In Post 1, we reframed the system network as a map of readiness, integrating inclination (propensity) and ability (capacity) into each node and pathway. In this post, we examine choice not as a simple selection among alternatives, but as the actualisation of potential where readiness aligns.
1. Choice as perspectival actualisation
Where previously we described choice as a “cut” through the network of potential, readiness adds direction and constraint:
-
Inclination draws the system toward certain nodes and pathways.
-
Ability enables the system to traverse those pathways.
-
Choice occurs where both converge — where the system is both disposed and competent to actualise a construal.
In this view, not all pathways are equally likely; actualisation is probabilistic-like, but fully grounded in relational topology rather than random selection.
2. Linguistic example: habitual vs novel constructions
Consider a speaker selecting between two grammatical constructions:
-
Construction A: frequently used, highly practised → high readiness (high inclination + high ability).
-
Construction B: rarely used, unfamiliar → low readiness (low inclination and/or low ability).
The speaker’s choice will almost always fall on A. B remains possible, but without sufficient readiness, it is unlikely to be actualised.
Here, the network encodes both the potential for meaning and the system’s dynamic readiness to realise it, explaining habitual patterns without invoking external rules or constraints.
3. Biological example: developmental pathways
In morphogenesis, cells follow developmental trajectories constrained by genetic, epigenetic, and environmental conditions:
-
A morphogenetic basin (node) is ready if signals align (inclination) and cellular machinery is competent (ability).
-
Only when readiness aligns does differentiation occur.
-
Potential pathways that are theoretically open but lack alignment remain dormant, preserving latent potential.
This mirrors linguistic readiness: actualisation emerges where the system is primed and capable.
4. Social example: collective action
Consider a social system:
-
Norms and roles define a network of potential social events.
-
Collective readiness arises when inclination (desire, motivation) and ability (resources, coordination) align.
-
Only then do actions actualise: a protest forms, a policy is implemented, a ritual enacted.
-
Potential paths that lack alignment remain latent — explaining why some social possibilities never manifest.
Here again, choice is relational and perspectival, dependent on alignment of readiness rather than deterministic forces.
5. Dynamics of alignment
Choice as alignment introduces a dynamic view of the network:
-
Readiness can shift over time as inclination and ability change.
-
Feedback loops can increase or decrease readiness along certain pathways (practice, learning, resource accumulation).
-
The network thus becomes not just a map of potential, but a dynamic landscape where pathways are continuously primed, realised, or inhibited.
This makes the network a predictive and explanatory tool, able to model why certain potentials are actualised in context and why others remain dormant.
6. Conceptual payoff
By integrating readiness into the relational topology of the system network:
-
Choice is no longer abstract or static; it is emergent from system alignment.
-
Actualisation reflects both the topology of potential and the dynamic state of the system.
-
The model unifies language, biology, and social phenomena under the same relational principle: actualisation occurs where inclination and ability converge.
In the next post, we will explore topologies of readiness across domains, showing how inclination and ability are distributed through networks and how this shapes the dynamics of actualisation.
No comments:
Post a Comment