The Reflexive Field: Readiness and the Grammar of Becoming: 1 The Ontology of Readiness

Every system, if construed relationally, is a potential — a structured readiness for actualisation. What exists, in this view, is not the instantiated event alone but the field of relational tensions that make its instantiation possible. Readiness is thus neither a state nor a stage: it is the differential organisation of potential itself, a grammar through which becoming can occur.

To treat readiness grammatically is to take seriously the systemic organisation of ontology. Just as a grammar constrains and enables the flow of meaning in language, so too does an ontological grammar constrain and enable the flow of becoming in reality. Grammar, in this deeper sense, is not a metaphor for structure but the very logic of structured potential. Readiness is that grammar in motion — not as syntax frozen into rule, but as systemic poise, the live equilibrium of possibility before eventuation.

From this perspective, to say that the world is ready for something is not to claim that a set of conditions have been met in linear time. It is to note that within the relational topology of the system, certain alignments of potential have become available to themselves. Readiness is reflexive: it is not the precondition for an event but the field’s own self-sensitivity, its awareness of its own potential to shift.

Such readiness is not uniformly distributed. Systems vary in their density of reflexive organisation, in the degrees to which they can sense and restructure their own potential. A field of high reflexive readiness is one that is not merely stable but tensile — able to reconfigure its own grammar of becoming as part of the process of actualising.

This introduces a crucial distinction. Readiness is not energy but orientation; not force but form of susceptibility. Where energy measures capacity for change, readiness measures the structural intelligibility of change — the relational sense in which potential becomes construal. The grammar of readiness thus lies at the intersection of system and semantics: the systemic readiness to mean, to align, to become.

In the posts that follow, we will explore this grammar as the reflexive field in which all actualisation occurs. We will trace how readiness emerges, how it differentiates, and how it composes itself into the architectures of meaning we call world.