Telling tales of relations: Appreciating relational constructionism

The terms social constructionism and (social) constructivism are employed in the context of different problematics and different philosophical assumptions. This article presents ‘relational constructionism’ as a social science perspective. The perspective centres language-based relational processes as they (re)construct more or less local relational realities. The latter includes western individualism and its construction of the bounded, separately existing individual relating to a separately existing other where ‘other’ is everything which is not self; this has been called ‘hard’ self-other differentiation. The perspective of relational constructionism allows that ‘soft’ self-other differentiation also is possible — for example, in the practice of relationally engaged inquiry and change work. Relational constructionism, as outlined here, has a number of distinctive features: it clearly speaks about ontology and power (unlike many other constructionisms); it centres and gives ontology to construction processes (to how, rather than what) and sees persons and worlds as emerging in processes (rather than assuming individual minds and actions); it opens up the possibility of soft self-other differentiation (rather than assuming that ‘hard differentiation is ‘how it really is’); and it centres dialogical practices as ways of relating that can enable and support multiple local forms of life rather than imposing one dominant rationality on others.