迈向关系性存在的基础设施随想 / Thought of Infrastructure for Relational Being
在对“走向关系性存在”的可能性进行思考之后，随之而来的问题是：如果这一转向具有其意义，那么它需要哪些基础设施作为支撑？在本文中，“基础设施”被理解为一组条件，它们使关系性存在得以被理解、发生、维持、生成与延续。
After reflecting on the possibility of moving toward relational being, a subsequent question arises: if such a shift carries significance, what kinds of infrastructure would be required to support it? In this context, “infrastructure” is understood as a set of conditions that enable relational being to be understood, to occur, to be sustained, to generate, and to continue.
一、理论基础设施 / I. Theoretical Infrastructure
理论基础设施的功能在于使关系性存在可被思考、建模与传递。关系性范式需要一种非实体中心的形式语言，用于描述关系、变化与生成，从而避免将关系还原为经验直觉或修辞性表述。
在这一层面上，场论提供了一种理解非局域相互作用结构的形式直觉，使关系不再依附于孤立实体；群论通过对变换结构的刻画，引入了一种关系本体的形式承诺，使对象的同一性与结构来自关系的保持方式；过程哲学将存在理解为生成过程本身；网络理论与复杂系统理论则用于分析多主体关系中整体结构与新性质的涌现。这些理论并不提供终极解释，而是为关系性存在提供可组合、可演化的形式框架。
其关键特征体现在三个方面：以关系、过程或场为基本单元；强调生成与涌现作为理解存在的核心路径；具有跨层映射能力，能够在哲学、科学、社会与技术等不同层次间建立联系。
The function of theoretical infrastructure is to make relational being thinkable, modelable, and transmissible. It provides a non-entity-centered formal language for describing relations, change, and genesis, allowing relational being to be articulated without reduction to intuition or rhetoric.
At this level, field-theoretic perspectives offer formal intuitions for understanding non-local interaction structures, freeing relations from dependence on isolated entities; group theory introduces a formal commitment to relational ontology by describing structures in terms of allowable transformations, through which identity and structure are defined relationally; process philosophy understands being in terms of generative processes; and network theory and complex systems theory analyze emergent structures and properties in multi-agent relations. These theories do not offer ultimate explanations, but provide composable and evolvable formal frameworks for relational being.
Its key characteristics manifest in three aspects: taking relations, processes, or fields as basic units; emphasizing genesis and emergence as core modes of understanding being; and possessing cross-level mapping capabilities that connect philosophical, scientific, social, and technical dimensions.
Summary
理论基础设施用于为关系性存在提供可形式化、可建模的理解框架。
例：场论（非局域关系结构），群论（关系变换的本体承诺），过程哲学（生成过程的理解），网络理论，几何与拓扑理论，复杂系统理论。
Theoretical infrastructure provides formalizable and modelable frameworks for understanding relational being.
Examples: field theory (non-local relational structures), group theory (ontological commitment to relational transformations), process philosophy (understanding of generative processes), network theory, geometric and topological theories, complex systems theory.
二、概念与本体理解基础设施
II. Conceptual and Ontological Understanding Infrastructure
概念与本体理解基础设施的功能，并不仅在于提供统一概念或接口协调，而在于为关系性存在提供原理层面的理解基础。它旨在帮助我们理解关系性存在为何可能、如何生成，以及其存在论与规范性的根源。
在这一层面上，关键不在于概念的一致性本身，而在于对一系列根本原理的把握：关系如何构成存在本身；结构如何从非结构中涌现；存在性如何在关系中被经验；在场性如何成为可感知的事实；以及伦理与道德如何并非外在附加的规范，而是从关系结构与生成过程中内生地产生。
这一基础设施使我们能够理解，关系性并非对实体本体论的修辞性替代，而是一种具有内在生成原理的存在样式。它解释为何关系可以稳定地产生结构，同时这些结构又始终保留不可完全结构化的余量；为何在场性并不等同于物理同处，而是一种在关系中被持续生成的存在状态；以及为何伦理与道德源于对脆弱性、依赖性与不可替代性的回应，而非外在强加的规则体系。
因此，概念与本体理解基础设施并不追求建构封闭的形而上学系统，而是提供一套可被持续反思、检验与深化的原理性理解框架，使关系性存在既不沦为空洞口号，也不被还原为纯技术或功能性安排。
The function of conceptual and ontological understanding infrastructure is not merely to provide unified concepts or interface coordination, but to offer a principle-level foundation for understanding relational being. Its aim is to clarify why relational being is possible, how it is generated, and where its ontological and normative grounding lies.
