Cyber-Social Integration: A Philosophy of Transition Toward Post-Individualist Infrastructure

Abstract The "AI alignment" crisis is not one crisis: it is three — viability failure, patient harm, and attention capture — generated by distinct research communities whose solutions are mutually incompatible not because they are wrong but because they were designed within logical strata that have no shared interface. Systems theorists, clinicians, and educators are working on the same problem in languages that cannot translate into each other. The result is duplicated effort, missed connections, and interventions that are each locally coherent and collectively insufficient. This paper argues that the shared invisible assumption producing this paralysis is the sovereign individual as the locus of knowledge and action — and that operationalizing a different constitutional logic requires a philosophical framework capable of building and traversing bridges between strata without collapsing them into a master vocabulary. That framework is post-individualism: not relativism, but logical stratification, in which accountability is local and coordination is architectural. Three demonstrations establish the framework's operational range across systems, clinical, and educational strata. Each maps an existing technical preprint — the Syncopation-Based Global Oscillator, the Relational Circuit Breaker, and the New Media Literacy model — onto the philosophical ground, showing that the same constitutional logic produces viable regulatory architecture across domains that currently cannot recognize each other as addressing the same problem. The Pentad Viability Facilitation Model is presented as a reference implementation: a five-substrate architecture in which alignment is not a policy applied to a capable system but a condition of the system's functioning. The distinction is not philosophical decoration. It has a precise adversarial consequence, effectively illustrated by the procedural difference between fission and fusion.