The Project of "Information Ontology" in Gilbert Simondon's Theory of Individuation

Sayapin Vladislav Olegovich ORCID: 0000-0002-6588-9192 PhD in Philosophy Associate Professor; Department of History and Philosophy; Tambov State University named after G.R. Derzhavin 392000, Russia, Tambov region, Tambov, Internatsionalnaya str., 33 vlad2015@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

French social researcher J. Simondon was the philosopher who decided to create a scientific field, now called "information ontology". Despite the fact that Simondon is still considered one of the original philosophers of our time, he cannot be attributed to the well-known social thinkers in Russia. In our opinion, Simondon's main merit lies in the fact that at one time he decided to bridge the catastrophic gap between the traditional "European humanitarian culture" and the new "scientific culture" born of the scientific and technological progress of the 20th century. Focusing on the place and role of technical objects in the construction of a new concept of "being", Simondon builds a serious philosophy in which he defines the parameters of the development of a new technical and scientific culture. The problems and contradictions of that culture, which was previously identified by the English physicist and writer C.P. Snow (1905-1980) in his famous lecture "Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution" (1959): "... between the traditional humanitarian culture of the European West and the new, so-called "scientific culture", derived from the scientific and technological progress of the XX century the catastrophic gap is growing every year"^{[1, p.5]}.

And it is for this reason that an important task for Simondon's philosophy is not only defending the thesis that information is always present in the present, and it is relevant, since this is the direction in which the system individualizes itself, but also a new theoretical and methodological understanding of the concept of "technical activity"^[2]. That is why the Simondonian theory of "individuation" not only develops the genesis and ontogenesis of the individual, but also forms an original philosophy of information, communication and technology, which is radically different from other similar theories of our time. In this philosophy of "information ontology", he was primarily interested in the deepest disappointment that during this period there was a lack of interdisciplinary research in the scientific community related to the convergence of technology, science and philosophy. And within this framework, there was probably the most important contradiction, which concerned the convergence of science and technology, and was associated with unsuccessful attempts to explicate the concept of "information".

So, in the middle of the 20th century, cybernetics scientists knew that there were areas of natural and social sciences that had not yet been explored using information theory, just as this information was formulated in mathematics, physics, and engineering. Thus, in the work of the American cyberneticist R. Hartley (1900-1982) "Information Transmission" (1928) ^[3,4], the concept of "information" was first voiced, which became a measurable quantity reflecting the recipient's ability to distinguish one sequence of characters from any other. Therefore, later the decimal digit was defined as the natural unit of information, renamed Hartley in honor of this scientist, namely it is shown as a unit that takes into account the scale or measure of information. According to another American mathematician, engineer and cryptanalyst K.E. Shannon (1916-2001), information meant not only surprise (the smaller the expected signal, the more information it carries), but also this concept was considered as a structured object that needs to be transported from point "A" to point "B". In other words, Shannon defines the amount of information as a measure of the uncertainty of a given situation that disappears after the message. That is, the lower the a priori probability of the fact about which the message is, the more information it contains. In addition, this mathematical theory of communication solved the problem of how to restore this structure in an almost unchanged form at point "B", despite encoding, errors and limitations in transmission. Cyberneticists, however, very quickly realized that it was necessary to take into account the "point of view" of the transmitting and receiving systems and that there is no information without a system. Simondon also knew this (he had access to some unpublished materials), and his approach to information was, in part, a continuation of solving these problems. In general, while accepting the engineering concept of "information" for himself, Simondon criticized many cybernetic approaches to information research.

At the same time, it was the mathematical theory of communication by Shannon (1948)^[5] that became the starting point for Simondon in his comprehension of the concept of "information". Moreover, Simondon saw in this concept of "information" an ontological property. It follows from this that the Simondonian "information ontology" is one of the options for expanding the mathematical theory of communication, which explains in his open information system not only the uncertainty of the interactive model of information existence, but also its interoperability (interoperability). Therefore, these two factors, interoperability and a certain measure of information uncertainty, allow him to apply the theory of "information" taken from the mathematical theory of communication to areas beyond mathematics, physics and engineering.

In this regard, an important question arises: what role does information entropy (or a measure of uncertainty and randomness), established in the mathematical theory of communication, play for Simondon's "information ontology"? Thus, according to the same Shannon, the main problem of any communication is the accurate or approximate reproduction at one point of the message selected at another point^[5]. In this case, messages often have meanings that relate to a certain information system or, thanks to this system, relate to certain physical or conceptual objects. Such semantic aspects of the communication process are not related to engineering tasks. An important aspect here is that the actual message is just one selected from a set of possible messages. The system must be designed and built to function under any possible choice, since the facts are never known in advance.

