Abstract
The article deals with the problem of the influence of digitalization processes on the concept of a subject. The purpose of the study is to analyze this influence and substantiate the possibility of preserving the category of the subject in the philosophical understanding of the present world and human being. It is shown that the expansion of human activity into the digital environment creates a situation in which the possibility of the existence of a subject as an integrity is questioned, since human activity is distributed across two environments — physical and digital. Several key problematic points are considered that make it necessary to clarify understanding of the subject in the modern world — these are the “disembodied” subject in the digital environment, the “decentralization” of the subject (i.e., the distribution of his activities in two different environments) and the alienation of information about the subject and messages belonging to it in the digital environment. It is revealed that at the heart of all these three problems, in one way or another, there is a gap between the bodily being of a person and its manifestations in the digital world, and it is demonstrated that the “incorporeality” of the subject in the digital world is illusory. It shows how a number of authors begin to use the concept of a “digital subject” to solve the above-mentioned problems and concludes that the use of such a term is possible only as a metaphor, since it hints at the existence of a certain separate entity in the digital world, whereas the subject cannot be considered in complete isolation from the physical environment. It is concluded that the distribution of human activity in the physical and digital environment is not the reason for the rejection of the concept of the subject. It is shown that the modern understanding of the subject is possible with a combination of approaches of body-oriented cognition and narrative approach, where the first is associated with the embodied being of the subject in the physical environment, and the second not only reflects the being of the subject in the digital environment, but also serves as a link between the digital and physical aspects of the subject. The combination of these two approaches allows us to preserve the idea of the integrity of the subject.
References
Abat Ninet, A. (2019). Protecting the “Homo Digitalis.” Naveiñ Reet: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research, 9, 153–170. https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i9.122156
Bakhtin, M. M. (2003). Toward a philosophy of the act. In M. M. Bakhtin, Collected Works in 7 Vols. 1: Philosophical Aesthetics of the 1920s (pp. 7-68). Russian Dictionaries: Languages of Slavic Culture. (In Russian).
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The Extended Mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/58.1.7
Deblasio, A. (2010). New trends in alternative epistemologies. Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 23(1), 160–172. https://doi.org/10.5840/eps201023117 (In Russian).
Didrov, A. A., Neveleva, V. S., Tikhonova, S. V., & Trufanova, E. O. (2022). A Person in the Digital Age. ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics, 4, 102–122. https://doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2022-4-102-122 (In Russian).
Dydrov, A. A., & Penner, R. V. (2024). Digital Anthropology Manifesto. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies, 6(2), 17–51. https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v6i2.466
Floridi, L. (1999). Philosophy and Computing. An Introduction. Routledge.
Floridi, L. (2014). The 4th revolution. How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford University Press.
Fromm, E. (2017). The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. AST Publ. (In Russian).
Goriunova, O. (2019). The Digital Subject: People as Data as Persons. Theory, Culture & Society, 36(6), 125–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276419840409
Lektorsky, V. (2020). Transformation of Individual and Collective Memory in the Context of Digitalization. Istoriya, 11(9). https://doi.org/10.18254/S207987840012305-4 (In Russian).
Lektorsky, V. A. (2001). Subject. In New encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 659-660). Nauka Publ.. (In Russian).
Lektorsky, V. A. (2021). Global digitalization as an existential challenge. In Man in the global world: Risks and prospects (pp. 20-31). KANON+ Publ. (In Russian).
Leshkevich, T. G. (2022). Metaphors of the digital age and the Black Box Problem. Philosophy of Science and Technology, 27(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2022-27-1-34-48 (In Russian).
Lisenkova, A. A. (2020). Transformation of Identity in the Digital Age. Voprosy Filosofii, 3, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2020-3-65-74 (In Russian).
Nguyen, C. T. (2020). Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles. Episteme, 17(2), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2018.32
Orekh, E. A., & Sergeeva, O. V. (2015). Digital Face and Digital Body: New Phenomena in the Visual Content of Social Networks. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Sociology, 2, 137–145. (In Russian).
Penner, R. V. (2023). Ab offline in online et retro offline: Socio-philosophical interpretation of digital identity. The Digital Scholar: Philosopher’s Lab, 6(1), 6–15. (In Russian).
Penner, R. V. (2024). Digital Identity: Theory and Methodology. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 7. Philosophy, 48(2), 98–113. (In Russian).
Shapiro, L., & Spaulding, S. (2024). Embodied Cognition. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2024). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/embodied-cognition/
Trufanova, E. O. (2017). The Self as Reality and as Construction. Voprosi filosofii, 8, 100–112. (In Russian).
Trufanova, E. O. (2021). Private and Public in the Digital Space: Blurring of the Lines. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies, 3(1), 14–38. https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v3i1.130 (In Russian).
Trufanova, E. O. (2021b). Human in the digital world: “distributed” and integral. Vestnik Permskogo Universiteta. Seriya Filosofia Psikhologiya Sotsiologiya, 3, 370–375. https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2021-3-370-375 (In Russian).
Tulchinskii, G. L. (2021). Homo digitalis and self-awareness: transformation, challenges and request a personological unique self. Vestnik Permskogo Universiteta. Seriya Filosofia Psikhologiya Sotsiologiya, 3, 302–311. https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2021-3-302-311 (In Russian).
Tulchinskii, G. L. (2023). Meaning, Subjectness and Responsibilityin Digital Communications. Chelovek, 34(3), 73. https://doi.org/10.31857/S023620070026106-3 (In Russian).
Vasilenko, L. A., & Mescheryakova, N. N. (2023). Digital hybridity: innovative reality or utopia? Filosofija nauki i tehniki / Philosophy of Science and Technology, 28(1), 48–65. https://doi.org/10.21146/2413-9084-2023-28-1-48-65 (In Russian).
Velichkovsky, B. M. (2017). From consciousness research to the development of cognitive technologies. In Subjective world in the context of challenges of modern cognitive sciences (pp. 37-57). Akvilon Publ. (In Russian).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.