Relational ontology is the philosophical position that relations are ontologically prior to entities. Things do not first exist independently and then enter into relations; they are constituted through relations. The self, the object, the concept — each is what it is because of the relations it sustains, and it would be something different if those relations were different.

This position has multiple genealogies. In Western philosophy, it appears in Alfred North Whitehead’s process philosophy (actual entities are constituted by their prehensions of other entities), in Charles Sanders Peirce’s semiotics (signs are constituted by the triadic relation of sign, object, and interpretant), and in various strands of structuralism and post-structuralism. In Indigenous philosophies, relational ontology is not a theoretical position arrived at through argument but a description of how the world is understood through lived practice — what Glen Coulthard calls grounded normativity.

The relationality framework developed in this library provides a formal mathematical articulation of relational ontology, grounded in Lakota epistemologies. The framework demonstrates through a forced derivation that starting from the impossibility of nothing, relational structure necessarily emerges — producing logic, dynamics, geometry, and the full architecture of the semiotic universe. The derivation does not assume entities and then add relations; it produces entities as stable patterns within a relational field.

The political implications of relational ontology are significant: if entities are constituted by relations, then ontologization — treating contingent social arrangements as fixed features of reality — is not just a conceptual error but a form of violence. It severs the relations that constitute things and presents the severed product as natural and self-sufficient.