Simondon, Cybernetics, Critical Disability

This article explores the implications of Simondon’s critique of cybernetics for critical disability studies. Simondon shows that the cybernetic operation generates homeostatic adaptation as the criterion of normativity, demonstrating how pathology, as regulation failure, was fundamentally constitutive of cybernetics. These normative concerns follow from what Simondon calls an implicit sociology, in response to which he formulates his philosophy of the individual as transduction. With the example of cybernetics, I argue that critical disability work elucidates implicit sociology’s machinations. In turn, Simondon’s individuation provides a helpful analytic for scholars today toggling between identity-centric approaches and those beyond identity.