Philosophy of Digital Man and Digital Society - 2024

Synergetic-Reflective Model of Interaction Between the Digital Individual and Digital Society

The Theoretical and Methodological Foundations of the Interaction between the Digital Individual and Digital Society in the Context of the Synergistic Paradigm

The synergetic-reflective model of interaction between the digital individual and digital society has gained widespread recognition in contemporary scientific discourse and research over recent decades in the realms of philosophical science and methodology. The term "synergetics," originating from ancient Greek, denotes assistance and participation that facilitates coordinated action, continuous collaboration, and shared utilization. Currently, synergetics focuses on situations where the structures or functions of systems undergo dramatic changes at macroscopic scales. Specifically, synergetics is particularly interested in understanding how subsystems or components enact changes that are wholly determined by processes of self-organization. Its subject matter encompasses self-organizational processes that may lead to spontaneous structuring.

Synergetics (from Greek - συνεργείν, meaning cooperating) is an interdisciplinary field of study concerning the self-organization processes within open systems of physical, chemical, biological, ecological, and social nature. In such systems, which exist far from thermodynamic equilibrium, a non-equilibrium state is created and sustained through the flow of energy and matter from the external environment.

The emergence of a synergetic perspective in the context of modern science is regarded by many scholars as prompting paradigm shifts within the contemporary natural science tradition and is interpreted as a nascent scientific revolution. The synergetic research strategy is represented by models such as: 1) the model proposed by the school of H. Haken; 2) the model associated with I. Prigogine, who received the Nobel Prize in 1977 for his studies on the self-organization of irreversible processes; and 3) the model of synergetics led by S. Kurdyumov. The term "synergetics" was introduced into scholarly discourse by H. Haken in the late 1960s. Crucial to the development of synergetics were the experimental results obtained by B. Belousov and A. Zhabotinsky. Building upon these, the Belgian school under I. Prigogine constructed the first nonlinear model of synergetics in chemical processes based on the ideas of non-equilibrium thermodynamics.

The synergetic paradigm of interaction between the digital individual and the digital society employs the following conceptual and categorical apparatus to elucidate their complex interplay:

1. Entropy (from Greek entropia - transformation) - a measure of the internal disorder within a system, an indication of uncertainty or randomness, characterizing the degree of chaos, disorder, and disorganization.
2. In the interpretation of chaos (from Greek chaos - disorder), the synergetic paradigm emphasizes the aspect of potential evolutionary creativity, the inherent possibility of establishing a new "order" (organization), the empirical and chaotic movement of elements.
3. Bifurcation (from Latin bifurcus - forked) - the splitting, poly-furcation, or branching of paths in the pursuit of goals and the selection of objectives.
4. Non-stationary state of the system - a condition in which there is an absence of an equilibrium state within the system.
5. Coherence (from Latin cohaerens - connected) - the temporal progression of several oscillatory and wave processes: if the phase difference between two oscillations remains constant over time or changes according to a specific law, the oscillations are termed coherent; oscillations in which the phase difference changes randomly are referred to as incoherent.
6. Dissipation (from Latin dissipatio - scattering) - the transition of part of the energy from organized processes into the energy of disorganized processes: a system through which disturbances dissipate is called dissipative and indicates the behavior characteristics of the system during fluctuations.
7. Synergy (from English synergia) - a joint action, the interaction of different potentials or types of energy in a holistic action, which denotes collaborative effort as the foundation of community, cooperation among individuals who have their own goals and act in a common direction.
8. Self-motion - an internally necessary spontaneous change within a system, determined by its contradictions.
9. Fluctuations (from Latin fluctuatio - oscillation) - random deviations from the average values of physical quantities that characterize a system comprising a large number of particles, manifesting in Brownian motion under the influence of the surrounding environment, typical of any random processes.

The synergetic concept of self-organization serves to clarify the principle of self-motion and the development of matter. In contrast to classical mechanics, which perceives matter as an inert mass propelled by external forces, synergetics argues that under certain conditions, inorganic systems are capable of self-organization. Unlike equilibrium thermodynamics, which recognized evolution only in the direction of increasing entropy (i.e., disorder, chaos, disorganization), synergetics was the first to unveil the mechanism of order arising from fluctuations, i.e., deviations of the system from its average state, potentially leading to stability. Fluctuations are amplified by non-equilibrium, which destabilizes the previous structure and fosters the emergence of a new one, resulting in order arising from chaos.