At the same time, mathematicians W. Weaver (1894-1978) and N. Wiener (1894-1964), as well as psychologist and linguist C.E. Osgood (1916-1991), also believed that communication is primarily a flow of information. At the same time, Osgood and Wiener equally argued that the mathematical theory of communication is unable to take into account the semantic aspect of information. According to these researchers, this state of affairs consisted in the fact that the mathematical theory of communication, although it was the basis of the semantics of information, could not provide an explanation for it. At the same time, Osgood recognized that along with the mathematical theory of communication, there are areas beyond the scope of this theory, such as sending and receiving messages. Especially in the context of when it is necessary to make a choice in the description of the moment, and in this case the information-theoretical content of the message gives way to something not completely predictable. This topic will be heard throughout Osgood's professional career, and it has much in common with the approach of Simondon's "information ontology." Osgood viewed communication sequences as informational, but also as something that constantly brings both the communicator and the recipient to what can be roughly called "points of choice" – points where each subsequent step in choosing a particular skill is not very predictable from the point of view of achieving communication goals. The dependence of the sentence "I probably won't water the flowers" on the sentence "it looks like it's going to rain today" in the message content reflects determinants within the semantic aspect of the information system, which hide and then "load" the transition probabilities at these choice points^[6].

These are the circumstances of the semantic aspect of Osgood's information theory, which has found places in this theory (sensitivity to unpredictable circumstances and openness to information multimodality) that are not mediated by communication. In other words, another step forward was taken by introducing these functions, which were previously associated only with semantic information, namely information as an entity. In this regard, according to the Italian philosopher L. Floridi (born 1964), people become connected to each other and surround themselves with intelligent, responsive objects. That is, they all become integrated into the "infosphere", where information can exist in three ways: information as reality, information for reality, and information about reality^{[7, p.65]}. Moreover, where cyberneticists considered the uncertainty and interoperability of information "about" and "for" reality, Simondon considers this information as reality.

It should be emphasized that another researcher of information theory, N. Wiener, who for a long time was unanimously recognized by many scientists as the founder of the cybernetic tradition, knew this state of affairs more than any other thinker of that time. Wiener, like Shannon, viewed communication as information. However, where Shannon tried to explain only the engineering approach to information theory, Wiener, like Osgood and Simondon, sought to find another way to make sense of information. A way in which information, thanks to the mathematical theory of communication, could lay the foundation for a much more flexible, diverse and promising (in terms of development) theory of communication. In addition, Wiener, recognizing the merits of B. Russell (1872-1970), criticized the fact that his actions to apply cybersemantics, as a discipline aimed at controlling the loss of meaning in language, had already led to certain problems^[8]. According to Wiener, it is always necessary to perceive the information on the basis of which not only people, but also machines can act effectively. Therefore, the following model of information message transmission is crucial here: sender (code) – message (channel) – recipient (context). Moreover, Wiener pays attention not to the total amount of information sent, but to the amount of information that can penetrate into communication^[9]. As a result, Wiener's concept of "information" serves both as a signal for action and presupposes the extrapolation of technological schemes that have emerged in computer science and telecommunications to vital and psychosocial individuals. It follows that Wiener distances himself not only from Shannon's mathematical theory of communication, but also from D. McKay's qualitative theory of information^[10]. Therefore, at the present time, as in the middle of the 20th century, the general scientific concept of "information" is not unified. These are the features of Wiener's information theory that allow for the existence of a reality in which semantic information differs from mathematical communication theory. However, this theory of information is still based on its traditional concepts, where the transmitted data is less important than the type of data that can penetrate various communication systems. Here, penetration implies overcoming some fundamental barrier, and this is how it differs from message transmission.

