Abstract: Digital technologies are radically changing the modern world, increasingly acting as autonomous agents. Algorithms governing social networks, neural networks creating content, or robots making decisions. Their actions are determined by their own internal logic, beyond human intentions. While many researchers in digital technology argue for the capability of machines to think based on their functional similarity to human reasoning when processing information, the outstanding philosopher and thinker in the field of technology and technological innovations, Gilbert Simondon, shifts the focus to the specificity of technical being and the collaborative nature of intellectual activity. The question "Can machines think?" transforms into a question of how we understand thinking within the complex interaction of the technosocial system "human-technology-society" with its own evolutionary dynamics. The methodological foundation of this article is based on methods of analysis, observation, and synthesis, consisting of the key ideas of philosophical individuation of technical systems (Simondon) and the ideas of genealogy, control, and machine cognition (Deleuze). The key task is to reveal the contingent process of the technosocial phase of individuation that produces operationally closed (autoetic) systems. Classical cybernetics, relying on the servomechanical model, interprets machines as passive executors of pre-set commands, denying the possibility of genuine "thinking." This article challenges this paradigm in relation to the modern machine learning process of neural networks. We assert that the servomechanism is incapable of adequately explaining the emergent, unpredictable, and creative aspects of complex models' behavior, especially deep neural networks, which go beyond simple responses to input stimuli. Drawing on Simondon's philosophy of technology, the article proposes an alternative ontological framework. The process of machine learning is interpreted as contingent technical individuation: the model arises ("individuates") from a "pre-individual" field (architecture, data, learning stochasticity) through the resolution of internal tensions (minimization of losses). The result is not a servomechanism but a unique operationally closed system. Its "thinking" is understood as an emergent property of this individuation – contingent (dependent on the learning path), immanent to the internal structure (weights), and manifesting in the ability to generalize, generate, and abduct.

Abstract: This publication is particularly relevant in the context of the 70th anniversary of a key document – the scientific article by S.L. Sobolev, A.I. Kitov, and A.A. Lyapunov (1955), rightly considered the origin of the domestic school of artificial intelligence. In an environment of increased attention to the history of science and technology, especially in the field of artificial intelligence, this work restores historical justice by emphasizing the priority of Soviet scientists in formulating the fundamental principles of artificial intelligence (machine self-learning, modeling of neural activity, heuristic methods, autonomy) long before these ideas gained wide recognition in the West. Understanding this "manifesto" is critically important not only for grasping the genesis and unique features of the Russian tradition in the conceptualization of artificial intelligence but also for recognizing the remarkable prophetic power of the ideas presented in 1955. The methodological basis of the study consists of principles of historical-scientific analysis, text hermeneutics, and conceptual reconstruction. The key method is a critical source analysis of the primary source – the article by Sobolev, Kitov, and Lyapunov from 1955. To define the historical context and scientific novelty of the manifesto, a comparative method is employed, contrasting its ideas with contemporary Western approaches in cybernetics. The novelty of the study lies in demonstrating for the first time how this article "Key Features of Cybernetics" (1955) anticipated the major development paths of global science in artificial intelligence for decades to come. In the era of neural network revolution and deep learning, revisiting these roots serves not only as a tribute to the pioneers but also as a powerful intellectual stimulus and guide for modern Russian research and development in the field of artificial intelligence. Understanding the depth and foresight of S.L. Sobolev, A.I. Kitov, and A.A. Lyapunov and their strategic vision is essential today for shaping a unique national agenda in the area of artificial intelligence. Furthermore, it is shown how these principles, which outpaced their Western counterparts (including the Dartmouth initiative) and were formulated in the terms of the Soviet cybernetic school, predetermined the specific trajectories of development for Soviet and Russian artificial intelligence.

