Within the depth-psychology corpus, ontogenesis occupies a distinctly contested theoretical space, functioning simultaneously as a biological concept, a philosophical operator, and a methodological framework. Simondon provides the most sustained and rigorous treatment, insisting that ontogenesis must be understood not merely as embryological development but as the very process by which individuation constitutes being: to study the individual is already too late unless one has first grasped the ontogenetic operation that brings it forth. For Simondon, ontogenesis names the unfolding resolution of a pre-individual metastable tension, encompassing physical, vital, psychical, and collective registers. The study of ontogenesis must, he argues, precede both logic and ontology. Neumann approaches ontogenesis through its classical pairing with phylogenesis, reading individual psychological development as a recapitulation of the evolutionary history of consciousness — a methodological premise that grounds his entire comparative mythology project. Schore invokes ontogenesis in its strictly neurodevelopmental register, tracking how sensory-modal shifts in early infancy produce concrete changes in ontogenetic adaptations of the maturing organism. Jung mentions the ontogenesis-phylogenesis dyad indexically, as an organizing background assumption rather than a theorized object. Thompson engages the term within the biology of autopoiesis and developmental systems theory. The central tension across these voices is whether ontogenesis designates a closed developmental program or an open, creative individuation that exceeds any pre-given form.
the study of ontogenesis must be anterior to logic and ontology. The theory of individuation must therefore be considered as a theory of the phases of being
Simondon establishes ontogenesis as the primary philosophical inquiry, arguing it must precede both logic and ontology because individuation is more fundamental than any constituted individual or substance.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020thesis
The ontogenesis of the living being cannot be thought based on the notion of homeostasis alone, i.e. the perpetuation of metastable equilibrium through self-regulations.
Simondon critiques homeostasis as insufficient for explaining ontogenesis, insisting that the concept must account for amplification and constructive individuation beyond mere self-maintenance.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020thesis
To seek the principle of individuation in a reality that precedes individuation itself is to consider individuation strictly as onto-genesis.
Simondon identifies ontogenesis with the philosophical problem of the principle of individuation, arguing that both atomism and hylomorphism evade the direct description of ontogenesis proper.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020thesis
All the functions of the living being are ontogenetic to some extent, not just because they ensure an adaptation to an external world, but because they participate in this ongoing individuation that life is.
Simondon generalizes ontogenesis beyond embryology, treating all vital functions — including memory, imagination, and inventive thought — as expressions of continuous individuation.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020thesis
this duality, which is maintained by a unity manifested by the principles of bilateral symmetry and functional asymmetry… is at the heart of the principle of ontogenesis in the chromosomal structure.
Simondon draws on Gesell’s developmental principles to situate ontogenesis at the intersection of biological embryology and the structural dynamics of differentiation and integration.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020thesis
processes of individuation belonging to all the orders of reality in which ontogenesis takes place: an axiomatic of ontogenesis rem
Simondon calls for a formal axiomatic of ontogenesis spanning all orders of reality — genetic, chronological, and topological — as an alternative to both fragmentary microphysics and holistic macrophysical organism theory.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020supporting
onto-genesis is that which indicates what participation in the collective is as well as what the psychical operation conceived as the resolution of a problematic is.
Simondon extends ontogenesis into the psychosocial domain, treating it as the index of both collective participation and the psychical resolution of metastable conflicts.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020supporting
In superior species, accentuated ontogenesis and its correlate in old age phase-shift the individual from one end to the other with respect to this actuality of the collective
Simondon argues that in higher species an intensified ontogenesis produces a temporal phase-shift between the individual and the collective, with maturity representing the moment of genuine coincidence.
, Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information, 2020supporting
this link between ontogenesis and human history alone gives us the justification for having ranged so far afield in our exposition of the latter subject, and for claiming at the same time that the real concern of this book is the treatment of modern man
Neumann grounds his entire comparative mythology project in the parallelism between ontogenesis and phylogenesis, treating individual psychological development as a recapitulation of the history of consciousness.
, The Origins and History of Consciousness (Princeton, 2019thesis
there is a shift from emphasizing olfactory-gustatory and tactile to visual and then auditory inputs from early to late infancy, and such shifts cause changes in ontogenetic adaptations.
Schore employs ontogenesis in its neurodevelopmental register, showing how sequential shifts in sensory dominance during infancy produce specific ontogenetic adaptations that shape the maturing affective brain.
, Affect Regulation and the Origin of the Self: The Neurobiology of Emotional Development, 1994supporting
ontogenesis, and phylogenesis, 23
Jung’s index entry pairs ontogenesis with phylogenesis as a background organizing dyad within his symbolic and mythological comparative framework, without extended theoretical elaboration.
, Symbols of Transformation, 1952aside
phylogenesis, and ontogenesis, 2
A second index reference confirms the ontogenesis-phylogenesis pairing as a structural assumption running through Jung’s transformational symbolism, invoked rather than argued.
, Symbols of Transformation, 1952aside
consciousness65, 78-79 deliberative239, 241 ontogenesis106 unity of141
Gallagher’s index locates ontogenesis at a specific discussion of consciousness, indicating its role in the developmental account of the emergence of self-consciousness and body schema.
, How the Body Shapes the Mind, 2005aside