The preceding essays have developed two complementary philosophical frameworks for understanding reality.
The first, Embodied Relational Reality (ERR), emerged from the ontological inquiry of the Reality & Cosmology Series. ERR asks what reality must be like if relation, coherence, embodiment, persistence, identity, value, meaning, possibility, and participation are genuinely constitutive features of existence.
The second, Open and Relational Process Metaphysics of Becoming (ORPMOB), emerged from the metaphysical inquiry of the present series. ORPMOB asks how such a relational reality continually becomes—how inheritance, openness, responsiveness, novelty, coherence, embodiment, persistence, and participation contribute to the ongoing realization of worlds.
These inquiries are closely related, but they are not identical.
ERR approaches reality ontologically.
ORPMOB approaches reality metaphysically.
One asks primarily what kind of reality exists; the other asks how such a reality becomes.
The purpose of this essay is therefore not to collapse ontology and metaphysics into a single philosophical system. It is to examine how these two inquiries begin to correspond and where their respective languages illuminate one another.
Essay 16 consequently functions as a methodological bridge. It gathers several of the distinctions developed thus far, clarifies the relationship between ontology and metaphysics, and prepares the inquiry for the more sustained exploration of relational becoming that follows.
The question guiding the essay is simple:
How do ontology and metaphysics begin to converge when both remain accountable to the same relational reality?
Ontology disciplines metaphysics
while metaphysics explains ontology.- R. E. Slater
Ontology and metaphysics address the same reality from different philosophical directions.
Ontology asks:
What kind of reality exists?
Metaphysics asks:
How does such a reality become?
The distinction is not absolute. Any ontology carries metaphysical implications, just as every metaphysics assumes something about what is real. Yet distinguishing the questions remains useful because it prevents either inquiry from being asked to do more than its particular task requires.
Within this project, Embodied Relational Reality (ERR) names the ontological inquiry. It begins by approaching reality relationally and asks what forms of organization become possible within such a world.
Its developing grammar may be expressed:
Relation → Coherence → Embodiment → Persistence → Identity →
Value & Meaning → Direction → Possibility → Participation
This sequence does not describe a rigid progression imposed upon reality. It identifies recurring dimensions through which relational realities may become organized, embodied, persistent, meaningful, and participatory.
Open and Relational Process Metaphysics of Becoming (ORPMOB) approaches the same reality from another direction. Rather than asking primarily what relational reality discloses, it asks how relational reality continually becomes.
Its developing grammar emphasizes:
Inheritance → Openness → Responsiveness → Novelty → Coherence → Embodiment → Persistence → Participation → Further Becoming
Again, these terms should not be understood as a mechanical sequence. They identify constitutive dynamics through which relational realities inherit conditions, respond to possibilities, generate novelty, achieve forms of coherence, and participate in further becoming.
The two inquiries therefore overlap without becoming identical.
ERR emphasizes the architecture of relational reality.
ORPMOB emphasizes the dynamics of relational becoming.
Ontology asks what reality discloses.
Metaphysics asks how such reality becomes.
The important question is therefore not which inquiry should absorb the other, but how their different perspectives correspond when both are attempting to understand the same world.
That question brings us to a distinction that will guide the remainder of this essay:
the order by which we inquire into reality is not necessarily the same as the order by which reality itself becomes.
Ontology observes what reality has become.
Metaphysics asks how reality continually becomes.- R. E. Slater
A useful distinction now becomes necessary.
The order in which philosophy investigates reality is not necessarily the order in which reality itself becomes.
ORDER OF INQUIRY
Our order of inquiry begins with what is encountered and moves progressively toward broader interpretation:
Observation → Ontology → Metaphysics → Interpretation → Ethics → Participation
We encounter reality before we theorize it.
- Ontology asks what kind of reality our encounters disclose.
- Metaphysics asks how such a reality becomes and why it exhibits the characteristics it does.
- Interpretation explores how meaning arises within and through that reality.
- Ethics asks how relational beings should live within it.
- Participation recognizes that knowing and acting are themselves ways of taking part in the reality being investigated.
