Within relational ontology, meaning and reality are not discovered but construed — through actualisation, perspectival cuts, and systemic constraints. This model invites a disciplined way of thinking, one that privileges internal consistency and structural viability over representational truth.
Two concepts help us make sense of this discipline: coherence and integrity. Though often used interchangeably in casual discourse, they perform distinct but interdependent roles within the relational framework.
Coherence: The Internal Consistency of a Construal
Coherence is a property of an actualisation — a construal or cut. It refers to whether the distinctions made within that construal are internally compatible.
A coherent construal:
-
Holds together without contradiction
-
Obeys the constraints of the system it draws from
-
Produces an intelligible, differentiated phenomenon
Importantly, coherence is perspectival: a construal is coherent within the terms of its own cut. There is no neutral standpoint from which to assess it — only other cuts, other construals.
Integrity: The Structured Viability of a System
Integrity, by contrast, is a property of the system — the structured potential from which instances are actualised.
A system has integrity when:
-
Its internal constraints are stable and generative
-
It supports coherent actualisations across perspectives
-
It can adapt without collapsing
Integrity is not about being complete or static. It is about holding form under variation — remaining recognisable and viable as a source of meaningful construal.
How They Relate
Coherence and integrity are not opposites, but complementary poles of ontological stability:
| Coherence | Integrity | |
|---|---|---|
| Level | Instance / actualisation | System / structured potential |
| Focus | Internal compatibility of a cut | Organised viability of the system |
| Judged by | How well a construal holds together | Whether the system supports coherent construals |
| Failure Mode | Contradiction or incoherence | Collapse, loss of generative power |
Put simply:
Integrity makes coherence possible; coherence confirms integrity.
Why This Distinction Matters
In relational ontology, we cannot appeal to external standards of truth or objectivity. All evaluation happens within a construal, and all construals are drawn from systems with particular constraints.
The interplay between coherence and integrity gives us a way to:
-
Evaluate meaning without metaphysical realism
-
Maintain theoretical discipline without totalising
-
Recognise when a construal is strained — or a system is failing
This is not just theoretical hygiene. It is what allows relational ontology to remain coherent across levels, while still evolving in time.
Conclusion: Holding Form Responsively
The power of relational ontology lies in its commitment to both coherence and integrity — to cuts that hold, and to systems that can be cut without unraveling.
This is what distinguishes a living system of thought from a merely logical one. Coherence is not just formal consistency. Integrity is not just structural persistence. Together, they allow us to think in ways that are both rigorous and responsive, stable and dynamic, grounded and transformative.
As we move forward, this distinction will help us discern which developments enrich the system — and which undermine it.
No comments:
Post a Comment