At this level, the emphasis is not on conceptual consistency per se, but on grasping a set of fundamental principles: how relations constitute being itself; how structure emerges from non-structure; how being is experienced within relations; how presence becomes a perceptible fact; and how ethics and morality are not externally imposed norms, but arise immanently from relational structures and generative processes.
This infrastructure enables us to see that relationality is not a rhetorical substitute for substance-based ontology, but a mode of being with its own internal principles of generation. It explains why relations can stably generate structures while always retaining a residue that cannot be fully structured; why presence is not equivalent to physical co-location but a state of being continuously generated within relations; and why ethics and morality emerge as responses to vulnerability, dependency, and irreplaceability rather than as externally imposed rule systems.
Accordingly, conceptual and ontological understanding infrastructure does not seek to construct a closed metaphysical system, but instead provides a principle-based framework of understanding that remains open to reflection, examination, and deepening, ensuring that relational being neither collapses into empty rhetoric nor is reduced to purely technical or functional arrangements.
Summary
概念与本体理解基础设施用于阐明关系性存在的原理基础与生成逻辑。
例：关系本体论，结构—非结构的涌现原理，存在性与在场性的生成原理，关系性伦理与道德的内生机制。
The conceptual and ontological understanding infrastructure articulates the principled foundations and generative logic of relational being.
Examples: relational ontology, structure–non-structure emergence principles, generative principles of being and presence, immanent mechanisms of relational ethics and morality.
三、共在基础设施 / III. Co-presence Infrastructure
共在基础设施的功能在于构筑被感知为共在的条件，即使在物理分离的情况下。关系性存在不仅是结构问题，更是现象学问题。共在基础设施关注主体是否被经验为“在一起”。
具体例子包括：远程看护系统中持续的感知—回应回路，而非一次性监测；远程陪伴机制中对节奏、停顿与回应的设计；以及以关照而非效率为中心的数字系统，如强调“被看到”“被回应”的交互设计。这些系统的目标并非最大化信息传输，而是维持共在的经验连续性。
其关键维度体现在三个方面：在场感的营造；情感与关照的可达性；以及避免将他者还原为纯接口对象。
The function of co-presence infrastructure is to construct conditions for being perceived as co-present, even in physical separation. Relational being is not only a structural issue, but also a phenomenological one. Co-presence infrastructure concerns whether subjects are experienced as “being together.”
Concrete examples include continuous perception–response loops in remote care systems, rather than one-off monitoring; remote companionship mechanisms designed around rhythm, pause, and responsiveness; and digital systems centered on care rather than efficiency, emphasizing being seen and responded to. The goal of such systems is not to maximize information transfer, but to maintain experiential continuity of co-presence.
Its key dimensions manifest in three aspects: the creation of presence, the accessibility of emotion and care, and avoiding the reduction of the other to a mere interface object.
Summary
共在基础设施用于构筑可被经验为“在一起”的关系性在场条件。
例：远程看护系统，远程陪伴机制，共在导向的数字交互系统。
四、决策基础设施
IV. Decision Infrastructure
决策基础设施的功能在于阐明决策如何在关系性存在中展开，并为关系性行动提供可持续、可负责的过程性支撑。在关系性范式中，决策以时间过程的形式发生，其意义不在于一次性地给出结论，而在于在不确定性中持续接近主体的实在状态，并对行动承担责任。
在这一框架下，决策基础设施同时涉及两个相互关联的层面。一方面，它以关系性本体为前提，体现权威的分布性与责任的共担性；另一方面，它关注决策在过程论意义上的生成方式，即决策如何在符号、现象与行动之间循环展开，如何在反馈中被调整，以及如何在持续更新中保持对主体实在的敏感性。
在这样的过程性理解中，证据决策构成一种重要的方法路径。证据在此并非被理解为对实在的完整表征，而是作为一种中介结构，通过符号化表达与现象性记录，在时间中逐步逼近主体的实在状态，并为决策保留修正与回溯的空间。通过这一方式，决策能够在不确定性条件下保持可解释性与可负责性。
这种以证据为支撑的过程性决策方法，已经在多个领域中得到实际应用。例如，在政治经济学中，它表现为基于统计指标、社会调查与政策反馈的迭代式治理实践；在福祉学与社会看护领域中，它体现为结合生理数据、行为节律与主观体验的持续评估与干预调整。在这些实践中，决策并非追求终局性的答案，而是通过过程性的证据积累，为关系性行动提供节律、约束与责任结构。
The function of decision infrastructure is to articulate how decision-making unfolds within relational being and to provide processual support for responsible relational action. Within the relational paradigm, decision-making takes place as a temporal process, whose significance lies in progressively approaching the real state of subjects under conditions of uncertainty and in sustaining responsibility for action.