This sequence is methodological rather than absolute. Inquiry often moves recursively. Later interpretations may cause us to reconsider earlier ontological assumptions; scientific discoveries may reshape metaphysical possibilities; ethical consequences may expose weaknesses in philosophical descriptions.
Nevertheless, the sequence preserves an important discipline:
Reality comes before our descriptions of reality.
ORDER OF REALITY
The order of reality, however, concerns something different. It asks what the inquiry presently suggests about the way relational reality itself becomes.
A provisional expression might be:
Relation → Relational Becoming → Possibility → Possible Coherence & Embodiment → Participation → Further Becoming
- Relation provides the constitutive condition.
- Relational becoming expresses its dynamism.
- Possibility marks the openness through which alternatives may emerge.
- Coherence and embodiment describe the achievement of organized and relatively persistent forms.
- Participation expresses the ways such realities enter into, affect, and are affected by wider relational worlds.
And every achieved form becomes part of the conditions inherited by further becoming.
The two sequences should therefore not be confused.
The order of inquiry describes how philosophy approaches reality.
The order of reality describes, provisionally, what philosophy believes it is discovering about reality's relational becoming.
One is epistemological and methodological.
The other is ontological and metaphysical.
Keeping them distinct prevents an important philosophical error: mistaking the architecture of our explanation for the architecture of reality itself.
Our concepts are not reality.
They are attempts to correspond with it.
For this reason, both sequences remain open to correction. If reality resists the grammar we have proposed, the grammar must change.
The measure of the philosophy is not whether its categories remain intact.
The measure is whether they continue to correspond with reality.
This distinction also helps clarify why ERR and ORPMOB can employ different philosophical languages without necessarily competing with one another. They approach the same reality through different questions, and their adequacy depends upon how well those questions and descriptions correspond with what reality discloses.
Ontology describes reality.Metaphysics explains reality.- R. E. Slater
The Complementary Architecture of ERR + ORPMOB
Because ERR and ORPMOB approach reality through different philosophical questions, they naturally develop different but overlapping vocabularies.
ERR speaks primarily in the language of ontological architecture:
Relation → Coherence → Embodiment → Persistence → Identity →Value & Meaning → Direction → Possibility → Participation
ORPMOB speaks primarily in the language of relational becoming:
Inheritance → Openness → Responsiveness → Novelty → Coherence → Embodiment → Persistence → Participation → Further Becoming
The similarities are significant.
Both inquiries converge around relation, coherence, embodiment, persistence, possibility, and participation, although they approach these realities through different vocabularies.
Both reject the picture of reality as composed primarily of self-contained substances whose relations are merely external additions.
Both understand enduring forms as relational achievements rather than exceptions to becoming.
Yet their differences are equally important.
ERR asks what kinds of organization relational reality discloses. Its language therefore emphasizes the structures through which realities become coherent, embodied, persistent, identifiable, meaningful, and participatory.
ORPMOB asks how such realities become. Its language therefore emphasizes inheritance, openness, responsiveness, novelty, and the recursive movement through which achieved forms become conditions for further becoming.
The relationship between the two may be illustrated through several correspondences:
Relation identifies the constitutive condition; ORPMOB asks how relational realities receive, affect, and respond within inherited worlds.
ERR identifies organized and embodied reality; ORPMOB examines how such organization may arise, stabilize, persist, and remain open to transformation.
ERR asks what allows something to become identifiable as this reality rather than another; ORPMOB asks how continuity can be achieved without requiring changeless substance.
ERR recognizes possibility as a dimension of relational reality; ORPMOB examines how openness permits possibilities to become consequential within becoming.
ERR recognizes participation as a feature of relational existence; ORPMOB emphasizes how participation becomes generative of subsequent relational conditions.
These correspondences should not be treated as exact translations.
Ontology and metaphysics are not interchangeable languages.
A term may carry different weight depending upon the question being asked. Coherence considered ontologically concerns the organization of relational reality; considered metaphysically, it concerns an achievement within becoming. Participation considered ontologically identifies relational belonging; considered metaphysically, it describes involvement in processes that shape what may become next.
