This document synthesizes some core concepts, methodologies, and critiques central to Scybernethics, a framework developed by Christophe Rigon (also known as Soto²). Scybernethics is presented as a personal and philosophical journey that explores cognition, technology, and the nature of understanding itself, integrating elements of cybernetics, enaction, phenomenology, and critical philosophy. It seeks a “second-order rationality” that is self-reflective, embodied, and aware of its own limitations.
Introduction

Key Themes and Ideas
1. Second-Order Thinking & Rationality²
- Beyond First-Order: Rigon argues that traditional, first-order thinking focuses on the what of knowledge, whereas second-order thinking is about the how of knowing. He explains that “second-order thinking involves reflecting on the concept, the conceptualization, and the conceptualizer (self), unlike direct first-order thinking.” This self-awareness is critical to recognizing cognitive biases.
- No True Third-Order: Rigon believes there is no true “third-order” thinking because the process remains a first-person experiential cycle between phenomenological (1st person) and objective (3rd person) perspectives. The process loops back on itself, rather than leading to a higher level of abstraction. “The ambijective gesture is a lived first person experiential cycling gesture between first (phenomenological) and third person (valid intersubjective/objective perspectives).”
- Rationality²: In scybernethics, “rationality²” is not just about logical deductions but encompasses a broader “aesthetic feeling” tied to biocognitive homeostasis. It’s a “second-order ana-logic ratio (ratio²)” that includes how we regulate our own regulations.
2. Enaction and Embodiment
- “All Knowing is Being”: Scybernethics is grounded in the idea that knowledge is not separate from the knower; “all knowing is being” and “the enaction of understanding is the understanding of enaction”. Understanding is an active, embodied process.
- Existential Inquiry: Enaction is not just a cognitive theory but also a method for self-transformation. It is viewed as a “aesthetic of self,” a way of knowing oneself and growing personally.
- Mind as a Gesture: Rigon often speaks of the “mind as a gesture”, a concept linked to his understanding of Parallel Distributed Processing (PDP) models, and a driving idea for his attention toward his psychomotricity.
- Emphasis on the Processual: He focuses on the processual dimension of meaning making. The “processual” is what remains when “form” is subtracted, a dynamic and unobjectifiable element essential for generating meaning. Form, on the other hand, is anything that can be designated/indicated.
3. Conceptual Dipoles and Dialogical Thinking
- Definition: Conceptual dipoles are pairs of terms (e.g., form/process, inside/outside, logic/analogic) that are complementary or appear in opposition. They are used as analytical tools.
- Asymmetry: Rigon emphasizes the asymmetrical nature of these dipoles, with one term (often the “formal” one) being easier to define or quantify than the other (often the “processual” one). “A first phenomenological observation is the observation of the asymmetry of grasping polarities: one of the concepts can generally be more easily ‘seized’ by a precise definition, a quantification than the other.”
- Focus on the “Weaker” Side: A key method in scybernethics is to emphasize the more difficult polarity of the dipole. By engaging with the “weaker” side, one gains a fuller understanding of the dipole and resists the bias toward the easily formalizable. “Rigon emphasizes focusing on the ‘weaker’ side of the dipole because it represents the aspect more difficult to grasp, promoting a deeper understanding by attending to what is not easily formalized.”
- “Exploratory Dialectical Dialogic”: This method of exploring dipoles involves understanding the two concepts distinctly, their complementarity, and their contexts, and putting the tension in “suspension of judgement.”
- Internal Gesture: The evaluation of conceptual dipoles often involves an “internalized gesture of weighing”, as if holding the semantic weight of each pole, allowing a feeling of difference to emerge. “It is real com-putation.”
4. The “Ambijective Gesture”
- Cyclical Process: It’s a core concept describing a cycling between culturally deployed objectification and phenomenological subjectification. “It is the self-conscious co-determination of (meta)epistemological understanding and body-based meaning-making which is critical to the way we make sense of ourselves.”
- Co-determination: This gesture is the “self-conscious co-determination” of meta-epistemological viewpoints and embodied meaning-making. The ambijective gesture creates a self-referential process linking the subject, object and the meta-understanding.
5. Technology and Computation
- Experimental and Experiential Epistemology: Computer models and simulations are viewed as experimental and experiential tools for self-understanding. Rigon uses the computer not to create artificial intelligence but to make his own thinking process more visible and comprehensible.
- “From Computers which Think to Computers which Make me Think” (Bachimont): This phrase captures Rigon’s view of computer use, emphasizing that the primary value of computation is in enhancing human understanding and self-reflection, not in replicating human intelligence.