Within this framework, decision infrastructure involves two closely related dimensions. On the one hand, it presupposes a relational ontology characterized by distributed authority and shared responsibility. On the other hand, it addresses the processual dynamics of decision-making: how decisions unfold through cycles of symbols, phenomena, and action; how they are adjusted through feedback; and how sensitivity to subject reality is maintained over time.
Under this process-oriented understanding, evidence-based decision constitutes an important methodological pathway. Evidence is not treated as a complete representation of reality, but as a mediating structure that, through symbolic articulation and phenomenal recording, progressively approaches the real state of subjects over time while preserving the possibility of revision and retrospection. In this way, decision-making remains interpretable and responsible under conditions of uncertainty.
Such evidence-supported processual decision-making has already been applied across multiple domains. In political economy, it appears in iterative governance practices based on statistical indicators, social surveys, and policy feedback. In welfare studies and social care, it takes the form of continuous assessment and adaptive intervention integrating physiological data, behavioral rhythms, and subjective experience. In these contexts, decision-making does not aim at final answers, but at providing rhythm, constraint, and responsibility structures for relational action.
Summary
决策基础设施用于支撑关系性存在中的过程性决策与责任行动。
例：基于统计与反馈的政策迭代，社会福祉中的持续评估与干预调整，医疗与看护中的多源证据决策流程。
Decision infrastructure supports processual decision-making and responsible action within relational being.
Examples: policy iteration based on statistics and feedback, continuous assessment and adaptive intervention in social welfare, multi-source evidence-based decision processes in healthcare and care systems.
五、共创基础设施 / V. Co-creative Infrastructure
共创基础设施的功能在于为关系性存在中的生成性实践提供条件，使新的关系、新的意义与新的结构能够在互动过程中涌现。在关系性范式中，共创是一种以关系本体为基础的生成性活动，通过共在、回应与协同展开，使生成过程得以持续推进。
共创基础设施关注生成发生的场域与条件。生成可以在多种关系性实践中展开，例如在共同艺术创作中，意义通过多方参与、回应与调整逐步形成；在障碍者可参与的共创实践中，创作过程成为关系重组与存在性显现的场域，使不同能力、节律与感知方式得以共在并相互生成；在共同照护实践中，照护方式与角色分工通过持续互动逐步形成；在社区协作与共同生活实践中，规则、角色与责任结构在实际互动中逐步生成。
这类共创实践通常呈现出若干稳定特征。生成过程沿着互动的展开而推进，并在过程中不断调整；失败、中断与未完成作为生成节律的一部分被自然吸收；生成保持开放性，使新的关系与意义持续出现；同时，通过对场域、节奏与规则的设计，生成过程获得必要的保护，使其能够在时间中延续。
The function of co-creative infrastructure is to provide conditions for generative practices within relational being, allowing new relations, new meanings, and new structures to emerge through interaction. Within the relational paradigm, co-creation is a form of generative activity grounded in relational ontology, unfolding through co-presence, responsiveness, and coordination.
Co-creative infrastructure attends to the sites and conditions in which generation takes place. Generative processes unfold across multiple relational practices. For example, in collective artistic creation, meaning takes shape through mutual participation, response, and adjustment; in accessible co-creation practices involving persons with disabilities, the creative process becomes a site of relational reconfiguration and existential manifestation, allowing different capacities, rhythms, and modes of perception to co-exist and co-generate; in shared care practices, modes of care and role distribution take shape through ongoing interaction; in community collaboration and co-living practices, rules, roles, and responsibility structures gradually emerge through lived interaction.
