Genealogies of Scientific Construal: 10 Synthetic Science: 21st-Century Fields and the Reflexive Cosmos

Focus: Systems, networks, and co-evolving scientific fields.

Throughline: Possibility and construal are mutually generative; the act of theorising shapes the field of potential, and the relational field of possibility shapes theory.

In the 21st century, science has become explicitly reflexive: its methods, models, and frameworks are recognised as co-constitutive of the possibilities they describe. Fields such as systems biology, network science, and computational cosmology treat reality as a relationally structured and dynamic field, where entities, interactions, and constraints co-evolve. Possibility is no longer merely observed or predicted; it is actively shaped by the theoretical and experimental frameworks through which it is apprehended.

Emergent phenomena, adaptive networks, and synthetic systems illustrate that construal is participatory and relational. Observers, instruments, and models do not merely register potential; they instantiate and individuate it, creating new horizons for what can occur. Science itself becomes a meta-system of potentialities, reflecting the interplay between relational fields, feedback structures, and conceptual framing.

Modulatory voices:

• Barabási: network science and emergent relational structures.

• Noble: systems biology and multi-level constraints on potential.

• Wolfram: computational models demonstrating how simple rules generate complex, reflexive fields of possibility.

Synthetic science exemplifies a full realisation of relational ontology in practice. Theory and possibility are entwined: construal shapes potential, and potential shapes construal. Across scales — from atoms to ecosystems to cosmic networks — the 21st-century scientific project is a living field of co-individuating possibilities, where understanding, modelling, and acting are inseparable from the relational emergence of the possible itself.

Genealogies of Scientific Construal: 9 Complexity and Chaos: Nonlinear Worlds

Focus: Emergent systems, feedback loops, and the relational structuring of potential.

Throughline: Possibility is shaped by nonlinear interactions; outcomes arise from relational dynamics rather than deterministic law alone.

The late 20th century introduced a profound reconstrual of scientific possibility through complexity theory and chaos science. Systems—ecological, social, and physical—were recognised as nonlinear, relationally coupled, and sensitive to initial conditions. Potential is no longer strictly predictable, nor fully determined by overarching laws; it emerges through interactions, feedback loops, and relational constraints.

In these frameworks, small perturbations can generate disproportionately large outcomes, highlighting the contingency and generativity of relational fields. Emergent structures—patterns, attractors, and dynamic equilibria—illustrate that the possible is not reducible to simple deterministic laws, but arises from the networked relations within the system itself. Observation, modelling, and conceptual framing interact with the system, making construal an active, co-determining process.

Modulatory voices:

• Lorenz: sensitivity to initial conditions; chaos as a relational phenomenon.

• Prigogine: dissipative structures and emergent order.

• Holland: complex adaptive systems as fields of relational possibility.

Complexity and chaos highlight a crucial ontological shift: possibility is contingent, emergent, and relationally constrained. The horizon of potential is co-determined by the system’s internal dynamics and its external interactions, demonstrating that understanding, predicting, or guiding outcomes requires attention to relational patterns rather than isolated elements. Construal here is participatory, dynamic, and historically situated: the field of possibility itself is a living, evolving network.

Genealogies of Scientific Construal: 8 Quantum Constellations: Indeterminacy, Superposition, and Probabilistic Potential

Focus: The microcosm as a field of multiple, coexisting possibilities.

Throughline: Possibility is non-deterministic, relational, and probabilistic, revealing new modes of actualisation at the quantum scale.

The advent of quantum theory in the early 20th century radically transformed our construal of possibility. Unlike deterministic Newtonian mechanics or relativistic spacetime, quantum phenomena are intrinsically probabilistic: particles exist in superpositions, outcomes are indeterminate until measurement, and the relational structure of the system defines what can be actualised. Possibility is no longer a fixed or pre-determined field; it is fluid, relational, and contingent upon the act of observation and interaction.

Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle formalised the limits of what can be simultaneously known, while Schrödinger’s wavefunction illustrates the coexistence of multiple potential states. Bohr’s complementarity emphasised the relational dependence between observation and the phenomena observed. The construal of possibility now operates not only across space and time, but across probabilistic and relational states, making the act of measurement itself a constitutive element of reality.

Modulatory voices:

• Heisenberg: uncertainty as relational constraint on potential.

• Schrödinger: superposition highlighting coexistent possibilities.

• Bohr: complementarity showing relational dependency between observer and system.

Quantum mechanics reframes possibility as an emergent property of relational and contextual fields. The cosmos at this scale is not a predictable machine but a network of potentialities, where actualisation occurs only through interaction within defined relational structures. The very act of construal—measurement, observation, and theorisation—participates in the becoming of possibility.

Genealogies of Scientific Construal: 7 Relativity and the Expanding Field: Einstein and the Contingent Cosmos

Focus: Relational restructuring of space, time, and cosmic potential.

Throughline: Possibility is no longer absolute; it is contingent, frame-dependent, and dynamically relational.

The early 20th century introduced a profound reconstrual of the cosmos through Einstein’s theories of relativity. Newtonian absolutes—fixed space and universal time—were supplanted by a relational understanding of spacetime, where motion, duration, and simultaneity are frame-dependent. The potential for events and interactions is no longer universal; it is contingent upon relative positions, velocities, and gravitational contexts.

Einstein’s reconceptualisation extends the relational field of possibility beyond deterministic mechanics. Mass-energy curves spacetime, trajectories of objects are contextually mediated, and the cosmos itself becomes a dynamic, interdependent field. Construal is no longer purely formal or deterministic: understanding the cosmos requires awareness of the interplay between observer, system, and metric, situating potential within a flexible, relational horizon.

Modulatory voices:

• Minkowski: the formalisation of spacetime geometry as a relational field.

• Einstein: general and special relativity demonstrating contingent structure of potential.

In this reconstrual, possibility itself is reframed: outcomes are intelligible only within relational and contingent frameworks, emphasising co-dependence, context, and curvature. The cosmos is a field in which potential is enacted relationally, revealing that the very structures through which we understand events are historically, conceptually, and materially contingent.