Of course, modern discourse (from cognitive science to epistemology) related to the theory of "information" is deeply tied to the difference that takes this barrier into account. However, it is important to find an understanding between what Wiener calls "straightforward" or "rough" information and the kind of information on the basis of which people can act effectively. For example, modern philosophers such as L. Floridi or F. Dretske (1932-2013), tried and are trying to create an "information ontology" that could determine not only the nature of information, but also understand the interaction between these two levels of information. It follows that information is a vital resource that shapes our knowledge and understanding of reality. It is not just a neutral representation of reality, but also a part of the world with its own properties, effects, and moral consequences ^{[11, 12]}. It is important to note that in this context, Simondon's "information ontology" remains a significant moment in the history of the development of the concept of "information" today. Therefore, by developing a unique approach to information, and drawing his origins from the mathematical theory of communication, Simondon leaves for himself a certain incompleteness (or endless becoming) in his information and organizational scheme of individuation, which allows him to create a unique "information ontology." That is why, from Simondon's point of view, information is what makes the incompatibility of an insoluble system an organizing dimension in resolution^{[13, p.46]}. In addition, the information here carries the meaning of an independent organizing action. He also attributes to this action the role of the fuse of individuation, the demand for individuation^{[13, p.46]}.

So, in his theory of "individuation", Simondon, "... shifts our attention from established structures and processes to emerging ones, which allows us to proceed to the analysis of the processes of origin, formation and development"^{[14, p.111]}. Simondon's individuation is always an unfinished process, always leaving a pre–individual residue that in itself makes possible future phases of individuation. Moreover, the mental phase of individuation always creates both an individual (mental) and a collective (social) subject. Based on this, he is no longer talking about structures, but about operations, and instead of identity, he turns to differential relations. In this case, Simondon anticipates the appearance of the "General Theory of Systems" (1969)^[15] by the Austrian philosopher Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901-1972). His most important achievement was the division of systems into closed systems (the mechanistic approach) and open systems (the dynamic approach). Therefore, the difference between living and non-living entities lies in the way the components are organized, not in the components themselves. For example, "Figuratively speaking, if a living being is compressed into a cube in which all the atoms are sorted in the form of single crystals of chemical elements arranged in strict order, the order will increase, and the organization of the living will disappear. Thus, it is not the degree of order that is the criterion and measure of life, but a special organization. And it is possible to lose this organization both by reducing and increasing the orderliness of the system"^{[16, p.338]}.

Ultimately, Simondon believes that there is no unity and identity of information, but there is something that creates tension in the system. As a result, the concept of "information", according to Simondon, is a formula of individuation, which, both at the unit level (mathematical theory of communication) and at the vital, mental and transindividual (psychosocial or technosocial) levels, is never stored in a form, but is a relationship between two disparate realities. Therefore, the meaning that arises here in the process of the individuation operation or in the process of the interaction of two disparate but real dimensions is an information system^{[17, p.22]}. In addition, Simondon's information never precedes the existing phase of individuation. Consequently, this information can be considered not only as the center of a "conceptual reform", but also as the greatest theoretical challenge ^{[18, p.31]}. At the same time, the Simondonian concept of "information" serves here as the basis for an updated approach to understanding the concept of "organization", especially in the context of the concepts of "entropy", "process" and "complexity". Hence, the main purpose of this article is to reveal the connections established by Simondon between "information ontology" in its critical dialogue with cybernetics and the theory of "systems".

However, despite some of the important differences between Simondon's approach and mathematical communication theory. One approach considers information as an entity that unfolds in forms of materiality, such as physical, vital, mental, collective, psychosocial, and technological individuals. Another approach seeks to bring the concept of "information" under physics, basically drawing an analogy with thermodynamics through the theory of "entropy". However, both of these approaches are considered taking into account the theory of "probability" and the concept of "entropy" taken from thermodynamics. It is known that the concept of "entropy" was proposed to Shannon by von Neumann (1903-1957) to denote the value of the information that makes up the content of the message. Shortly before his death, John von Neumann prepared an unfinished manuscript for a series of lectures in Memory of Silliman at Yale University. This manuscript compares many elements of the mathematical theory of communication (computational model) with the human mind (biological model). The manuscript was published posthumously under the title Computer and the Brain in 1958, and the importance of the book, along with von Neumann's influence, cannot be underestimated. However, the book is generally unsuccessful, and contains many attractive hints about what its full version could be. A long unfinished manuscript on automata was edited and completed by Arthur W. Burks (1915-2008) and published in 1966 under the title Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata. Simondon was aware of this thermodynamic feature of the mathematical theory of communication, and he subsequently writes: "Information theory is the starting point for a number of studies that have founded the concept of negative entropy (or negentropy), showing that information corresponds to the reverse process of degradation and that within the entire structure, information is determined not in terms of source or recipient, but from the relationship between source and recipient"^{[17, p.50]}.