Such co-creative practices typically exhibit several stable characteristics. Generation advances through the unfolding of interaction and is continuously adjusted in process; failure, interruption, and incompleteness are integrated as part of generative rhythm; openness is sustained so that new relations and meanings can continue to emerge; and through the design of spaces, rhythms, and rules, generative processes receive the protection necessary to persist over time.
Summary
共创基础设施用于支撑基于关系性本体的生成性实践。
例：共同艺术创作，障碍者可参与的共创实践，共同照护实践，社区协作与共居实践，跨角色协同生成机制。
Co-creative infrastructure supports generative practices grounded in relational ontology.
Examples: collective artistic creation, accessible co-creation practices involving persons with disabilities, shared care practices, community collaboration and co-living practices, cross-role collaborative generative mechanisms.
六、教育基础设施 / VI. Educational Infrastructure
教育基础设施的功能在于为关系性存在的形成与延续提供条件，使关系性能力能够在学习、实践与时间积累中逐步养成，并在代际之间得以传递。在关系性范式中，教育并非单向的知识传授过程，而是一个持续展开的关系性实践过程，通过互动、反思与情境参与，使主体逐渐学会在关系中理解自身与他者。
在这一过程中，教育基础设施关注主体如何在具体情境中发展关系性能力，包括对话中的倾听与回应能力、在多方互动中的位置感、以及在不确定情境中维持关系并作出行动的能力。这些能力并非通过抽象原则获得，而是在反复的实践与反思中逐步形成。
相应的教育实践体现在多种形式中。例如，对话式教学通过持续的互动训练主体在关系中表达与理解；跨学科问题导向学习通过共同面对复杂问题，培养在多重视角中的协作与协调能力；强调反思与关系定位的训练机制，则帮助主体在行动中不断调整自身与他者、结构与情境之间的关系。
The function of educational infrastructure is to provide conditions for the formation and continuation of relational being, allowing relational capacities to be gradually cultivated through learning, practice, and accumulation over time, and transmitted across generations. Within the relational paradigm, education unfolds as an ongoing relational practice rather than a unidirectional process of knowledge delivery, enabling subjects to learn how to understand themselves and others within relations through interaction, reflection, and situated participation.
In this process, educational infrastructure attends to how subjects develop relational capacities in concrete contexts, including the ability to listen and respond in dialogue, a sense of positioning within multi-agent interaction, and the capacity to sustain relations and act within conditions of uncertainty. These capacities are not acquired through abstract principles alone, but take shape through repeated practice and reflection.
Corresponding educational practices appear in multiple forms. Dialogical pedagogy cultivates the ability to express and understand within relations through sustained interaction; interdisciplinary problem-based learning fosters collaboration and coordination across perspectives by engaging with complex shared problems; and training mechanisms emphasizing reflection and relational positioning support subjects in continuously adjusting their relations to others, structures, and situations through action.
Summary
教育基础设施用于支撑关系性能力的养成与代际延续。
例：对话式教学，跨学科问题导向学习（不同学科间的关系性结构的理解、实践、生产与再生产），关系定位与反思训练机制。
Educational infrastructure supports the cultivation and intergenerational continuity of relational capacities.
Examples: dialogical pedagogy, interdisciplinary problem-based learning (understanding, practicing, producing, and reproducing relational structures among different disciplines), training mechanisms for relational positioning and reflection.
七、伦理与看护基础设施 / VII. Ethical and Care Infrastructure
伦理与看护基础设施的功能在于，为关系性存在在不对称、脆弱与依赖的条件下提供持续回应的可能性，使关系本身不因失衡而中断。在关系性范式中，伦理体现为主体在具体关系中对他者的回应方式；看护则是在关系无法对等展开时，使回应得以持续的实践形态。
在这一意义上，伦理与看护基础设施关注的并非抽象规范或单向保护，而是关系如何在不稳定条件下被维持。例如，在长期照护关系中，关系并非基于即时回报，而是通过持续回应与责任承接得以延续；在复杂组织或技术系统中，伦理机制体现为对关系断裂风险的识别与缓冲，使效率、自动化与规模化不会切断必要的关怀关系；在社会结构中，对弱势处境的回应体现为承认关系的不对称性，并为其提供可持续存在的条件。
因此，伦理与看护基础设施构成关系性存在得以持续的重要支撑层。它在关系无法对等展开、无法持续生成新结构的情形下，为关系提供承接、维持与回应的条件，使关系能够在脆弱性与不对称中继续存在。
The function of ethical and care infrastructure is to sustain relational being under conditions of asymmetry, vulnerability, and dependency, enabling relations to persist even when balance and reciprocity cannot be maintained. Within the relational paradigm, ethics takes shape as the way subjects respond to others in concrete relations, while care constitutes the practical form through which responsiveness is sustained when relations cannot unfold symmetrically.
