Foundations of the Ontology of Meaning: 2 Ontological Assumptions

Having established the epistemological foundation — the conditions under which meaning can be discerned — we now turn to the ontological commitments that make the Ontology of Meaning coherent. These are the assumptions about what exists, in what sense, and how systems participate in meaning without presupposing individuation, objects, or symbols as primitives.

These assumptions define the structural ground of reality as it pertains to first-order meaning.

---

Collectives and fields of potential are primary

The first ontological commitment is that collectives and fields of potential precede individuation. There are no pre-existing individuals, objects, or entities waiting to be connected. There is only:

• A structured field of possibilities,

• Systems of potential relations,

• Coherent patterns that can be actualised through constraining events.

Individuated entities are derivative effects: stabilised configurations that appear only after a cut has actualised a constrained coherence.

This shift is radical but necessary: it prevents the misattribution of explanatory power to objects or agents that do not, in fact, generate meaning.

---

Construal as ontological event

The second ontological commitment is that construal is an ontological event, not a mental act or interpretation. Construal is the process by which possibility is locally constrained, stabilised, and made coherent.

• It is not “done” by an observer; it happens within a system.

• It actualises particular relational patterns while excluding others.

• Meaning is the coherence that emerges from this actualisation.

This is the move that distinguishes first-order phenomena from second-order theory: meaning is produced by the event of construal, not inferred afterward.

---

Stability precedes identity and reference

Third, identity, objecthood, and reference are not ontologically primitive. They emerge after patterns of stability have been actualised:

• Stability under repeated construal produces the appearance of enduring entities.

• The ability to track a pattern across cuts is what gives rise to the illusion of discrete objects.

• Reference is a meta-description applied to already stabilised phenomena; it does not generate them.

Objects, individuals, and agents are thus effects of relational coherence, not causal origins.

---

Systems exist relationally, not aggregatively

Fourth, systems are understood relationally:

• The ontology does not treat collectives as sums of parts.

• Relations and constraints constitute the system, not individual elements.

• First-order phenomena emerge from patterns of participation across the field of potential.

This prevents the misstep of aggregative explanation, which would reintroduce entities as causal primitives.

---

Why these assumptions matter

Making ontological assumptions explicit achieves several goals:

1. Clarity of explanatory hierarchy
   Collectives and patterns precede the entities that later appear to carry meaning.

2. Alignment with first-order phenomena
   Construal, stability, and coherence become the true loci of meaning.

3. Prevention of illicit metaphysics
   Objects, symbols, and agents are never granted explanatory primacy.

These assumptions prepare the ground for the next post: the methodological assumptions, which govern how analysis proceeds once the epistemological and ontological strata are in place.