The value of placing the two vocabularies beside one another is therefore not that one can be reduced to the other.
It is that each may illuminate dimensions the other approaches differently.
Their correspondence suggests that ontology and metaphysics need not compete for philosophical priority. They may instead function as complementary inquiries whose adequacy is tested by their continuing correspondence with the same reality.
The next question is therefore not whether ERR and ORPMOB can be merged.
It is whether their points of correspondence reveal a more coherent understanding of relational reality without erasing the distinctions that made each inquiry useful in the first place.
Three Expressions of Relational Reality
The distinctions developed above may now be gathered into three complementary expressions. The first two identify the characteristic languages of ERR and ORPMOB. The third offers a more provisional expression of the relational reality toward which their correspondence appears to point.
ERR — Ontological Architecture
Relation → Coherence → Embodiment → Persistence → Identity →
Value & Meaning → Direction → Possibility → Participation
ORPMOB — Metaphysical Dynamics
Inheritance → Openness → Responsiveness → Novelty → Coherence →
Embodiment → Persistence → Participation → Further Becoming
Provisional Order of Reality
Relation → Relational Becoming → Possibility → Possible Coherence & Embodiment → Participation → Further Becoming
These three expressions should not be collapsed into a single sequence. They answer different questions.
ERR asks what relational reality discloses.
ORPMOB asks how relational reality becomes.
The provisional order of reality asks what their correspondence may be telling us about reality itself.
The third formulation must remain especially tentative. It is neither another philosophical framework nor a synthesis imposed upon ERR and ORPMOB. It is a provisional attempt to express, as simply as possible, the relational movement both inquiries increasingly appear to disclose.
Accordingly:
Ontological architecture describes.
Metaphysical dynamics explains becoming.
The provisional order of reality expresses their emerging correspondence.
Each remains answerable to the same measure:
reality itself.
Reality is one.
Our questions about reality are many.- R. E. Slater
When ERR and ORPMOB are placed alongside one another, their correspondence begins to disclose a more integrated picture of relational reality.
ERR proposes that reality is relationally constituted.
ORPMOB asks what relational constitution means dynamically.
ERR identifies coherence, embodiment, persistence, identity, possibility, and participation as significant dimensions of relational reality.
ORPMOB asks how such realities inherit conditions, respond within relational environments, generate novelty, achieve forms of coherence, persist through change, and participate in further becoming.
The relationship between them may therefore be expressed provisionally:
Relational architecture ↔ Relational becoming
The double arrow is important.
Ontology informs metaphysics because claims about becoming necessarily presuppose something about the reality that becomes.
Metaphysics informs ontology because an account of what reality is must remain adequate to the ways reality actually changes, persists, develops, and generates novelty.
Neither inquiry therefore stands entirely alone.
Their correspondence is recursive.
An ontological claim may suggest metaphysical questions. Metaphysical inquiry may expose inadequacies in an ontological description. Revised ontology may then generate new metaphysical possibilities, which may in turn require further revision.
This recursive movement is not a defect in philosophical method. It is what should be expected when finite interpreters attempt to understand a reality that is itself complex, relational, and continually becoming.
Several important insights begin to emerge from this correspondence.
First, relation and becoming belong together without becoming identical. Relation names the constitutive condition through which realities exist; becoming names the dynamic character of their ongoing realization.
Second, coherence and change need not be opposites. Relational realities may achieve sufficient organization to persist without becoming immutable. Stability can therefore be understood as an achievement within becoming rather than an escape from it.
Third, embodiment gives relational organization consequential form. Relations become effective through organized configurations capable of maintaining boundaries, interacting with environments, and participating in wider relational worlds.
Fourth, identity need not require changeless substance. If persistence can occur through continuity of relational organization, identity may be understood as historically achieved and continually maintained.
Fifth, participation becomes more than external interaction. Relational realities inherit from, contribute to, constrain, enable, and transform the worlds within which they become.
These are not yet conclusions of a completed philosophical architecture.
They are directions opened by correspondence.
