Relationalism is any theoretical position that gives importance to therelational nature of things. For relationalism, things exist and function only as relationalentities.
Relationalism, in the broadest sense, applies to anysystem of thought that gives importance to the relational nature ofreality. In its narrower and more philosophically restricted sense, as propounded by the Indian philosopherJoseph Kaipayil[1][2][3] and others, relationalism refers to thetheory ofreality that interprets theexistence, nature, and meaning of things in terms of their relationality or relatedness. In the relationalist view, things are neither self-standing entities nor vague events but relationalparticulars. Particulars are inherently relational, as they are ontologically open to other particulars in their constitution and action. Relational particulars, in the relationalist view, are the ultimate constituents of reality.
In discussions aboutspace and time, the name relationalism (or relationism) refers toLeibniz's relationist notion of space and time as againstNewton'ssubstantivalist views.[4][5][6] According toNewton’s substantivalism, space and time are entities in their own right, existing independently of things. Leibniz's relationism, on the other hand, describesspace and time as systems of relations that exist between objects.
More generally, in physics and philosophy, arelational theory is a framework to understandreality or aphysical system in such a way that the positions and other properties of objects are only meaningful relative to other objects. In a relationalspacetime theory, space does not exist unless there are objects in it; nor does time exist without events. The relational view proposes that space is contained in objects and that an object represents within itself relationships to other objects. Space can be defined through the relations among the objects that it contains considering their variations through time. This is an alternative to anabsolute theory, in which the space exists independently of any objects that can be immersed in it.[7]
The relational point of view was advocated in physics byGottfried Wilhelm Leibniz[7] andErnst Mach (in hisMach's principle).[7] It was rejected byIsaac Newton in his successful description ofclassical physics. AlthoughAlbert Einstein was impressed by Mach's principle, he did not fully incorporate it into hisgeneral theory of relativity. Several attempts have been made to formulate a full Machian theory, but most physicists think that none have so far succeeded. For example, seeBrans–Dicke theory.
Relational quantum mechanics and a relational approach to quantum physics have been independently developed, in analogy with Einstein'sspecial relativity of space and time. Relationist physicists such asJohn Baez andCarlo Rovelli have criticised the leadingunified theory ofgravity andquantum mechanics,string theory, for retaining absolute space. Some prefer a developing theory of gravity,loop quantum gravity, for its 'backgroundlessness'.
Relationalism incolour theory, as defended by Jonathan Cohen and others,[8][9] means the view that colours of an object are constituted partly in terms of relations with the perceiver. An anti-relationalist view about colour, on the other hand, would insist colours are object-dependent.[10]
Inrelational sociology, relationalism is often contrasted with substantivalism. While substantivalism (also called substantialism) tends to view individuals as self-subsistent entities capable of social interaction, relationalism underscores the social human practices and the individual's transactional contexts and reciprocal relations.[11]Georg Simmel was methodologically a relationalist, because he was more interested in the interactions among individuals than the substantial qualities of the individual.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)