Thus, the establishment of the synergetic-reflective model of interaction between the digital individual and the digital society articulates a central thesis, positing that at all levels of structural organization of being, it is precisely non-equilibrium that serves as both the condition and source of order's emergence. According to the assessments of Prigogine and I. Stengers, it is non-equilibrium, as a principal characteristic of contemporary societal conditions, that facilitates the genesis of "order from chaos." Self-organizing processes are characterized by contradictory tendencies such as instability and stability, disorganization and organization, disorder and order. Ultimately, the identification of common principles of self-organization renders it possible to construct adequate models of interaction between the digital individual and the digital society, which possess a nonlinear nature and account for qualitative changes. Synergetics refines the understanding of the dynamic nature of the real structures and systems of interaction between the individual and society, alongside the processes of development that reveal the growth of orderliness and hierarchical complexity in self-organizing systems at each stage of evolution, transitioning from the old economic model to a new one as an object of sustainable development.

Self-organization and self-regulation are processes during which organizations are created, reproduced, and refined as complex dynamic systems. Self-organizing processes can only occur in systems characterized by high complexity and a significant number of elements, where the interconnections among these elements exhibit probabilistic rather than rigid characteristics. The properties of self-organization are manifested in objects of various natures: cells, organisms, biological populations, biogeocenoses, human collectives, etc. Self-organizing processes are expressed in the establishment of existing connections and the formation of new connections among the system's elements. A distinguishing feature of self-organizing processes is their goal-directed yet simultaneously natural and spontaneous nature, as these processes occur through the interaction of the system with its environment, thus remaining autonomous and relatively independent of that environment.

At the foundation of any self-organizing social system lies self-organization, a phenomenon uniquely inherent to human communities. From the chaos of energetic and disorderly self-motion of elements, with adept and effective management, emerges self-organization, which contributes to the stabilization and strengthening of the digital society, evolving into a society in which the correlational connections among the system's elements operate clearly, harmoniously, and undoubtedly, employing models of contemporary management and marketing.

The concepts of self-organization emerged in the 1950s and 1960s in the 20th century, rooted in statistical physics (I. Prigogine, H. Haken), general systems theory, and cybernetics (H. von Foerster, H. Maturana). They investigate the regularities of structure emergence in non-equilibrium systems composed of disordered elements. The general principles of self-organization are manifested in physical, chemical, biological, and social systems, with the highest degree of realization occurring in highly organized systems.

An essential characteristic of self-organizing systems is their capacity for self-construction and self-renewal. The emergence of any organization is possible, taking into account the stochastic fluctuations of parameters (fluctuations) and even energy, as part of its subsequent evolution. All entities, both in nature and society, are the result of a constant self-movement of matter and the fluctuations underlying it. This initial chaos is overcome through the interaction of elements (economics, politics, social sphere, spiritual sphere). The interconnection of these elements cannot be overlooked, as the digital society is a complex web of connections, wherein the elements are interconnected directly or indirectly through other elements of the same set, all within the context of utilizing new principles and methods of data mining as a key strategic resource of the digital society.

Self-regulation manifests as the purposeful functioning of living systems across various levels of organization and complexity. Within the digital society, self-regulation represents a level of regulation of these systems' activity, reflecting the specificity of mental tools for representing and modeling reality, including the subject's reflection. Self-regulation in the digital society occurs in unity with energetic, dynamic, and substantive aspects. Despite the diversity of its manifestations, self-regulation possesses a common structure: 1) the goal of the subject’s activity; 2) a model of significant conditions for action; 3) a program of executive actions; 4) a system of criteria for the success of activity; 5) information about the actual results achieved; 6) an assessment of the correspondence of real results to success criteria; 7) a decision regarding the necessity and nature of the activity's correlations. Self-regulation has a closed regulatory loop and constitutes an informational process, with various mental forms of reality representation serving as its bearers. The subject's adopted goal does not unambiguously determine the conditions necessary for constructing the program of executive actions. In analogous models, various means of achieving a single result are possible. In the context of the interaction between the digital individual and the digital society, categories such as self-organization and self-regulation of society emerge. The digital society is a system that invariably possesses emergent properties (specific, unique) that are absent in any individual elements, arising from a particular combination of interacting elements. From these same elements, a multitude of diverse systems can form, varying in stability (depending on the connections among them and the state of the external environment) in the pursuit of unconventional creative solutions in the new digital era.