Indeed, many of them require considerably more investigation than Essay 16 can provide. Questions concerning persistence, stable worlds, participation, relata, and the larger architecture of relational becoming remain ahead of us.
That is precisely why the present essay should resist resolving them prematurely.
Its task is more limited.
It is enough at this stage to recognize that ERR and ORPMOB are not merely adjacent inquiries. Their questions continually intersect, and their vocabularies appear capable of mutually illuminating a relational understanding of reality.
What ultimately follows from that correspondence remains open.
But the correspondence itself has become too significant to ignore.
Reality first invites us to see.Philosophy then invites us to understand.- R. E. Slater
The correspondence between ERR and ORPMOB suggests that the inquiry is beginning to disclose something larger than either vocabulary considered independently.
Yet it would be premature to call that larger possibility a completed philosophical synthesis.
What has emerged thus far is better understood as a developing relational architecture.
ERR has identified recurring dimensions of relational reality: relation, coherence, embodiment, persistence, identity, value and meaning, direction, possibility, and participation.
ORPMOB has explored complementary dynamics of relational becoming: inheritance, openness, responsiveness, novelty, coherence, embodiment, persistence, participation, and further becoming.
Placed together, these inquiries suggest a reality in which what exists and how it becomes cannot finally be separated.
- Reality is relationally constituted.
- Relational realities become.
- What becomes may achieve coherence.
- Coherence may become embodied.
- Embodied realities may persist.
- Persistent realities may acquire histories and identities.
Such realities participate within wider relational worlds, altering the conditions from which further becoming proceeds.
The resulting movement is neither linear nor predetermined. It is recursive:
Relation → Relational Becoming → Possibility → Possible Coherence & Embodiment → Participation → Further Becoming
Even this sequence should remain provisional.
It does not describe a universal mechanism operating identically at every scale, nor does it imply that becoming necessarily advances toward greater complexity, coherence, or value. Relational processes may stabilize or destabilize, cohere or decohere, flourish or fail. Possibilities may be realized, transformed, foreclosed, or lost.
What the emerging architecture proposes more modestly is that reality continually develops through relational conditions that both constrain and enable what may become next.
This also clarifies why the order of inquiry developed earlier in this essay remains important:
Observation→Ontology→Metaphysics→Interpretation→Ethics→Participation
Only then should the inquiry move carefully toward questions of interpretation, value, ethics, and participation.Philosophy begins with reality rather than with a completed system.
Ontology attempts to describe what reality discloses.
Metaphysics explores the dynamics through which such reality becomes.
And even this order remains recursive, because later inquiry may require earlier assumptions to be reconsidered.
At this stage, therefore, the correspondence between ERR and ORPMOB should remain open rather than prematurely resolved.
Several questions still require sustained investigation.
What does it mean to say that relation is primary?
How does openness operate within relational becoming?
Why do some relational configurations persist while others disappear?
How do relatively stable worlds emerge within continual becoming?
What does participation mean if realities are constituted relationally rather than existing first in isolation?
And if relation is constitutive, what becomes of the traditional assumption that relata must exist prior to their relations?
These questions cannot be settled merely by placing two philosophical vocabularies beside one another.
They must be pursued.
The essays that follow will therefore move more deeply into the metaphysics of relational becoming, testing the architecture proposed here through questions of relation, openness, persistence, stability, participation, and the priority of relation itself.
Only after that work has been undertaken will it become possible to ask whether these inquiries together point toward a broader philosophical orientation.
For now, the appropriate conclusion is more modest:
Ontology and metaphysics have begun to converge around a relational understanding of reality.
What that convergence may eventually become remains an open question.
This essay began with two philosophical questions:
What kind of reality exists?
How does such a reality become?
ERR and ORPMOB approach these questions differently.
ERR investigates the ontological architecture of relational reality.
ORPMOB investigates the metaphysical dynamics of relational becoming.
Their languages overlap because their subject is ultimately the same reality. Yet their differences remain important. Ontology should not simply become metaphysics, nor should metaphysics be expected to absorb ontology. Each inquiry contributes something the other cannot provide by itself.
