The language of potential has always seemed quiet — a background hum beneath the bright insistence of actuality. But when potential is understood not as absence but as readiness, the hum becomes a pulse. The relational field itself vibrates with a leaning, a directed openness: not toward a pre-given outcome, but toward becoming actual at all.
In the systemic terms of relational ontology, potential is the theory of the instance — the structured possibility from which any construal can be cut. But this potential is not inert. It is not a frozen map of what might happen. It is a living configuration of inclination — a field of readiness to construe.
This readiness is what makes the metaphenomenal real. It is what allows a system to lean toward instantiation without collapsing into actuality until a construal completes the cut. In other words, potential is not the opposite of actuality but its directional condition: the vector by which the system inclines toward eventhood.
Physics once captured a faint echo of this idea in the concept of energy. But energy, too, was reified — treated as a substance or quantity rather than a posture of relation. The relational ontology reclaims that lost sense: energy as readiness, as the inclination of the system to actualise a construal.
Readiness, then, is the ontological ground of responsiveness. It is the system’s orientation toward its own possible coherence — not a will, not a cause, but a leaning into relational alignment.
To describe potential as readiness is to give up the fantasy of a neutral world waiting to be known. The universe is already postured, already leaning — a field of relational dispositions that invite construal.
No comments:
Post a Comment