Abstract: The modern world is undergoing a radical transformation driven by digital technologies, which increasingly exhibit traits of autonomy: algorithms governing social networks, neural networks generating content, or robotic systems making decisions – all of them function according to an internal logic that cannot be reduced to human intentions. This growing independence of technology poses fundamental questions for society: who or what controls the techno-social reality? How can we preserve human agency in a world where technology gains its own "intellect"? In this regard, two approaches – the procedural philosophy of technology by Gilbert Simondon and the systems theory of Niklas Luhmann – remain insufficiently integrated and researched, despite their complementary potential. Simondon emphasizes individuation and transduction, revealing technologies as dynamic processes interwoven with the development of humanity and society. Luhmann, describing technology through the lens of autopoietic, self-referential systems, demonstrates their capacity for self-organization and operational closure. The methodological foundation of the article is comparative analysis and theoretical synthesis. We compare the key concepts of Simondon and Luhmann, identifying points of intersection and contradiction. Digital platforms are examined as examples where the autonomy of algorithms (Luhmann) and their role in shaping user practices (Simondon) are most vividly manifested. The goal of this article is to propose a synthesis of these approaches, bridging the gap between procedural and systemic understanding of techno-social autonomy. We argue that the integration of Simondon's and Luhmann's ideas allows for: 1) explaining how technologies simultaneously evolve through interaction with society (Simondon) and function as closed systems (Luhmann); 2) revealing the dialectic of human and technological agency in the context of digitalization; 3) creating a basis for ethical reflection on autonomous technologies, avoiding the extremes of techno-optimism and determinism. The scientific novelty of the work lies in overcoming disciplinary boundaries: Simondon's philosophical depth enriches Luhmann's structural analysis, while systems theory lends sociological specificity to processuality. This synthesis paves the way for a more holistic understanding of techno-social reality not as a confrontation between humans and machines, but as a complex symbiosis, where the autonomy of technology becomes both a condition and a challenge for a new stage of social evolution.

Abstract: This work examines the concept of individuation as a historical process, developed by the representative of speculative ontology and new materialism, Manuel DeLanda. The aim of this article is not only to rethink the problem of the formation of individual entities (individuals, institutions, cities, and nation-states), but also to consider it within the context of the concept of "assemblage." In other words, historical individuation in DeLanda's work is a concept that describes the process of formation and stabilization of social, cultural, and material entities through the interaction of heterogeneous elements within social assemblages. DeLanda borrows the term "individuation" from Gilbert Simondon, but reinterprets it in the framework of his speculative ontology, which unites nonlinear material processes, contingency, and emergence. Hence, it follows that all entities—from molecules to cities, from bacteria to algorithms—exist in one plane, without hierarchy. The interdisciplinary analysis of historical individuation in DeLanda's framework requires a rejection of reductionism, consideration of the multiplicity of levels, and an emphasis on processuality, as well as a combination of comparative-historical, systemic, and network approaches. A key task is to capture the dynamics of interactions in assemblages, taking into account the role of contingency and emergence. This allows for a departure from simplified models of history in favor of a multidimensional analysis, where the material and social intertwine in unpredictable patterns. Furthermore, DeLanda's concept of individuation as a historical process enables the analysis of history as a multitude of intertwining processes, where "material" and "social" are interdependent, and contingency and emergence coexist. In this case, the achievement of the concept of "assemblage" is the description of relationships as external, that is, multiple and qualitatively diverse. Through the parameterization of philosophical concepts, DeLanda is capable of describing phenomena as simulations, tracking their changes through chains of relationships rather than through cause-and-effect links. This ability to quantitatively represent previously unique events makes the concept of "assemblages" promising for analyzing correlations found in large volumes of information. Nevertheless, this transformation leads to a loss of emphasis on individual existence, which falls outside of DeLanda's consideration. As a metaphysics of multiplicity, also utilizing scientific concepts but retaining a focus on individual existence, one can reference the concept of "individuation" by Gilbert Simondon.

