"Context is everything" and it is divisable. But how do we divide context in meaningful ways that allow us to science within that space and within that time within that space? How do we describe both the spacetime of a particular experiment or application of DRR? What is the nature of that context within a context? One way is to define the "relational space" as a network of positional relationships of objects (this is what Descarte would suggest). This leads to our traditional modeling of points and lines, nodes and edges that, in turn, lead to considerations of relational strength and density. We entangle a number of elements (stimuli) to form a structure of more or less stability and investigate how that stability is influenced by various manipulations of the operants and discriminated operants used to form the structure. Both the formation and "tweaking" of the structure, however, do not happen in a static spacetime, which is what our pictured models suggest. Instead, they happen in a continuous and individual world line flowing within an "absolute space" (this is what Newton would suggest) - a space that is independent of the objects participating in the evolved network. A person's world line is simply a trace of that individual's causal connection to the universe as that person lives throughout a lifetime. That world line is characterized by a process of entanglement, negentropy and disentanglement. These are the phases of life as we know it. Within the phase state of negentropy we observe, and personally experience, the grandeur of growth, awareness and realization, all within a collective cloud of individual variations. Each of these world lines trace a unique geometry that defines a person's Context of Life (CoL). Within an individual's CoL there exists partitionable contexts in which negentropy allows for the evolution of complexity. The evolution of complexity allows for the emergence of DRR. What is important to understand, however, is that evolution occurs within a world line, and world lines are describable as having a past, present and future. It is within that past and present spacetime that the capactity to perform DRR is established. That spacetime has time as one of its coordinates and must always be included in our formulation and understanding of the evolution of relational networks and their emergent properties (e.g., relational density). If we are to fully understand the dynamics of mutual entailment and combinatorial mutual entailment we must account for the influence of time between pairings and between the pairing of pairings. One such control for this natural source of variation is to always require RESA levels of fluency rates as a standard for the qualification of the stability of a pairing, a pairing of pairings, a network of pairings, and a network or networks. The limits of our ability to control fluency of relational responding will set the limits to our ability to control and understand this phenomenon.
rlaitinen