Realism presents itself as commonsense:
there is a world “out there,” independent of us, and our task is to represent it accurately.
The world is real; knowledge is correspondence; truth is mirroring.
It sounds simple. It sounds solid.
But under relational ontology, realism unravels almost immediately.
The problem is clear: representation cannot be primary.
The act of representing presupposes the very relational structure that realism refuses to acknowledge.
1. The Illusion of the Independent World
Realism relies on the idea that the world exists independently of us.
Yet “existence” is not a brute fact; it is intelligible only through relational organisation:
Without these relational cuts, there is no “thing” to represent, no “out there” to mirror.
Reality, like meaning, is never unconstrued.
It cannot float free of relational fields and still be the target of representation.
2. Representation Cannot Stand Alone
Realism assumes:
-
There is a world.
-
Our representations can capture it.
-
Knowledge is measured by correspondence.
But consider: what makes a representation recognisable?
-
It must differentiate what is represented.
-
It must situate itself within a field of potential interactions.
-
It must be interpretable.
These conditions are relational, not representational.
Representation is always a cut through relational potential, never an autonomous bridge between subject and world.
3. The Feedback Loop Realism Ignores
Realism presumes a one-way relationship: world → representation.
But all knowledge is perspectival:
-
The observer is part of the relational field.
-
Measurement, perception, and interpretation depend on constraints provided by the system.
-
Meaning arises from construal, not passive mirroring.
Attempting to reverse-engineer reality as “independent” ignores the fact that all representation presupposes relational conditions.
There is no raw, pre-construal world to mirror—only phenomena actualised through cuts.
4. The Mirror Is Imaginary
Realism’s mirror is a fantasy:
-
it presupposes differentiation without explaining it,
-
it presupposes intelligibility without relational grounding,
-
it presupposes coherence without a system.
In short, realism treats the reflection as if it were the source.
The mirror is imagined; the independence is imagined; the correspondence is imagined.
The only real ontological substance in play is relation, the very thing realism denies primacy.
5. The Relational Alternative
When relation is primary:
-
The world is a structured potential.
-
Representation is an instance—a perspectival actualisation of that potential.
-
Knowledge is a relational cut, not a snapshot of a pre-existing world.
-
Interaction, construal, and differentiation are necessary preconditions, not afterthoughts.
Representation does not found reality.
Representation depends on reality’s relational organisation.
6. Punchline: Relation, Not Representation, Is Grounding
Realism promises certainty:
mirror the world, and you capture the truth.
Relational ontology responds:
mirror what?
From which cuts?
Under which relations?
The “independent world” is a conceptual scaffolding,
not the foundation of explanation.
Representation cannot be primary, because it cannot exist without relation.
It is derivative. It is perspectival. It is instantiated through relational cuts.
The realist mirror is an imaginary reflection on a world that only exists because it is construed.
Remove relation, and both world and mirror vanish.
No comments:
Post a Comment