Integrating the ‘real’

► Reocentric and contractualist models of reality cannot do justice to the human condition in its multiple facets. ► Integrationism treats reality as pertaining to the individual only, i.e. the question whether there is an independently given reality or a linguistically constructed one is irrelevant, ontologically speaking, if we place the individual at the center of our focus. ► An integrational semiology relativizes the importance of language as a means to knowledge and treats the latter as an integrational process occurring in a contextually unique situation; knowledge is thus not to be mistaken for information (as contained in books or stored in databases). ► (scientific) knowledge and (religious) belief are not so diametrically opposed as modern society wants us to believe. This article explores (the concept of) ‘reality’ from the vantage point of an integrational epistemology ( Harris, 2009a). It considers ontological and epistemological questions pertinent to evolutionary biology, history and linguistics and argues that an integrational account of sign-making, which places the individual’s experience at its center, shows how deeply these disciplines (and others) rely on a misconceived view of how real people relate to the world ‘as it is’ (or ‘was’). What is ‘real’ cannot hence be established ‘objectively’, assuming a reocentric model of the world, nor should it be conceived of as discursively constructed, but rather as the result of contextualization by individuals.