In this sense, ethical and care infrastructure attends not to abstract norms or one-directional protection, but to how relations are maintained under unstable conditions. For example, in long-term care relationships, relations persist through ongoing responsiveness and responsibility rather than immediate reciprocity; in complex organizational or technical systems, ethical mechanisms function as buffers against relational breakdown, ensuring that efficiency, automation, and scale do not sever necessary relations of care; in social structures, responses to vulnerable situations acknowledge relational asymmetry and provide conditions for relational continuity.
Accordingly, ethical and care infrastructure constitutes a crucial support layer for the continuity of relational being. It provides conditions for carrying, sustaining, and responding to relations in situations where relations cannot unfold symmetrically or continuously generate new structures, allowing relational being to persist amid vulnerability and asymmetry.
Summary
伦理与看护基础设施用于在脆弱性与不对称条件下维持并重构关系的连续性。
例：长期照护中的持续回应与关系承接机制，弱势处境中关系性能力的支持与再生产实践，组织与技术系统中的关系性伦理缓冲机制。
Ethical and care infrastructure sustains and reconstitutes relational continuity under conditions of vulnerability and asymmetry.
Examples: sustained responsiveness and relational carrying in long-term care, practices supporting the construction and reproduction of relational capacities in vulnerable situations, relational ethical buffering mechanisms in organizational and technical systems.
总结 / Conclusion
迈向关系性存在，是对存在条件本身的重新组织。这一转向通过一组相互关联的基础设施得以展开，使关系能够被理解、被经验、被实践、被生成、被延续，并在脆弱条件下保持连续。
理论基础设施与概念—本体理解基础设施，为关系性存在提供形式与原理，使关系作为存在的生成方式得以被把握。共在基础设施为关系提供可被经验的在场条件，使关系在空间与距离中展开。决策基础设施使关系性行动能够在时间中持续推进，通过过程性与证据性的机制承担责任并接近主体实在。共创基础设施为关系的生成性打开空间，使新的关系、意义与结构在互动中不断涌现。教育基础设施使关系性能力得以养成并跨代延续，使关系性存在成为可学习、可实践的存在样式。伦理与看护基础设施在不对称与脆弱条件下承接并重构关系，使关系得以持续存在。
这七类基础设施共同构成了一种关系性存在的整体条件结构。关系在其中被生成、被学习、被实践、被再生产，并在失衡与不确定中得到回应与承载。关系性存在因此通过多层基础设施的协同持续展开。
Moving toward relational being involves a reorganization of the conditions of existence themselves. This shift unfolds through a set of interrelated infrastructures that enable relations to be understood, experienced, practiced, generated, sustained, and carried through conditions of vulnerability.
Theoretical infrastructure and conceptual–ontological understanding infrastructure provide the forms and principles through which relational being becomes intelligible. Co-presence infrastructure supplies experiential conditions through which relations are lived and enacted across space and distance. Decision infrastructure enables relational action to unfold over time through processual and evidence-based mechanisms that sustain responsibility and approach subject reality. Co-creative infrastructure opens spaces for generativity, allowing new relations, meanings, and structures to emerge through interaction. Educational infrastructure cultivates and transmits relational capacities across generations, making relational being learnable and practicable. Ethical and care infrastructure carries and reconstitutes relations under conditions of asymmetry and vulnerability.
Together, these seven infrastructures form an integrated condition structure for relational being. Relations are generated, learned, practiced, reproduced, and sustained through coordinated infrastructural support, allowing relational being to unfold through the interaction of multiple infrastructural layers.