It is in this context that "Information is information, not matter or energy. No materialism that does not recognize this can survive in our day" ^{[19, p.132]}. This is a well-known statement by Wiener, in which he points out one of the main problems associated with the definition of information: its connection with matter and energy. Because Wiener always agreed with the hypothesis of the immateriality of information. However, he also believed that modern philosophy needed an updated philosophical worldview of materialism. According to Simondon, this worldview should contain information materialism, where this materiality is associated with the transmission of information, codes and machines. Moreover, such an information and organizational scheme of individuation allows Simondon to create a unique "information ontology". Therefore, in order to fully understand Simondon's "information ontology", built on these entropic principles, and which eventually became different from the mathematical theory of communication, it is necessary to consider a number of Simondonian alternative concepts. The most important of these concepts are: metastability, individuation, transduction, concretization, and organization.

First, the concept of "metastability" means the first-order difference between the Simondonian concept of information and the version of the mathematical theory of communication. Simondon's position is unique in that he views information as operating in a state of metastability within a pre-individual system in which communication or a turning point is based on the concepts of interoperability and uncertainty of information. In this case, instead of focusing on information in terms of sending and receiving it, Simondon seeks to make sense of it in an event where two types of information interact with each other. He argues that information never exists in a single homogeneous reality, but exists in two different realities or in two states of incongruity, which form a new informational entity. As a result, according to Simondon, information at both the unit level (mathematical theory of communication) and the vital, mental and transindividual levels is never stored in form, but is a relationship between two disparate realities. Therefore, the meaning that arises here in the process of an individuation operation or in the process of interaction between two disparate but real dimensions is an information system^{[17, p.22]}. Information in Simondonian ontology moves from one state of metastability to another state of metastability, and for Simondon this is never something that is taken for granted. There is no unity and identity of information, because information is not a goal, and the goal here is the system that information consists of. The degree of foresight that Simondon demonstrates in this formulation borders on the foresight that the Canadian philosopher H.M. McLuhan (1911-1980) later recognized. Therefore, Simondon's information is exchanged not only between entities, but also within the systems of these entities, which are phases of individuation ^{[17, p.234]}.

Secondly, the concept of "form" should be replaced by the concept of "information", which is rapidly becoming one of Simondon's most famous expressions^{[17, p.28]}. In other words, the concept of information, according to Simondon, in the "form–matter" modality, should take the place of form. That is, to replace it, as this will become an adequate understanding of the fact that the system assumes to be constantly in a metastable equilibrium and constantly individualized. Information, unlike form, is never a unique term, but is a meaning resulting from splitting. The ancient concept of "form", such as the hylomorphic scheme "form – matter", is too independent of any concept of system and metastability. That is why Simondon postulates that this hylomorphic scheme of Aristotle is insufficient when it comes to understanding the true evolutionary genesis of the individual and society as a whole. According to Simondon, the trajectory of individuation in Western metaphysics is still determined by the Aristotelian paradigm of hylomorphism. And therefore, as he believes, hylomorphism already initially has common errors in thinking and traditions, fixed in the form of persistent philosophical illusions. In other words, what the concept of "shape" lacks is precisely the ability to comprehend the actual metastability of systems, their tendency to transductively amplify, instead of (apparently) providing a long duration without any effects. For this reason, Simondon turns his attention to the emerging concept of "information", since this concept allows us to understand "formation" as a process related to a dynamic system. That is why the system is considered by Simondon as invariably active, and its equilibrium is always dynamic, but not stable^{[20, p.24]}.

Thirdly, the concept of "individuation", which can be considered as the core of his ambitious project to ensure a unified understanding of the genesis of all individuals (physical, biological, mental, technical and psychosocial). In this regard, individuation also determines that the existing state of metastability implies the existence of a system in a state of metastable equilibrium, which individualizes entities. In other words, Simondon argues that information should never be reduced to signals or only to static media, as in the mathematical theory of communication, but should express the compatibility of two disparate spheres. Moreover, if in the communicative model of the mathematical theory of communication information (information content) is transmitted only in the form of content, then the Simondonian "information ontology" should be understood as an information code, or, in other words, as a tool for converting information artifacts into something ontologically new. For example, the current communicative practices of object-oriented ontology and multimodality are increasingly the way they are represented by the latest computer technologies, Internet technologies and artificial intelligence technologies. Therefore, it becomes clear to many modern social philosophers, sociologists, digital engineers, biologists, etc. that understanding the current society is inextricably linked to many different ways of interacting with the information system. Simply put, we are talking not only about multiple stages (or phases) of individuation, but also, as we noted, an important pre-individual (metastable) resource that makes individuation possible.

