Readiness as Categorial Grammar: Inclination, Ability, and the Architecture of Potential: 5 Readiness as Functor: Mapping Internal–External Structure

Readiness is where inclination and ability stop being separate analytic conveniences and become a single operational configuration. Up to now, we have treated inclination as endogenous pressure (internal morphism-structure within a potential) and ability as exogenous coherence (external structural affordances that constrain and enable morphisms). But readiness is not their sum, nor their interaction, nor their harmony. It is the mapping that binds them into a single perspectival configuration.

The correct formal analogue is the functor.

A functor does not merely relate two categories; it actualises a correspondence between two domains of structure. It preserves the shape of morphisms while re-situating them in a new structural field. In relational ontology terms: a functor is the perspectival cut through which a potential becomes actualisable as a configuration of inclinations and abilities.

Readiness, therefore, is the functorial construal of a system of potential.

1. Why a Functor?

A functor has three defining features:

1. It maps objects to objects.

2. It maps morphisms to morphisms.

3. It preserves composition and identity.

In other words, a functor is a structure-preserving shift of perspective. If inclination and ability are two strata of potential—one endogenous, one exogenous—then readiness is not “how they interact.” Readiness is the mapping that makes their interaction intelligible. It is the shift-of-frame that allows internal morphism-pressure to be seen as constrained/enabled by external coherence.

In Hallidayan terms, readiness is like the metafunctional pattern that integrates different semiotic pressures into a coherent clause. But here, stripped of the semiotic stratum, we treat readiness as the categorical integrator of potentials.

A readiness-functor does not look at inclination and ability; it is the construal that binds them as the same system of potential.

Thus:

• Inclination supplies the internal map of possible morphisms.

• Ability supplies the external frame that makes some morphisms coherent.

• Readiness is the structure-preserving map between the two.

2. Objects and Morphisms of Readiness

What are the objects and morphisms in this readiness-functor?

Objects: stable potential-configurations

• These may be states of a system, configurations of internal gradients, or nodes of possible transition.

Morphisms: transitions sanctioned by both endogenous pressure and exogenous coherence

• A morphism exists only when internal inclination pushes toward an actualisation and external ability permits and shapes that push.

Readiness maps these internal morphisms into the external domain of coherence, preserving their structure while re-situating them.

The key insight:

Readiness is not a filter; it is a structural translation between internal and external potentials.

3. Readiness as the Actualisation Interface

The functorial position of readiness makes it the interface where:

• The system’s internal potentials become interpretable as viable transitions.

• The environment’s external potentials become interpretable as constraints/enablers.

• The two are brought into mutual intelligibility through a structure-preserving mapping.

In other words:

Readiness is the site where inclination and ability become mutually constraining perspectives.

A system with high inclination but low ability produces a readiness-functor that maps many internal morphisms to a very restricted external configuration.

A system with high ability but weak inclination yields a functor with broad external affordances but few internally stable transitions to map into them.

A system with both yields a functor tightly aligned with robust internal gradients and rich external coherence.

Readiness is thus not the “interaction” of inclination and ability—it is the perspectival structure that makes interaction possible.

4. Preserving Structure: The Heart of Readiness

Preservation is the key functorial demand.

A readiness-functor must preserve:

• Identity: internal equilibrium points must correspond to externally coherent stabilities.

• Composition: internally composed transitions must correspond to externally viable pathways.

This means readiness is not arbitrarily constructed. It is the only mapping that maintains the intelligibility of change across the internal–external divide.

Thus:

Readiness is the structural guarantee that morphisms “make sense” both from the system’s perspective and the environment’s.

5. Readiness as Construal, Not Property

Crucially, readiness is not a property an entity has.

It is a construal—a perspectival cut through which potential is organised into a coherent mapping between internal and external structure.

This means:

• Readiness is perspectival, not inherent.

• Readiness is relational, not local.

• Readiness is a mapping, not an attribute.

In relational ontology, nothing “is ready”; rather, readiness is the construal through which a system’s inclinations and abilities are aligned into a stable form of potential.

The functorial structure is not in the world; it is the lens through which potential becomes intelligible.