- Critique of “Technology-by-Itself”: He is critical of the notion that technology is neutral or self-operating, arguing that it reflects human biases and agendas. Rigon emphasizes that the human element is key.
- Computation as an Aesthetic Operation: Rigon describes “com-putation” as a “ana-logic (analogic and logic) and situated meaning-making transformative operation”. It’s an aesthetical operation rooted in synchronic sensorimotor evaluation.
- Double Cut: Rigon describes “the double cut of the digital” as “the cut to meaning, which is reduced, and the cut to matter, which is abstract.” (Bachimont)
6. Dia-Grams
- Quasi-Bidimensionality (DimenTionality): Dia-grams are a “second-order spacialized/formalized double conceptual dipole” representing the form/process and 1st/3d person perspective matrix.
- “Not Three, Not Four”: This phrase highlights the dia-gram’s quasi-dimensionality, referring to the fact that the forms/process and first-person/third-person perspectives intersection is self-reflexive and recursive, and a duration needs to be introduced.
- Stiegler’s “Gramme”: Rigon’s “dia-gram” terminology is influenced by Stiegler’s concept of “gramme”, defined as an interruption of a flux to make it reproducible and calculable. Dia-gram is a tool to help with self-interpretation.
7. Critique of Western Rationality
- Mechanical Rhythm: Rigon critiques a “mechanical rhythm” in Western thinking, where “form” precedes “process,” leading to the “objectification fallacy,” ignoring the role of the observer-actor. He warns that the emphasis on “form to process, representation to function” leads to a limited rationality.
- Dangers of Mechanization: He sees dangers in the mechanization of thought and social structures, recognizing that the same type of thinking that creates technology can also create negative consequences. He describes a “global western rationality crisis” and a “schismogenesis” of systemic positive feedback loops.
- Objectification Fallacy: He describes a “tendency to ignore or bury the observer-actor and focus on the formal object.”
8. Scybernethics as a Regulatory Paradigm
- Reflective Practice: Scybernethics is framed as a reflective practice to regulate distinctions in how we understand the world.
- Iterative & Cyclic: Rigon’s methodology is deeply iterative and cyclic, constantly returning to revise concepts through phenomenological exploration, technological simulation, and reflection.
- Emphasis on Process: It highlights the importance of the “processual dimension”, the unobjectifiable, dynamic aspect of experience.
- Second-Order Cybernetics: Scybernethics applies second-order cybernetic principles, recognizing the role of the observer in shaping what is observed.
Key Quotes
• “An observer is it’s own ultimate object.” (von Foerster)
• “The enaction of understanding is the understanding of enaction.”
• “Excessive polarization in (scientific) intersubjective controversy tends to rhetorically favor the “easy” polarity, which is more in agreement with the mechanical structure of causal explanations.”
• “All knowing is being.” (von Foerster, Maturana, Varela)
• “Cognition is not about objects, since it is an effective action; and by acquiring the knowledge of knowledge, we constitute ourselves.” (Maturana & Varela)
“From Computers which think to computers which make me think” (Bachimont)
• “Science and technologies without observer-actor is only ruin of the conscience.” (Pseudo-Rabelais)
Scybernethic’s Methodology
Scybernethics methodology is structured around iterative cycles, encompassing:
• Conceptual Dipoles: Systematically explore and maintain the tension of conceptual dipoles, focusing on the weaker side.
• Suspension of Judgement: Temporarily hold judgement to foster deeper understanding and avoid premature conclusions.
• Computer Simulations: Utilize simulations to experientially explore cognitive processes, seeing them as extensions of self.
• Phenomenological Inquiry: Emphasize first-person experience and embodied awareness, linking it with scientific and technical explorations.
• Hypomnemata: Use self-writing tools to deal with complexity and record the self-transforming process of exploration.
• Ambijective Gesture: To understand the implicit relation between subject and object, in a cyclic manner.
• Dia-grams: Using them as tools to conceptualize and explore “quasi-bidimensional” aspects of cognition.
Heuristical/hermeneutical co-determining enactive circulations (meaning and sense-making).
Conclusion
Scybernethics represents a unique approach to understanding the interconnectedness of cognition, technology, and self-awareness. Through a focus on second-order thinking, the exploration of conceptual dipoles, and a deeply embodied approach to knowledge acquisition, it provides a framework to critique and refine our understanding of ourselves and the world around us. Rigon’s work challenges traditional notions of objectivity, advocating instead for an approach that is reflective, dynamic, and always aware of its own situatedness. He urges the creation of a “second order philo-techno-scientific rationality coupled to a democratic bio-techno politics of citizens” to navigate our current challenges.
This briefing document should serve as a good starting point for understanding the complexities and innovative aspects of Scybernethics, as developed by Christophe Rigon.