Having established systems as structured possibility spaces, we now turn to actualisation: the emergence of specific cuts from the set of admissible possibilities. Actualisation is perspectival, contingent, and non-causal. It is the selection of a coherent cut consistent with the system’s structure, not the effect of a force or law.
Actualisation as Selection
A system’s structure defines which cuts are admissible. Actualisation occurs when one of these cuts is selected or enacted from within the possibility space. The selection does not follow from teleology or causation; it is a perspectival enactment: what becomes actual is determined relative to the system’s structure and the vantage from which the selection is made.
This perspective ensures that multiple cuts could, in principle, be actualised, each coherent within the system. No single outcome is privileged by the system itself; what is selected emerges relationally.
Perspectival Character of Actualisation
Actualisation is inherently perspectival. Observers or participants perceive, enact, or interact with a system from particular positions, each of which defines what cuts are visible, interpretable, or accessible.
A cut that is admissible in one perspective may remain inaccessible from another due to relational constraints. Actualisation is therefore not a universal event, but a localised selection relative to system and perspective.
Examples
Combinatorial System: In a grid of switches, the system allows certain configurations. Each act of setting switches represents an actualisation: a selection from the admissible possibilities. The system permits the configuration but does not cause it.
Conceptual Network: In a structured network of distinctions, one observation or assertion constitutes an actualisation of an admissible cut. Different observers may actualise different cuts, each coherent within the system but distinct from one another.
Ecological System: Certain species interactions are admissible given the ecosystem’s structure. Which interactions occur at a given moment is contingent, perspectival, and non-teleological. The system allows but does not dictate.
Contingency and Non-Causality
Actualisation is contingent: multiple admissible cuts exist, and which is enacted depends on perspective, context, and relational position. This contingency does not imply randomness; each cut is coherent within the system’s structure.
Non-causality is central. The system does not push toward a specific outcome. Admissibility defines possibility, not inevitability. Actualisation is a selection among what the system allows, not a manifestation of external or internal causes.
Implications
Understanding actualisation as perspectival selection allows us to see phenomena as emergent from structured possibility, without importing teleology, causation, or necessity. This framing sets the stage for examining stability, interaction, and limits in subsequent posts, showing how systems organise admissible cuts across time, participants, and overlapping structures.
No comments:
Post a Comment