What, in this case, temporarily keeps the pre-individual existence of the information system in this very fragile state is the lack of interactive communication between disparate orders of magnitude. As soon as such communication is initiated by a triggering event, metastable stresses begin to resolve, leading to the generation of local structures, which, in turn, serve as the principle and model of structuring in neighboring areas of the system. This gradual expanding and structuring activity, the so-called transductive operation, has an axiomatic character (based on a certain set of principles) and in Simondon's "information ontology" is a new "genetic ontology" or ontogenesis.

Fourthly, the concept of "transduction" is a progressive individuation, which means not only a formula, but also knowledge of information. As Simondon states: "By transduction, we mean an operation – physical, biological, mental, social – through which activity spreads step by step within an area, and this spread is based on the structuring of the area, carried out (operee) from place to place: each constituent region of the structure serves as the principle of constitution for the next region, so that that the modification, therefore, gradually spreads simultaneously with this structuring operation"^{[21, p.44]}. This is why transduction refers to an operation by which two or more immeasurable orders of reality resonate and become commensurate through the invention of measurement. That is, such a measurement articulates them, and promotes the transition to an order richer in structures. In addition, Simondon emphasizes that cybernetics suffers from the fact that it cannot represent the transmission of a message as a transductive operation (physical, biological, mental, and social). Criticizing Wiener's information theory of transmission technologies, which reduces information only to a signal or only to a static medium, Simondon believes that the modern definition of information requires a transductive medium and an allagmatic (operational) connection with the medium. "Information,– writes Simondon, –is an exchange, a modality of internal resonance through which such an individuation is carried out. All information is simultaneously informing and informing; it must be captured in such an active transition of an individuating being" ^{[21, p.258]}.

Therefore, the Simondonian "information ontology" is both informational and material, which leads to the creation of informational structural realism in the process of individuation. Obviously, such philosophical researches of Simondon clearly found understanding in Deleuze^{[22, p.86]}. In addition, for Simondon, information provides the formation of an immanent self-organization. In other words, information expresses the immanence of each of the subsets to the set. But such immanence in Simondon does not imply uniformity of information, it is always heterogeneous. In his opinion, "Information is not homogeneous with respect to its current structure, and therefore the individual remains divided between the current structure and the acquired information" ^{[17, p.273]}.

Fifth, the concept of "concretization" interprets the connection between the metaphysics of information and the ontology of a technical object. That is, it is a "process" through which technical facilities are developed. It follows from this that the interoperability of information leads us to artifacts, to technological objects, and, finally, to the theorization of technological genesis. In this regard, the question arises, what are the distinctive qualities of concretization? There are only two of them. In the first case, during the concretization (technological genesis), technology always strives for self-sufficiency. That is why concretization is not an additive process, but a process in which technology tends to decrease as the purpose of the elements within itself changes. In the second case, technical facilities reorient themselves due to interoperability. Therefore, if concretization is the engine that drives individuation, then information is the fuel that keeps concretization going. As a result, it can be noted that specification is the process of the genesis of technical objects that are never absolutely specific. In the future, acting and becoming more and more like a living individual, technical objects gradually lose their artificial character. Simondon emphasizes that the relationship between humans and intelligent machines is developing today as a relationship between this technology as an intermediary between them and various dimensions that open up new possibilities. In this case, technical thought is present in all technical activities, and such thought belongs to the category of inventions. Moreover, this technical idea can be conveyed and it allows for participation. A technical object, to the extent that it was invented, thought out and constructed by a person, becomes a support symbol of these relations, which Simondon calls transindividual relations^{[23, p.252]}.

Sixth, information is also considered by Simondon as a process of dissemination; here information means a connection between different orders of magnitude ^{[18, p.33]}. In this case, in his opinion, there are three types of amplification: transductive, modulating and organizing. Transduction, modulation (transformation of energy into structure), and organization are names that came to the Simondonian theory of individuation from telecommunications engineering, where they are used as concepts related to the processing of codes and information signals. For example, transductive amplification assumes that information arises in receptive structures during the transition from one metastable state to another metastable state. Unlike a communicator, during transduction, the recipient must undergo a complete transformation. From a physical point of view, transductive amplification has an activation threshold that determines (instantly) whether transduction takes place or not. That's why Simondon calls transduction an instantaneous flash into the future. For example, in the physical domain, the processes of crystallization and brick forming are examples of information transduction amplification. In another area of individuation, the area of the vital individual, there is always an internal resonance (like a quantum leap in physics) and the translation of connectedness with oneself into information can also be described as an example of transduction. "The living individual is simultaneous to himself in all his elements, which is not the case with the physical individual, who has a radically changed past, even when he is still growing up. The living in its interior is a node of informative communication; it is a system within a system that includes mediation between orders of magnitude"^{[21, p.36]}. Finally, at the psychosocial level, various manipulations and simulations are also cases of transduction, since their spread requires the metastability of the recipients, that is, their anxiety or curiosity.

