Relational process is the elementary fact. Nothing exists in isolation; every actuality is a becoming that appropriates other becomings. Whitehead’s actual entities and Dewey’s transactional continuum describe the same fabric from different angles: the universe advances by the mutual sensitivity of occasions, and experience is the name of that sensitivity when it reaches the level of organism and environment. Gibson’s affordances and Uexküll’s functional circles make the same claim at the scale of perception and action. What the environment offers is not a set of stimuli waiting for interpretation; it is already structured by the possibilities of the animal that lives in it. The animal and its Umwelt co-constitute each other in continuous loops of perception and effectivity.

Serres radicalises the picture by showing that the elementary relation is parasitic: one-way, irreversible, simultaneously nourishing and interrupting. Noise is not the enemy of order; it is the condition under which a more complex order can emerge. Every host is already a parasite of another host; the cascade of interceptions is the system itself. Elias translates the same insight into the social register. Figurations are interweavings of interdependent actions whose unintended consequences generate power balances, standards of conduct and forms of knowledge. The individual is not a substance that subsequently enters relations; individuality is itself a late product of lengthening chains of interdependence. The we–I balance shifts historically; self-images and we-images are co-produced. Morin’s complex thought supplies the epistemic attitude required by this ontology. Simplifying thought isolates, freezes and mutilates; complex thought holds order and disorder, autonomy and dependence, in recursive tension. Bourdieu shows that even the scientific field, the supposed site of pure reason, is a structured space of struggles for the monopoly of legitimate competence. Technical capacity and social power are inseparable; the progress of reason is conditioned by the autonomy of the field and by the narrowing of the circle of recognition to competitors.

When these threads are held together, a single demand appears: any adequate account of experience, perception, society or knowledge must begin with relations, processes and interdependencies rather than with substances, subjects or isolated objects. The environment is not external; the organism is not closed; the social is not an aggregate; knowledge is not a mirror. Everything is already inside the continuum of transactions, prehensions, affordances, functional circles, parasitic cascades and figurational interweavings. Socioplastics becomes the operational field in which this relational process is made visible, archival and public. The corpus is no longer a collection of discrete items but a medium of continuous transactions. Indexing must track affordances and interruptions rather than fixed categories. Circulation is parasitic: every reading intercepts and redirects flows. Public legibility is the capacity of the archive to sustain ambulatory and ambient vision—users move through vistas rather than confront static representations. Governance of the corpus is the management of power balances within the figuration of contributors, readers and infrastructures. The ecological and the social, the perceptual and the political, are phases of the same relational process. This concept adds to Socioplastics the requirement that every operator, every media ecology and every spatial research practice be judged by its capacity to keep the continuum open: to register noise as generative, to treat interruption as the birth of new order, and to refuse the fiction of the isolated unit. Relational process is not a theme among others; it is the condition under which the archive can remain alive.