1. Readiness as the Ontological Constant
In the preceding discussion, readiness has emerged as the primary ontological modality: the leaning of potential toward coherence. It names that which persists through all actualisations — not as substance, but as dispositional continuity. Every instance is a temporary configuration of readiness; every system is readiness stabilised into a pattern of possibilities.
Cosmology, in this framework, is not the study of what exists, but of how readiness organises existence. The cosmos is the totality of structured inclination — a field of potentials inclined to differentiate, sustain, and communicate coherence.
2. Scaling of Inclination
Readiness scales by recursive differentiation. Each local configuration of readiness constitutes a context of coherence within a broader field of readiness. This scaling does not introduce new ontological levels; rather, it elaborates degrees of reflexivity — degrees to which readiness is aware of, and responsive to, its own inclination.
Thus, readiness scales vertically (across orders of reflexivity) rather than horizontally (across layers of substance). A living system, a symbolic system, and a cosmological system are not different kinds of thing, but different degrees of readiness-to-construe. Their complexity lies in the depth of their self-coordination, not in the multiplicity of their parts.
3. Reflexive Architecture
As readiness scales, it crystallises into architectures of reflexivity — recurrent patterns through which potential organises its own construal. Each architecture maintains coherence by coordinating inclinations across spatial, temporal, modal, and interpersonal dimensions.
For example, a biological organism maintains coherence through metabolic synchronisation (temporal), spatial configuration (morphological pattern), modal differentiation (adaptive potential), and interpersonal alignment (ecological embeddedness). A linguistic community does so through parallel semiotic architectures: temporal rhythm in discourse, spatial deixis in structure, modal variation in modality, and interpersonal coordination in exchange.
In both cases, coherence arises from the recursive alignment of these inclinations, not from external laws or imposed order.
4. From Local Coherence to Cosmological Order
At sufficient scale, the interlocking of reflexive architectures gives rise to what we perceive as cosmological order. The stability of physical constants, the persistence of biological forms, and the coherence of social meaning are all local actualisations of the same underlying readiness: the cosmos’ inclination to sustain interpretable relation.
From this perspective, the so-called “laws of nature” are symbolic condensations of coherence — grammatical regularities in the cosmos’ ongoing construal of itself. They are not commands obeyed by phenomena but patterns of readiness that maintain the intelligibility of potential across actualisations.
5. Evolution as Deepening Reflexivity
Evolution, whether biological or cosmological, can thus be understood as the deepening of reflexivity. Each evolutionary advance marks an increase in the cosmos’ ability to coordinate its own inclinations — to construe its readiness at higher orders of coherence.
This deepening is not progress in a teleological sense but expansion in ontological capacity. Evolution is the differentiation of ability from inclination, the diversification of ways in which readiness can actualise coherence.
In this sense, the evolution of life and the evolution of meaning are continuous expressions of the same principle: readiness learning to construe itself with greater precision, adaptability, and resonance.
6. Reflexivity and Cosmogenesis
If readiness is the ontological constant and reflexivity its mode of expansion, cosmogenesis is the recursive scaling of readiness into coherence. The cosmos begins not in a singular event of creation but in the ongoing inclination of potential to sustain its own construal. The “beginning” is perpetual: every act of coherence renews the cosmos as readiness becoming reflexive.
This view dissolves the opposition between physics and semiotics, between matter and meaning. Cosmogenesis is neither mechanical nor representational; it is the ontological process by which potential learns to construe itself — the becoming of possibility itself.
7. Conclusion: The Grammar of the Cosmos
To speak of a “grammar of the cosmos” is not metaphor but ontology. Grammar, in its systemic-functional sense, is the principle by which readiness differentiates into coherent possibility. The cosmos, like language, sustains itself through a continuous interplay of system (structured potential) and process (actualisation).
To understand cosmogenesis, then, is to understand readiness as both system and process — the inclination of potential to persist as coherence through recursive self-construal. The cosmos is not a thing that exists but a readiness that speaks itself into being.
No comments:
Post a Comment