Another gain, modulating gain, is achieved in Simondon by taming the transductive propagation, that is, by mastering it and feeding it stably to make it produce and work under normal conditions. In this regard, the transition from one metastable equilibrium to another metastable equilibrium occurs at a fixed point, which does not imply a change in the entire structure, as in the transductive case. "In fact, the effect of a structural germ on a structured field that is in a metastable state and contains potential energy is modulation"^{[21, p.57]}. In other words, "... we can say that the boundary between a structural germ and a metastable, structurable field is a modulator; it is the energy of the metastability of the field, and This means that it allows the structure, and therefore the form, to move forward: potentials live in matter, and the boundary lies between form and matter – this is an amplifier relay"^{[21, p.53]}. In addition, instead of quantitative thresholds, here we find polarities within the "entry" and "exit" positions. These polarities are the product of external interference, that is, in this case, reality is not transformed within its own metastability. That is, in this case, such metastability is caused by an external energy source. Simondon notes that an example of modulation is an athletics relay race, where the first runner must run the entire distance and use up all of his own energy before the second runner starts his sprint. Therefore, the productivity of the first participant limits what the second participant can do. From a technological point of view, for example, a transistor is also a modulation device. In the field of the vital individual, the paradigmatic cases of modulating reinforcement are the processes of self-regulation. While instinctive activities were examples of transductive reinforcement, abstraction and generalization, produced and controlled by formal reasoning, are modulating actions because they integrate many new elements into old structures. As a result, information is not only a transductive operation, but also a modulation operation that exists only in the realm of reality in an unstable state containing potential energy^{[21, p.57]}.

Finally, all this brings us to the consideration of Simondon's special concept in relation to the concept of "organization" and the connection of this concept with the concept of "information". It follows from this that considering the concept of "information" as an enhancement and as an emerging property distinguishes Simondon from the position of cybernetics, according to which the concept of "information" is considered as equivalent to the concept of "organization". Simondon takes the concept of "organization" from a certain sector of technology, and in particular from electronics, but he uses it as an interpretive paradigm aimed primarily at promoting critical correspondence between different disciplines in order to eventually achieve a much-needed conceptual axiomatization of knowledge. As a result, Simondon's concept of "organization", for example, eliminates the distinction between life and matter in favor of an ontogenetic process that connects the physical and vital phases of individuation^{[18, p.159]}. Since matter is not formless, it can be argued that the physical world is highly organized. Therefore, here, too, Simondon is clearly aware of what will eventually become one of the main problems of molecular biology. The elementary levels of biological order conceal the organization of the same order that hides the concept of "organization" in completely individualized physical systems, such as those that generate crystals or large metastable molecules in organic chemistry. It follows that based on the concept of "organization" it is not so easy to build a hierarchy of life and matter. If there is a difference between the physical and vital phases of individuation, it is not based on the concept of "organization" (or some kind of organization between inorganic reality and a fully functional life). This difference is based on the polarities that exist in matter itself, which allow for two different phases of transformation. In the first case, it is a physical mode in which information does not differ from potential energy pillars that realize themselves within the framework of the concept of "organization". In the second case, the mode of living beings, in which individuation will be based on the difference between modulating structures and supports of potential energy. Therefore, the physical phase of individuation must be associated with a transductive enhancement, while the vital phase is associated with a modulating enhancement.