Existence within the digital society refers to the system's ability to maintain essential relationships among its elements amidst continuous fluctuations, system oscillations, and changes in external and internal parameters. Existence is always bounded by the volume of the phase space that encompasses the system's and environment's parameters, beyond which the system cannot exist within this qualitative determination. The system, as a singular social organism, can only exist under certain environmental conditions that correspond to the phase space of permissible states of the system and the environment. For instance, the formation of a digital society in our country necessitates the activation of numerous parameters, yet the human consciousness must also undergo transformation; the individuals themselves must change, along with their worldview and culture. Should the fluctuations of the parameters of the digital society be extensive, the system will lose its qualitative determination: it either collapses or transforms into another, new stable system over a certain period, leading up to the next critical point in the system’s emergence from crisis and the enhancement of digital management efficiency.

Thus, any digital system exists in a state of abrupt change concerning various parameters—economic, social, managerial, monetary, informational. Open digital systems often find themselves at points of imbalance, where their behavior is described probabilistically, utilizing nonlinear equations, with variables entering higher degrees (squares, cubes). From an evolutionary perspective, a digital system enters a state of imbalance, within which self-organization occurs, stable structures emerge, and an order towards which the system gravitates manifests. These structures are referred to as attractors. In the interaction between the digital individual and the digital society, the use of a comprehensive set of synergistic categories—synergy, self-organization, open systems, nonlinearity, attractor structures—becomes crucial.

In this interaction, informational interaction and communication play a vital role. Communication serves as a means to reduce uncertainty in situations of interaction. Within the communicative space, communicative norms operate, alongside moral-ethical obligations, the roles imposed on individuals, a set of functionally conditioned processes and behavioral expectations, communicative networks, and an interweaving of interpersonal connections; these instrumental rules are necessary for the formation of a digital society.

Three types of processes of self-organization in the digital society can be distinguished. The first pertains to the very birth of an organization, that is, its emergence from a certain collection of integral objects forming a new holistic system with its specific laws. The second type encompasses the processes by which a system maintains a certain level of organization amidst changing external and internal conditions. The third type of self-organization processes relates to the development of a system capable of accumulating and utilizing past experiences.

Special studies on self-organization and self-regulation first commenced within cybernetics, which introduced the term "self-organizing system" by the English cyberneticist W. Ashby in 1947. A broader examination of self-organization and self-regulation in the digital society began in the late 1950s, aimed at creating computational machines capable of modeling various aspects of intellectual activity for the purpose of transferring its technologies as instruments for realization.

From the 1970s onwards, the study of self-organization and self-regulation in the digital society increasingly incorporated concepts from the thermodynamics of open systems. The behavior of these systems under conditions far from equilibrium is characterized as an irreversible process, wherein a sequential transition occurs from one equilibrium steady state to another, through the reduction of entropy and, consequently, the increase in the organization of the digital system.

Dysfunction is a term that characterizes a type of relationship where the consequences of a phenomenon, event, action, or process are adverse for a given object, as observed in biological, psychological, and social sciences. The term "dysfunction" was introduced by American sociologist R. Merton in "Social Theory" (1957), where he critiqued certain postulates of functionalism in Western sociology and social anthropology. Specifically, he opposed the universalization of the perspective that any cultural element reproduced within a social system contributes to the maintenance of the entire system’s existence. According to R. Merton, it is essential to establish a "net balance of functional consequences," considering favorable, neutral, and unfavorable outcomes. The concept of dysfunction allows for the identification of contradictions within social systems, yet it does not unveil the causes and mechanisms of societal change and development.

A fundamental property of the synergistic objects of the digital society is complexity, understood as the capacity for self-organization and the complication of its spatiotemporal structure at the macro level due to changes occurring at the micro level. Synergetics explores the phenomena of self-organization and self-regulation in the interaction between the digital individual and the digital society, the collective action of many subsystems, where appropriate functioning emerges. Within the framework of the synergetic perspective of reality, chaos serves as the physical underpinning of imbalance, evolving simultaneously towards self-organization.

