Abstract Amid the wide variety of interpretations of quantum mechanics, the notion of a fully coherent ontological interpretation has seen a promising evolution over the last few decades. Despite this progress, however, the old dualistic categorical constraints of subjectivity and objectivity, correlate with the metrically restricted definition of local and global, have remained largely in place – a reflection of the broader, persistent inheritance of these comfortable strictures throughout the evolution of modern science. If one traces this inheritance back to its ancient roots in Plato and Aristotle, it is clear that the coherence, scientific utility, and historical durability of the various natural philosophies that followed have been directly proportional to their commitment, tacit or explicit, to object-oriented realism. As Simondon might put it, it is a commitment to the primacy of individuated substance over the process of individuation. For Whitehead, it is the misplaced assimilation of becoming to being, of potentiality to actuality. Quantum mechanics has challenged this commitment with a combined breadth and depth of force that far exceeds any other theory in the history of science. The theory’s objectively demonstrable empirical application is manifest only by way of a fundamentally subjective, context-dependent mechanism of measurement. More compelling still, actual system states are always actualizations of locally contextualized yet globally conditioned potential system states, such that “globally objective” reality is no longer merely the object of local measurement, but also its product. Thus, any coherent, ontological interpretation of quantum theory must include a conceptual framework by which objectivity and subjectivity, actuality and potentiality, global and local, being and becoming, individuated fact and process of individuation, are no longer understood as merely epistemic, mutually exclusive category pairs descriptive of an already extant, closed reality – but rather as mutually implicative ontological categories explicative of an ontogenetic, open reality-in-process.

中文翻译：

---

关系现实主义与本体宇宙

摘要 在对量子力学的各种解释中，完全连贯的本体论解释的概念在过去几十年中取得了有希望的演变。然而，尽管取得了这一进展，主观性和客观性的旧二元分类约束与局部和全球的度量限制定义相关，在很大程度上仍然存在——反映了这些舒适的限制在整个现代进化过程中的更广泛、持久的继承。科学。如果将这种继承追溯到柏拉图和亚里士多德的古老根源，很明显，随后的各种自然哲学的连贯性、科学效用和历史持久性与它们对对象的承诺（默认或明确）成正比。定向现实主义。正如西蒙东所说，它是对个体化实体优先于个体化过程的承诺。对怀特海而言，这是对存在、潜力与现实的错位同化。量子力学以远远超过科学史上任何其他理论的综合力的广度和深度挑战了这一承诺。该理论的客观可证明的经验应用只有通过一种基本主观的、依赖于上下文的测量机制才能体现出来。更引人注目的是，实际系统状态始终是局部背景化但全局条件下潜在系统状态的实现，因此“全局客观”现实不再仅仅是局部测量的对象，而是其产品。因此，任何相干的，