Therefore, in understanding the concept of "organization" within the framework of the vital and psychosocial phases of individuation, Simondon also uses a similar logic. The dynamism that Simondon postulates in vital individuals, he calls the intensity of information or the polarity of perception, which generates a psychosocial (collective) subject. In this case, perceiving means not only fighting the entropy of the system, but also means organizing, preserving, or inventing an organization. In addition, Simondon insists on rejecting the ontological division of spheres, between the living sphere, the social and the artificial. He assumes that life and consciousness are not different orders, and that the elementary aspects of life are already endowed with consciousness. As for the social, it is not exclusively human: molecules, elementary cells can be connected to each other by some kind of social relationship, implying control, modulation, reduction of activity. Moreover, it can be said that three ways of amplification are characteristic of three types of dialectical relations (transductive, modulating and organizing). That is why the concept of "organization," as the Russian researcher Ya.I. Svirsky (1958-2024) writes, "... is not a thing, not an object, not a ready–made idea, it is a purposeful reconciliation of various means in order to obtain sustainable effects. Simondon believes (and, as he believes, contradicts common sense and what was stated in his time in textbooks) that there are no unchanging organizations, but only organizational processes. An organization is a connection between people and non-people, ideas and beliefs. This idea was later developed by J. Deleuze in his "logic of meaning", as well as Bruno Latour, creating the "actor-network theory". It is from "pre-individualized" tools that assemblies and networks of actions are composed. The organization is individualized and becomes metastable. And when such activity of organizations becomes metastable, they are able to maintain metastability for a long time and are even able to survive after significant environmental changes or the replacement of individuals or programs"^{[14, p.123]}.

Thus, the concept of "organization", in our opinion, should be based on the assumption that modern technologies include not only technical elements (tools) and technical individuals (machines), but also reticular technical ensembles. This new network synergy depends on recognizing the value of the organization compared to information processing systems. And in this synergy, the ontological differences between animals, humans, and machines dissolve to a degree that cybernetics has not reached, even with its emphasis on operations rather than structures. Moreover, understanding the concept of "information", simultaneously with philosophical, scientific and technological Simondian theories, in our opinion, lays the foundations for a better understanding of the links between the concepts of "information" and "organization". However, this does not mean that Simondon had the last word on these issues, and that our task is limited to describing his philosophical system as an open truth. A comparison of Simondon's theory of individuation, for example, with the postulates of A. Turing (1912-1954) and various ways of understanding modern computing, shows that his program of reforming some fundamental concepts in science, technology and philosophy contains some very controversial biases about the difference between the human and artificial spheres. But some elements suggested by Simondon himself help overcome these difficulties. Therefore, the best starting point for developing a unified concept of "information and organization" is possible. To fully understand the concept of "information and organization," it is necessary to go through the difficult path of understanding the complex and fascinating theory of "individuation," which Simondon bequeathed to us.

In addition to the above, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the concepts of "organization" and "information" in the process of individuation in Simondon play the role of intrasystem amplifiers that help reduce tension, but they do not completely eliminate this tension. Therefore, organization and information are the modalities of changes that occur at all levels of the formation of beings. Unlike mathematical communication theory and information engineering theory, which promote the idea that information presupposes a certain degree of organization, Simondon claims that the concept of "organization" arises as a special type of information amplification, and is considered by him not as the transportation of matter or a signal, but as a kind of transformation generated by a structure "striving" to receive similar information. Without tension (or conflict), there is no organization or information. If such tensions (or conflicts) reach a stable state, then the concepts of both "organization" and "information" cease to exist. Therefore, the concepts of "organization" and "information" always require a metastable equilibrium. Moreover, these concepts are always interconnected not only at the technological level, but also at the philosophical and scientific levels.

In conclusion, it is possible to draw an important conclusion that Simondon's "information ontology" not only makes a significant contribution to understanding the process of "concretization", but can also make an important theoretical contribution to the concept of "communication". An original theory that, based on the multimodality of three concepts (information, communication and technology), answers the most important philosophical question of what communication is. At the same time, Simondon identifies the following philosophical theoretical and methodological tools for solving this problem.

1) Offers a new methodological framework on which to conduct research related to communication as an empirical (random) process. His theory of individuation (or the situation of continuous becoming) is always aimed at formulating examples of the modulation of the communicative processes themselves, rather than aiming at the knowledge of a simple "transfer" of meanings or the transmission of messages from one individualized entity to another.

2) Offers a new conceptual toolkit and specialized terminology with which we can build our future discussions on completely new communicative phenomena: the language of technology. For example, when we talk about "technological evolution," any technical object (engines, programs, and games) can be called points of specification. In another case, when once separate levels of communicative or informational characteristics give way to something new, they can be called acts of inconsistency. Here, the individuation operation reveals a dimension in which two disparate realities can become a system. In other words, a similar disparity occurs when two close aggregates that do not completely overlap each other, such as the left and right retinal images, are perceived together as a system. Moreover, such a system is capable of allowing the formation of a unique aggregate of a higher level, combining all their elements due to a new dimension^{[18, p.200]}.

