The relevance of this research is due to the systemic crisis of representative models in the social sciences, triggered by the "ontological turn" and related to the reaction to the exhaustion of dominant epistemological paradigms, the influence of interdisciplinary fields of knowledge, and the striving for "new realism." Despite the declared abandonment of constructive reductionism, dominant approaches, including the strict social ontology of philosopher Brian Epstein, remain "trapped" in the paradigm of statics, reducing social reality to a set of fixed facts and relationships. Such "architectonic" models, while effective for analyzing stable states, are fundamentally unable to conceptualize the inherent processuality, creativity, and continuous becoming of the social world. Overcoming this conceptual "deadlock" requires turning to a radically different ontological tradition that is adequate to the dynamic complexity of social existence. The methodological approach of the research is built on the consistent application of the method of comparative-critical analysis. The primary object of critique is Epstein's social ontology, which is subjected to systematic analysis through the lens of key categories of the process philosophy of Gilbert Simondon. The methodology is implemented in three stages. First, the reconstruction of the epistemological architecture of Epstein's model through the prism of the opposition of the "static and the processual." Second, the transductive transfer of Simondon's categorical apparatus into the field of social ontology problems. And finally, the assessment of the heuristic potential of both paradigms through their ability to represent the dynamic aspects of social existence. This approach allows not only the comparison of the two theories but also the identification of the internal boundaries of the structural-analytical approach and the justification of the necessity of a process-oriented epistemology for an adequate description of social reality as a permanent becoming. The novelty of the article lies in the systematic critique of the epistemological foundations of Epstein's project through the lens of Simondon's processual ontology. It is argued that such key Simondonian categories as individuation, transduction, and pre-individual reveal the internal limitation of Epstein's epistemic stance, which is aimed at the "justification" and "fixation" of already established entities. In contrast, it is proposed to view the social not as a structure but as an unfinished process, where the "individuals" and "institutions" themselves are not starting points but temporary and problematic results of a continuous process of individuation.
Vladislav Olegovich Sayapin (Sun,) studied this question.