The philosophical substrate of Socioplastics constitutes a dense constellation of continental philosophy, systems thinking, and critical urban theory metabolised into what may be described as a constructive-operational epistemology.

At its conceptual core lies the Deleuzian–Guattarian rhizome, whose topology of distributed connectivity replaces hierarchical epistemic trees with adaptive meshes in which ideas circulate, mutate, and recombine across domains. This rhizomatic orientation is complemented by Baruch Spinoza’s ontology of immanence, where a flat, non-transcendent field of relations permits socioplastic systems to operate metabolically rather than hierarchically, while the principle of difference and repetition provides the generative logic through which motifs, nodes, and interventions recursively accumulate epistemic mass. Within this architecture Michel Foucault’s analysis of power–knowledge dispositifs functions as a diagnostic instrument, enabling frameworks such as CAPA to orchestrate agonistic dialogue, rotating authority, and the continuous recalibration of institutional agency. Parallel sociological grounding emerges through Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of fields and symbolic capital, which clarifies how epistemic gravity accumulates through recursive publication, citation, and institutional interaction, gradually reshaping cultural terrains. At the level of political economy, Karl Marx’s critique of capital and metabolic rift informs the framework’s investigations into urban extraction, permanence, and the geological temporality of infrastructural value, while Slavoj Žižek’s Lacanian dialectics contribute tools for navigating ideological sediment and narrative contradiction within relational systems. Systems theory further consolidates this structure through Niklas Luhmann’s concept of operational closure and autopoiesis, enabling Socioplastics to function as a self-referential yet permeable epistemic organism whose nodes maintain coherence while remaining open to mutation. Additional philosophical resonances—Paul B. Preciado’s politics of the body, Samuel Beckett’s minimal existential dramaturgy, and contemporary ethics of care—extend the framework toward questions of identity, affect, and more-than-human relationality. The resulting synthesis forms a geometric philosophy of practice, in which theoretical concepts become infrastructural operators embedded within a distributed digital corpus. Rather than interpreting philosophical traditions, Socioplastics activates them as topological instruments capable of structuring knowledge production, spatial experimentation, and cultural agency across the volatile ecological and political conditions that define contemporary urban life.

Collectively these philosophical vectors converge in Socioplastics as an operational epistemology in which artistic practice becomes an executable framework—simultaneously archive, laboratory, and infrastructural protocol—designed to generate adaptive knowledge and relational resilience within the volatile socio-ecological landscapes of contemporary urban life.

The theoretical architecture underpinning Socioplastics situates the work of Anto Lloveras within a constellation of late-twentieth and early-twenty-first century thinkers who reconceptualised art, architecture, and urban space as relational and systemic processes rather than autonomous objects. At the closest conceptual proximity stands Joseph Beuys, whose notion of social sculpture expanded artistic practice into a societal modulation where pedagogy, ecology, and action collectively sculpt public life; Socioplastics inherits this expanded ontology while substituting mythic charisma with distributed epistemic infrastructure. Equally foundational is Nicolas Bourriaud, whose formulation of relational aesthetics reframed art as the production of micro-social encounters. Yet Lloveras extends this paradigm beyond interpersonal exchange toward atmospheric and infrastructural relations, introducing ecological thresholds, digital archives, and platform-native sovereignty as operative media. In the domain of performative urban gestures, the work resonates with Francis Alÿs, whose subtle civic actions and itinerant objects demonstrate how minimal interventions can activate latent urban narratives. Meanwhile, the convivial situations orchestrated by Rirkrit Tiravanija echo in Socioplastics’ emphasis on hospitality, durational encounters, and the dissolution of objecthood into lived relational processes. More recent theoretical affinities emerge with infrastructural and ecological thinkers such as Shannon Mattern, whose investigations into maintenance, repair, and knowledge infrastructures parallel the metabolic ethics of care embedded in Socioplastics. Similarly, Maria Puig de la Bellacasa’s philosophy of matters of care informs its attention to more-than-human relations and ecological responsibility. At a systemic level, Bruno Latour’s actor-network theory provides a conceptual grammar for understanding artefacts, bodies, environments, and digital nodes as distributed agencies within relational assemblages.