Architectures of Possibility: The Evolution of Evolvability: 2 Relational Reconfigurability — Reformulating Evolvability

In biology, one often encounters the term evolvability: the capacity of a system not merely to change, but to generate variation that is itself structured, allowing forms to emerge that were not predetermined. This notion captures an important intuition, but the biological framing carries assumptions we do not require.

Within semiotic and relational fields, the issue is architectural rather than organismic. We are concerned not with adaptation or fitness, but with how a structured field reorganises the very constraints that govern what can become actualisable within it.

What biology calls evolvability can therefore be reformulated in ontological terms as relational reconfigurability.

---

1. Defining Relational Reconfigurability

Relational reconfigurability is:

The capacity of a patterned field of relations to rearticulate its own constraint structure, thereby altering the horizon of possible actualisations.

Key clarifications:

1. Focus on relations, not bearers: No entity “has” this capacity. Only a field, structured by enduring condensations and recursive articulation, can reorganise itself.

2. Focus on architecture, not accumulation: This is not about adding density or producing more of the same patterns. It is about re-patterning the relations themselves.

3. Focus on potential, not outcomes: Relational reconfigurability changes what is possible, not merely what occurs. It is second-order with respect to instantiation.

---

2. How Meta-Semiotic Recursion Produces Reconfigurability

Relational fields often exist in recursive layers:

• Lower-level condensations realise higher-level potential.

• Higher-level patterns guide and constrain lower-level trajectories.

• Feedback loops between layers allow reflexive restructuring of constraints.

It is this recursive layering that produces relational reconfigurability:

• By accumulating constraints at multiple levels, the field gains sensitivity to the organisation of its own structure.

• By recursively modulating constraints, the field can repattern itself, opening previously unavailable trajectories.

• By nesting condensation across levels, the field can reorganise its architecture without external intervention.

---

3. Why This Matters

Relational reconfigurability allows a field to:

• Move beyond incremental thickening.

• Alter its own patterned constraints.

• Reshape the conditions under which future instantiations occur.

In short, it is the mechanism by which architectures of possibility evolve.

Unlike simple adaptation, relational reconfigurability is structural, reflexive, and meta-semiotic. It establishes the conditions for architectural shift, which we will examine in detail in the next post.

---

4. Preparing for Post 3

In the next post, we will explore thresholds and reconfiguration:

• When does density accumulation produce incremental thickening?

• When does it trigger full architectural reorganisation?

• How do local versus global patterns interact to generate topological shifts?

Relational reconfigurability is the key property that makes these structural transformations possible.