Here is the core insight from the series, in plain view: if reality is relational, then knowing must be directional.
1. Reality as Field, Not Ladder
Traditional epistemology imagines a ladder: foundations below, certainty above. Knowledge climbs toward detachment, truth, objectivity.
Relational ontology says: the world is structured potential, not independent blocks. Entities and phenomena exist through relations, not in isolation. Complementarity is universal: every instance is also potential, every potential can be actualised.
There is no “outside” vantage. There is no final rung.
2. Directional Epistemology
If the world is relational, then:
-
Validity is not descent from foundations; it is constraint within positioning.
-
Truth is not correspondence; it is durable adequacy across perspectives.
-
Proof is not ascent; it is inevitability demonstrated within a field of constraints.
-
Objectivity is not detachment; it is robustness across positional shifts.
Rigour survives — not by climbing, but by navigating and stabilising.
3. What This Means for Knowing
Knowledge is active participation. Inquiry is movement within structured potential, testing, refining, and maintaining constraints. There is no absolute vantage, but stability emerges through relational coherence.
Constraint replaces hierarchy. Durability replaces elevation. Complementarity replaces certainty.
4. The Big Picture
Relational ontology → directional epistemology.
This is not relativism. The world resists incoherence. Some claims hold; others fail. But knowing is no longer a ladder to climb — it is a field to navigate with responsibility, rigour, and attention to positional constraints.
No comments:
Post a Comment