about psychological exploration

---

Psychological reflectivity as conceptual prospecting is based in psychal (¶ 12) self-understanding, which is ontogenic. Conceptual prospecting is pre-ontological, i.e., not yet venturing to claim a primordial focus. Inasmuch as such prospecting has constitutive merit for ongoing inquiry, then the prospecting might be appropriately called ontic (and its aspects ontical), but that’s about a provisional efficacy of conceptuality for discursive inquiry. It’s no metaphysicalism, to my mind. Onticality is a relative notion of inquiry, as a topography may be relative to a preceding topology, which is developed from evolving backgrounds. The nature of developmental evolving (presently: a humanistic phenotype—this writer—in a historizing ecology, so to speak) is a primordial interest of inquiry in itself (as discursive inquiry, not exemplifying the writer as such—not merely self serving).

Everything in psychological inquiry is ontogenically constituted in resultant capabilities for working with bodies of appropriated understanding, but ontogeny as such is a concept of reconstructive interest or inquiry. No actual ontogeny can be comprehensively captured through methodic reflection and evidentiary reconstruction. (There’s no comprehensive synthesis in the horizon of autobiographical and psychological inquiry.) Ontogenic notions have a resonance of living and represented understanding that ensites itself conceptually (and textually).

The ontogenic resonance of ontic pretexts might suggest a high sense of ontogeny for conceptual prospecting. But that’s a philosophical anticipation in evolving developmentality.

---