According to R. Haken, self-organization frequently emerges from chaotic states, giving rise to highly ordered spatiotemporal structures. O. Knyazyeva and S. Kurdyumov contend that chaos at the micro level serves not only as a factor of destruction but also as a force that drives the tendency for self-structuring in nonlinear environments. Contemporary synergetics considers self-organization as a “theory of chaos,” wherein order and disorder are revealed to be closely interconnected; each encompasses the other, a realization we can appreciate as a fundamental shift in our perception of the universe. The polyvariance of self-organizational processes gives rise to a characteristic of the studied synergetic systems: nonlinearity, which has led to the emergence of new concepts within the digital society.

The fundamental mechanism that facilitates the realization of nonlinearity in the evolution of the digital society is the bifurcation mechanism in synergetics. A bifurcation transition represents the objectification (choice of a system) as one of the developmental options, each offering a pathway for the system into states radically distinct from its original condition. The more complex the system, the more bifurcation forks will appear along its path. However, even the initial bifurcation verifies the evolutionary process, establishing its intrinsic nonlinearity and polyvariance. The phenomenon of bifurcation serves as a source of innovation and diversification, as it is through bifurcation that new solutions to problems arise within the system.

Fluctuations—termed "perturbations" or "disturbances"—play a crucial role in the self-organization of the interaction between the digital individual and digital society, including dissipative processes that act as determinants of morphogenesis in both living and non-living nature. The most significant concept in the self-organization and self-regulation of the interaction between the digital individual and digital society is the attractor (from Latin attraction), which manifests as a mode (state) towards which the system tends and is defined as a stable focus to which all trajectories of the system's dynamics converge, thereby acting as a factor of order in the formation of a socially responsible society.

Self-organization and self-regulation are particularly intriguing as they emphasize aspects of reality most characteristic of the current stage of social change: variety, instability, diversity, non-equilibrium, nonlinear relationships, and temporality. The decline of the industrial society, or the society of the "second wave," currently observed, can be characterized as a bifurcation of civilization, leading to the emergence of a more differentiated "third wave" society, as noted by E. Toffler in his works.

On one hand, fluctuation brings the system into a state of instability; on the other hand, fluctuation substantively determines the outcome of the self-organizational transformation of the system. According to E. Toffler, the entire system encompasses subsystems that are in a constant state of fluctuation; the conceptual "models" of order developed by contemporary synergetics through fluctuations unveil an unstable world where small causes yield significant effects. Macroscopic management is incapable of predicting the trajectory along which the system’s evolution will unfold. Indeed, the evolution of the system is interpreted as a process of sequential bifurcation transitions, wherein randomness recurs time and again, making it critical to ascertain where the system's "disturbance" will arise—at the center or the periphery. If the disturbance occurs at the system’s periphery, the system may remain oblivious to it; if it occurs at the center, the impact on the latter's evolution will be substantial.

The synergetic research paradigm of self-organization and self-regulation of the interaction between the digital individual and digital society encompasses: 1) a re-evaluation of the phenomenon of determinism in light of its nonlinear interpretation; 2) the establishment of a synergetic vision of reality, allowing for the conceptual introduction of the phenomenon of time, signifying a paradigmatic shift “from that which exists to that which emerges”; 3) a paradigmatic orientation towards the plural multiplicity of descriptions, through which an unstable self-organizing object can be captured; 4) a rejection of the subject-object opposition as a rigid contrast between subject and object; and 5) the development of a paradigmatic program for a “new synthesis” that aims to reconcile the contradiction between the two cultures—the “natural sciences” and the “human sciences”—thus opening avenues for mutual interdisciplinary dialogue.

In open systems, there exists the potential for a unique process, termed the self-organization of the interaction between the digital individual and digital society. The governance of systems in general, and social systems in particular, is inextricably linked to the issue of selecting the trajectory of the system’s evolution. Digital systems possess specific characteristics associated both with the particularities of the human personal factor and with the socio-systemic factors and properties of the corresponding information system.