Abstract: The subject of this study is the ontological project of the brilliant French philosopher Gilbert Simondon (1924-1989), which consists of examining the individual through individuation in all spheres of reality: physical, biological, psychosocial (transindividual) and even technological. According to Simondon, the point is to use metaphysics to outline the ontological perspective of the individual's development on the path to individuation as a condition for the complete knowledge of reality. In addition, for Simondon, the theory of "individuation" comes from a relational meaning: this concept transforms a certain potentiality into a current reality. That is why this theory consists primarily in the ontogenesis of the individual as a problem of potential fiction: "more than one". The research methodology includes such general scientific approaches as the descriptive method, the categorization method, the method of analysis, observation and synthesis. It should be noted that this article has a search character and is aimed at understanding the individual as unique in relation to himself - unfinished, free and surpassing his being. Moreover, Simondon connects the idea of ​​a free and self-overcoming individual with the concept of technology as a creator-inventor. It follows that technical activity can be considered as an introduction to the true essence and as a manifestation of creative initiative in the name of individual freedom. In conclusion, the author points out: freedom through technology does not mean belonging to a certain gender or being chosen. This is a life calling, since it is based on the readiness to meet the highest risk of death. At the same time, the feeling of freedom inherent in a technician not only imposes great responsibility on him, but also gives his actions a universal ethical value.

Abstract: One of the very few who, along with Gilles Deleuze (1925–1995), recognized from the very beginning the importance of the philosophical works of the outstanding philosopher and thinker in the field of technology and technological innovation Gilbert Simondon (1924–1989) was the famous philosopher and anthropologist Bernard Stiegler (1952–2020). In his works, Stiegler not only directly refers to the works of this thinker, but also continues his thoughts, just as Simondon himself conducted a “dialogue” with Henri Bergson (1859–1941). However, the nature of this new dialogue is so specific that Stiegler questions the status of “first philosophy”, which Simondon, following Bergson, attributed to the philosophy of nature understood as cosmogenesis (Bergson) or ontogenesis (Simondon). In this case, as specific research methods for constituting the concept of the Simondon's "pre-individual" and the Stiegler's idea of the original technological nature of this pre-individual, we use such general scientific approaches as the descriptive method, the method of categorization, the method of analysis, the method of observation, the genetic method and the comparative-contrastive method. Hence, the goal of our research is not only to refute the critical assessment expressed by Stiegler in relation to Simondon, but also to successfully understand the specificity of ontogenesis, we will try to solve the following problems: 1) to reveal the philosophical understanding of the hypothesis of the pre-individual state of being, from which any phase of individuation (physical, biological, mental or psychosocial) comprehended as being flows; 2) to investigate the reasons why Stiegler has grounds to accuse Simondon of not having fully thought through the psychosocial (transindividual) phase of individuation; 3) discuss Stiegler's additional step, which ultimately recognizes the intrinsically technological dimension of the pre-individual.

Abstract: Social researcher Gilbert Simondon (1924–1989) was one of those recognized as a philosopher of information. Simondon’s lifelong philosophical project was to explain what we today call “information ontology”, a subject that deserves to be explored in detail. This article argues that Simondon’s “information ontology” was created not only in the context of the cybernetic tradition, but also within the framework of the positioning of a new materialism that was intended to change contemporary debates around issues related to information, communication and technology. Furthermore, the article explores the concepts of “organization” and “information”, the combination of which considers the science of the individual as a process of not only living but also psychosocial individuation, constituted by transindividual relations. The research methodology includes such general scientific approaches as the descriptive method, the method of categorization, the method of analysis, observation and synthesis. As a result, it was established that in Simondon's theory, information is a formula for individuation. And moreover, for Simondon, it is a tension, not a term; it is based on a minimally heterogeneous problem and affects the future in order to resolve emerging states. Information always implies not only a change of phase or heterogeneity, which may seem decisive, but it is also a semantic content, thanks to which the system is individualized. Therefore, information is the basis of individuation, a requirement for individuation, it is never something given. This is why the appeal to the concept of "information" as the "information potential" of the organization of the system, and not as a form, emphasizes that the emerging meaning requires something unsaturated, namely, incomplete formation.

