relationality • gary e. davis • berkeley


	Area	Spring Points

	relationality gary e. davis	June 2020 June 2024

Phenomenal relationality is expressed in appellant phenomenality (and implicitly mirrored, former by latter). Articulation about that relationality as such (rather than attending to, say, a murmuration of starlings) is articulative relationality about relational appeal.

One’s receptiveness as enacting desire shows as the “responsiveness” of being there: present.

One’s responsiveness as enacting desire shows as the “receptiveness” of being there: presence.

Present (receptive) responsiveness (appellant bearing, being) reflects open (res-
ponsive) receptiveness (granting appeal, letting): presencing. (June 2024: I know that’s obscure, due [I believe] to the unusual association of terms.)

A present of presencing has presence.

The degree of phenomenal appeal is relative to the temporal depth of appreci-ability brought to phenomenality, either by temporality of one’s life or time of relationality itself (e.g., being with “us” for a “long” time). Temporal depth is integral to any degree of meaning in phenomenal appeal, thus for meaning of ‘degree’ in appealing.

Relational cohering biways (is biwaying: is a mutuality of) granting and bearing in/over time: one’s receptiveness with the other’s responsiveness, one’s responsiveness with the other’s receptiveness—or better: one’s [responsive] receptiveness in/over time with the other’s [receptive] responsiveness in/over time.

I’ve coined this term to name relational being. | June 2024: See “interality”

Relationality individuates itself from the primal appeal of attachmental bonding, transposed in/over maturing time to different kinds of interal relations which individuation grows to appreciate in varying degrees, inasmuch as kinds are validly comparable.

‘Interality’ generally names appellant relationality individuated from primal attachmentality (attachmental bonding) irt anything wanted. Psychal-analysis of
a life can disclose the historicity of relationality brought to phenomenal appeal.

Intrinsic is want of trust: in/with oneSelf, others, and [personified—> person-
alized] things. Matured notions of genuineness and authenticity are individuations of trust in Self, others, and things.

Dwelling with textuality of interality is philological, at best in light of Literary appeal (i.e., the appeal typified by canonical literary art), and genealogy serves enablative (educational) interests through discourse.

June 2024: Much of the 2020 discussion here has become irrelevant and is deleted. For years, I used a neologism ‘cognative’ as relational complement to represen-
tational ‘cognative’. ‘Cognative’ still occurs in past discussions, but I expect to change that when I find it.

next—> flexibility of relational differences