The study of self-organization phenomena, the conditions and directions of self-organizational structuring of processes, and the formation of predictive algorithms (optimization) for the trajectory of interaction between the digital individual and digital society can be tentatively termed a synergetic-reflexive model. To construct a synergetic-reflexive model of interaction between the digital individual and digital society, the following conceptual categories and images should be employed: 1) multiplicativity; 2) social environment; 3) interaction of scales; 4) the informational field of the socio-system; 5) reflexive interaction of systems. The multiplicativity of socially active meanings manifests as a consequence of the increased number of informational and financial-material connections.

If a system exhibits characteristics of bifurcation, it alters its qualitative determination in an unpredictable direction that depends on random fluctuations. The term “bifurcation” was introduced by Poincaré (1854-1912), a French physicist, mathematician, and philosopher, and denotes a “splitting” in the description of a certain physical process that begins to follow various trajectories from a certain moment. The amplitude or temperature of oscillatory processes varies: it either increases or decreases at different frequencies or ratios of forces, depending on the system's stability with the increase of energy from stochastic motion. A decrease in amplitude reduces the sphere of spontaneously arising states, diminishing the factor of entropy, which leads to a lower probability of destructive tendencies within the system due to internal environmental parameters.

The corresponding invariant of the system, which is independent of temperature within the bounds of existence, should be termed structure. Structure is the set of stable connections of the object (the digital individual and digital society) that ensures reproducibility under changing conditions. In a holistic sense, structure equals a system understood as the elements created among them, encompassing both the internal organization and the order of the object. The holistic definition of the concept of “structure” introduces characteristics such as integrity or unity.

The structure of interaction between the digital individual and digital society must meet three conditions: 1) integrity; 2) transformation; 3) self-regulation. Even in I. Kant’s works, one may encounter the notion that structure is the arrangement and connection of elements within any organism formed for a particular purpose. An ideal structure (particularly a managerial one) can only be created on the basis of utilizing the natural potential of the self-organizing system, considering its own laws, such as the mechanism of self-governance. The true art of self-governance lies in the ability to subordinate the organization not to externally imposed systems, but to create systems from already existing elements within a given environment. In other words, the system must align with the actual physical conditions necessary for its self-preservation and self-development, serving specific functions and purposes for growth.

Moreover, the functions of the system should not merely be declared but rather defined by a suitably designed structure. After all, one cannot tailor a suit to a measure that does not fit, just as one cannot construct a society based on external schematics or developmental models. Frequently, the declared role of the organization does not align with the role it practically performs; thus, the digital system represents a unity of identity and divergence, reflecting the unity of its internal and external conditions of existence.

The structure of the digital society, much like the governance of society, does not operate as a singular social organism at this juncture in time, despite the establishment of territorial self-governance and municipal self-organizing structures that facilitate the development and self-preservation of an appropriate environment for their citizens. Regional self-governing units are also being created. Governance, as a unified social organism, has fragmented into a series of self-governing units: some non-viable administrative entities merely simulate activity, as certain necessary interconnections within the system have been disrupted. The elements of the organism's external environment may correlate with one another, forming more or less stable spatial-temporal substrative-process structures that constrain the freedom to alter external parameters for the organism.

Thus, the system, fluctuating, moves through a specific fundamental space, where interaction with the altered environment no longer disrupts the equilibrium of its state. Such a purposeful movement may be termed drift (for instance, the slow directed action of certain particles—organizations, institutions), in order to anticipate the future, as noted by B. Rohit.

However, the transformation of the system may occur along various trajectories:

1. as a deliberate change of the system and the realization of its plan;
2. as a drift that occurs due to changes—economic, political, social—for the fulfillment of the objectives of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Consequently, the interaction between the digital individual and the digital society manifests itself in the alteration of priorities, modes of operation, and procedures, often revealing itself only "de facto." The less rigidly and unequivocally defined the parameters of the elements and the regulated connections between them, the greater the space for drift will exist among them. Such a system may be less efficient, yet more dynamic (for example, totalitarian regimes were less economically efficient but more effective psychologically, in terms of identification with society). There is a significant probability that this drift will lead the system to an unfavorable state.

The systemic method allows us to examine the interaction between the digital individual and the digital society as a complex economic, social, and cultural system, which comprises several subsystems that constantly interact with the surrounding environment and is considered in the context of communicative, epistemological, and sociocultural approaches to human existence within this type of society.