Abstract: The subject of this study is the problem of individuation of a living system (ontogenesis of a vital individual) considered by the French philosopher Gilbert Simondon (1924–1989), which is the process where life arises and perpetuates itself. Simondon argues that individuation in a living system is carried out within itself. A living system is defined by its external boundaries and its internal processes, which are constantly adapted to both the environment and the internal structure. In addition, biological individuation is the organization of a solution, namely, the resolution of an objectively problematic living system. This solution should be understood as an internal resonance, the most primitive way of communication between realities of different orders. Therefore, we believe that Simondon managed to turn internal resonance into an extremely rich scientific and philosophical concept suitable for the explication of a living system. The research methodology includes such general scientific approaches as the descriptive method, the categorization method, the analysis method, the observation method and the comparative method. It should be noted that this article has an exploratory character, oriented towards understanding Simondon's philosophy and its relevance today. Moreover, it is aimed not only at understanding the living system as non-identical to itself, but also seeks to show that we think about life within the framework of Simondonian non-reductionist materialism. In this regard, the living system is transformed both from the inside and from the outside. All the contents of its internal space are in "topological" contact with the contents of the external space. In conclusion, the author argues that reflecting on the nature of the living system is tantamount to searching for material ontological conditions of individuation in Simondon.

Abstract: The understanding of speech communication in the thinking of the outstanding French philosopher and thinker in the field of technology and technological innovations Gilbert Simondon (1924–1989) is aporetic, is a riddle, not a solution and, moreover, cannot give convincing definitions of the sought-after concepts, such as truth and virtue. Although, it seems, Simondon had all the conditions for developing an original and consistent theory of "speech communication", which in the space of linguistic communication is the dominant form of interaction. However, in his works there are only scattered reflections that do not provide a basis for a strict theory, but rather lead to an unsystematized criticism of language. Moreover, Simondon always criticized the topic of "speech communication", since in the middle of the twentieth century its theory was a paradigm of structuralist fashion. Therefore, with an emphasis on the dialectical method of research, we will try to determine those hypotheses that can explain such an absence of the theory of "speech communication" in his works. In conclusion, the author of the article came to the following conclusions. First, Simondon did not need to use the concept of "speech communication" to rethink the conditions of thinking in his theory of "individuation". Second, Simondon posed the question of speech communication differently, namely in the form of a theory of "technosocial communication" based on the relationship between technologies, information and meanings that go beyond and embrace the question of language. Third, based on these two hypotheses, an important assumption is made that Simondon sought to derive philosophy from logocentrism and the reductionist anthropocentrism that supports it, which implies a fundamental relativization of speech communication.

Abstract: The French philosopher Gilles Deleuze (1925–1995) wrote many original works, but one short article, “The Actual and the Virtual,” is, in our opinion, one of the most important. Deleuze’s virtual appears in almost every work, and its influence can be felt everywhere from the idea of singularity to the concepts of differentiation and individuation. That is why the virtual, for Deleuze, is the real, which forms the basis of his philosophical strategy, and where this virtual is opposed not to the real, but to the actual. In other words, Deleuze’s virtual objects are created in perception as memory objects that constitute the object of perception (the actual object). Moreover, according to Deleuze, the unconscious character of his virtual images is probably the greatest obstacle in adapting his theory to the problem of computer-generated virtual worlds. Using the comparative method, virtuality is studied in Deleuze's discussion with Henri Bergson (1859-1941), which is revealed precisely as a process of creative actualization. Unlike the actualization of the possible, which is equivalent to a sudden entry into reality, the actualization of the virtual in Deleuze's sense always occurs through difference, divergence or differentiation. Moreover, for Deleuze, the virtual has the reality of a task that must be accomplished or a problem that must be solved. Therefore, in this article, the author, for the first time, tries to answer the question of whether Deleuze's idea of virtuality can be applied in the philosophy of information science, including for the study of computer virtual worlds. In this case, the main result of the study is the substantiation of the fact that virtuality, both in Deleuze and in Bergson, is an epistemological and not an ontological concept.