What their correspondence has begun to reveal is a developing relational architecture.
Reality appears not as a collection of independently constituted substances that subsequently enter into relationships, but as a world in which relations participate in constitution itself. Within such a reality, becoming occurs through inherited conditions, openness, responsiveness, emerging possibilities, coherence, embodiment, persistence, and participation.
But these remain philosophical proposals rather than final descriptions.
The distinction between the order of inquiry and the order of reality therefore remains essential.
Order of RealityObservation → Ontology → Metaphysics → Interpretation → Ethics → Participation
Relation → Relational Becoming → Possibility → Possible Coherence & Embodiment → Participation → Further Becoming
The first reminds us how philosophical investigation proceeds.
The second expresses, provisionally, what that investigation presently believes it is discovering.
Neither should be mistaken for reality itself.
Reality remains prior to the philosophy.
That priority requires intellectual humility. Our categories are instruments of inquiry, not possessions of the world. They should be preserved when they continue to illuminate reality, revised when they cease to correspond adequately, and abandoned when better descriptions become possible.
The task ahead is therefore not to complete a system but to continue testing the relational architecture that has begun to emerge.
- Can relation genuinely bear the constitutive significance being proposed for it?
- Can openness and persistence coexist without contradiction?
- Can stable worlds emerge within continual becoming?
- Can identity endure without appeal to changeless substance?
- Can participation be understood as constitutive rather than merely external interaction?
These questions now lead the inquiry forward.
The essays that follow will pursue them more directly, beginning with the primacy of relation and moving through relational becoming, persistence, stability, participation, and the relation between relata and the relational worlds through which they become.
Only through such continued inquiry can we discover whether the architecture proposed here is adequate to the reality it seeks to describe.
In this sense, philosophy itself participates in reality's becoming.
Its task is not to possess reality but to accompany it.
Not to conclude the conversation but to continue it.
Not to master the world but to learn continually from it.
And so we return, once again, to where philosophy must always begin:
reality itself.
Aristotle. Metaphysics. Translated by Joe Sachs. Santa Fe, NM: Green Lion Press, 1999.
Heraclitus. Fragments. Translated by Brooks Haxton. New York: Viking, 2001.
Plato. Timaeus. Translated by Donald J. Zeyl. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 2000.
Whitehead, Alfred North. Adventures of Ideas. New York: Free Press, 1967.
———. Modes of Thought. New York: Free Press, 1968.
———. Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. Corrected ed. Edited by David Ray Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne. New York: Free Press, 1978.
Barad, Karen. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2007.
DeLanda, Manuel. A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London: Continuum, 2006.
Hartshorne, Charles. Reality as Social Process: Studies in Metaphysics and Religion. New York: Hafner Publishing, 1953.
Rescher, Nicholas. Process Metaphysics: An Introduction to Process Philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1996.
Segall, Matthew David. Physics of the World-Soul: Whitehead's Adventure in Cosmology. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2021.
Whitehead, Alfred North. Science and the Modern World. New York: Free Press, 1967.
Cassirer, Ernst. An Essay on Man: An Introduction to a Philosophy of Human Culture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1944.
Dewey, John. Experience and Nature. 2nd ed. New York: Dover Publications, 1958.
James, William. Essays in Radical Empiricism. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1996.
Polanyi, Michael. Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958.
Capra, Fritjof, and Pier Luigi Luisi. The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Holland, John H. Emergence: From Chaos to Order. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1998.
Juarrero, Alicia. Dynamics in Action: Intentional Behavior as a Complex System. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.
Kauffman, Stuart A. At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Meadows, Donella H. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008.
Mitchell, Melanie. Complexity: A Guided Tour. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Morin, Edgar. On Complexity. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 2008.
Prigogine, Ilya, and Isabelle Stengers. Order Out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature. New York: Bantam Books, 1984.
Craig, Edward, ed. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge, 1998.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman.
Slater, R. E.
———. Reality and Cosmology Series (Embodied Relational Reality).
———. Reality and Metaphysics Series (Open Relational Process Metaphysics of Becoming).