3) Allows us to bypass the long-standing philosophical debates about substantialist atomism and hylomorphism, philosophical doctrines that have also contributed to the understanding of communication processes in the past. Therefore, Simondon's "information ontology" allows us to finally discard the subject-object impasse and instead consider a psychosocial individual who is present in a technological object, and vice versa, as an ensemble. For example, research on network "machine interfaces" involved in interactions between social actors and robotic systems endowed with artificial intelligence will benefit from Simondon's deeply phenomenological approach to technology and embodied interaction, where it is not so much about separating the human from the technical, as about the successful interoperability of the ensemble.

4) Shifts the discussion from the paradigms of closed ecologies to widely open information paradigms. In this regard, it should be emphasized that Simondon's "information ontology" corresponds to some of the strictest philosophies of information structural realism that currently exist.

5) Developing a unique concept of "information" and drawing his origins in the mathematical theory of communication, Simondon leaves for himself a certain incompleteness (or infinite becoming) in his information scheme of individuation, which allows him to create a unique "information ontology". In this regard, Simondon finds in the concept of "information" a contradiction between matter and energy and defines an individual as the result of three conditions: energy, material and informational state. In other words, the information state is what allows you to relieve the tension between material and energy conditions. Simondon's examples of the process of taking shape with a brick or a crystal, taken from technology and physics, are aimed at his ability to see different points of view in the concept of "information". According to Simondon, information processes are those in which matter takes shape. In particular, there are two elements in Simondon's work that turn the problem of information into a philosophical problem rather than a scientific or technological one. And this is evidenced by the following facts.

On the one hand, information, like individuation, expresses the process of becoming, rather than conveying a state of being. It is impossible to define information by abstracting it from the context and operational nature. Information is not a thing, but an action of a thing that enters the system, producing a transformation. Information does not belong to the communicator, as in the mathematical theory of communication, rather it arises within the recipient. At the same time, the recipient is understood by him not as someone who receives something, but as any reality that does not completely determine its future trajectory by itself^[18]. Therefore, in the Simondonian concept of "information", none of the fields (engineering, mathematics or cybernetics) has superiority over others. This non-hierarchical approach differs from cybernetics, where the engineering context occupies a privileged position.

On the other hand, despite its origin in the field of science and technology, information for Simondon is a concept with a clear philosophical scope. The discovery of the "black box of individuation" helps him expand the meaning of the concept of "information" to the meaning of the concept of "organization" and formulate both of these concepts in an updated philosophical language. Thus, according to the modern social researcher A. Bardin, if the program of cybernetics consists in extending the technological paradigm to biological and social systems, then Simondon's attempt is rather the opposite. He seeks to extend the biological and psychosocial (collective) paradigm of communication to the physical and technological areas of the system. In this case, Simondon believes that this paradigm will allow him to link the quantum nature of all systems and the non-deterministic characterization of all processes, as opposed to the essentially deterministic nature of the cybernetic concept of "information"^{[20, p.31]}.

Consequently, the approach of Simondon's "information ontology" makes it possible to structure and organize a variety of theoretical traditions and schools of thought, bringing today's coherent field of communicative theory to a single foundation. Moreover, this gives us reason to assume that if Simondon had lived long enough, he would have witnessed an influx of new approaches to understanding the concept of "communication" along with related technological advances – big data, computational ontology, cloud storage. Therefore, he would have found solace in the fact that much of what he said about the interoperability and uncertainty of the ontological significance of information would have come true. He probably would not have "found solace," but would no longer seek to humanize technology, as in his original project, but rather to humanize digitized culture, supplementing his philosophical reflections with this new question: what are the traces of technology in man?

Simondon would not only be a philosopher of information, as some American and Western European exegetes suggest, but was, above all, a "philosopher of modern personality." A philosopher who not only had a significant impact on the work of researchers such as J. Deleuze, B. Stigler (1952-2020), B. Latour (1947-2022), but also contributed to the development of I. Prigozhin's theory of self-organization (1917-2003), G. Haken's synergetics (1927-2024), and N. Luhmann's system theory (1927-1998). Thus, Simondon's work was significantly ahead of its time, not only in describing socio-philosophical paradigms, but also in applying various interdisciplinary fields such as quantum mechanics, cybernetics, evolutionary biology, aesthetics, and many others to social research.