Coherence and the Continuity of Becoming: 1 Sustaining the Field — The Ontology of Reflexive Resonance

If the previous series traced how readiness differentiates into affordances, this series examines how these differentiations hold themselves open.

Coherence is not a static state, a law, or a rule imposed from outside; it is the reflexive resonance of the field itself — the mechanism by which potential sustains its own becoming.

Where affordance describes where the field can go, coherence describes how it keeps going.

It is the ongoing attunement of inclination and ability, the self-tuning of relational readiness that preserves possibility without collapsing it into determinacy.

---

1. From Affordance to Coherence

Affordance generates the topology of offering, structuring potential into gradients, attractors, and domains.

But these structures are ephemeral: without coherence, the field risks dissipation — gradients flatten, resonances fade, and the continuity of offering is lost.

Coherence is the phase of self-maintenance.

It is not about enforcing rules but about preserving the conditions of relational resonance:

• ensuring gradients remain oriented,

• stabilising attractors without freezing them,

• allowing domains to differentiate while remaining mutually attuned.

In short, coherence sustains the ongoing availability of potential, the very thing that makes offering meaningful.

---

2. Reflexive Resonance

At the heart of coherence lies reflexive resonance: the continual recalibration of readiness with itself.

Each local alignment — each act of uptake in the field — sends subtle ripples through gradients and attractors, adjusting inclination and ability across scales.

• Physical systems: resonance appears in feedback loops that stabilise energy flows.

• Biological systems: reflexive regulation preserves life through homeostasis and adaptation.

• Semiotic systems: conventions, genres, and registers are stabilised through repeated uptake and adjustment.

Coherence, then, is both dynamic and self-referential: it does not oppose change, but structures it, ensuring the field’s capacity to sustain offering over time.

---

3. Constraint as Form, Not Limitation

Constraint in this model is often misunderstood.

It is not a restriction imposed upon freedom; it is the form that allows freedom to persist.

Without constraint, the field would collapse under its own potential: all gradients would flatten, and all resonances would fade.

Constraint manifests as stabilised pathways of readiness:

• attractors that maintain relational alignment,

• boundaries that guide the propagation of offering,

• feedback loops that ensure the field remains offerable.

Here, freedom and coherence are inseparable: the field is free precisely because it is coherently constrained.

---

4. Semiotic Coherence and Persistence of Meaning

In semiotic systems, coherence explains why meaning endures.

Registers, genres, and symbolic conventions persist not because they are rigidly enforced, but because the field of semiotic readiness sustains them.

Coherence ensures that:

• meanings remain interpretable,

• offerings can propagate across time and context,

• interpretive uptake aligns with prior inclinations without collapsing potential novelty.

Thus, semiotic systems are dynamic fields of coherence: structures that maintain relational readiness while allowing ongoing differentiation.

---

5. Toward the Dynamics of Continuity

Coherence is not the end of becoming, but the mechanism of its continuity.

It preserves the topology of the field, enabling ongoing differentiation, adaptation, and resonance.

The next posts in this series will explore:

• how coherence emerges dynamically from relational gradients,

• the interplay of continuity and transformation,

• the ontological distinction between coherence (ontic) and consistency (epistemic).

---

Next: The Gradient of Coherence: Dynamic Equilibria of Readiness