Identity of a Subject in the Socio-Cultural Reality of Digital Society
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5148-2024-3-131-137
Abstract
Aim. To identify the specifics of the subject’s identity in the social reality of modern society, subject to digitalization, which produces new forms of interaction between individual and collective subjects.
Methodology. The complexity, dynamics, and emergent properties of the subject’s identity are considered, taking into account the transformations that have arisen against the backdrop of the digital era. The study uses the method of socio-philosophical analysis of the transformations of social reality, the source of which is information technology, generating variability in identity, radically changing the value orientations of the subject and society as a whole. In addition, an interpretation method was used, which made it possible to generalize the dialectic of stability and variability of the subject’s identity in modern society.
Results. It was revealed that social reality has expanded the space of subjective interactions, radically influencing the choice of guidelines for individual identity. The susceptibility to atomization and fluidity of the identity of the collective subject has been established, which indicates deep, essential breaks with traditional sociocultural archetypes. Conclusions are drawn about an impending bifurcation on a societal scale, where the slightest fluctuations can cause radical changes in society. The specifics of digitalization force it to change exponentially, inevitably affecting the identification of the subject.
Research implications is an attempt to rethink the view of the essence of identity, to emphasize the urgency of the problem of preserving and reproducing cultural values, to identify the responsibility of social institutions for a new quality of the semantic picture of the world at the personal level.
About the Author
M. E. RyabovaRussian Federation
Mariya E. Ryabova – Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Professor, Professor Department of German Studies and Linguistic Didactics,
4, Vtoroj Sel`skohozyajstvennyj ave., Moscow 129226.
References
1. Ahiezer A. S. Trudy [Works]. Moscow, Novyj hronograf Publ., 2006. 480 p.
2. Guryanova A. V., Timofeev A. V. [Technoimages of Man. Part I: Homo Computeris, Homo Informaticus, Homo Network]. In: Sovremennye filosofskie issledovaniya [Modern Philosophical Research], 2024, no. 1, pp. 120–128. DOI: 10.18384/2949-5148-2024-1-120-128
3. Castells M. Information Age: Economy, Society, Culture (Rus. ed.: Shkaratan O. I., transl. Informacionnaya epoha: Ekonomika, obshchestvo, kul’tura. Moscow, Vysshaya shkola ekonomiki Publ., 2000. 608 p.).
4. Kutyrev V. A. Bytie ili nichto [Being or Nothing]. St. Petersburg, Aletejya Publ., 2010. 496 p.
5. Ryabova M. E. [Meme culture and its impact on the development of modern society]. In: Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofskie nauki [Bulletin of Moscow Region State University. Series: Philosophical Sciences], 2023, no. 1, pp. 123–132. DOI: 10.18384/2310-7227-2023-1-123-132
6. Tul’chinsky G. L. [Meaning-making and power, or Political pragsemantics]. In: Politicheskaya nauka [Political science], 2023, no. 3, pp. 151–169.
7. Cheklecov V. V. [Dynamic emergent interfaces of complex sociotechnical systems]. In: Filosofskie problemy informacionnyh tekhnologij i kiberprostranstva [Philosophical problems of information technology and cyberspace], 2015, no. 1 (9), pp. 70–84.
8. Antweiler Ch. Kollektive Identitаt. In: Kuhnhardt L., Mayer T., eds. Bonner Enzyklopаdie der Globalitаt. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 2017, pp. 443–453.
9. Blackburn M. The Persistence of the Civic Ethnic Binary: Competing Visions of the Nation and Civilization in Western, Central and Eastern Europe. In: National Identities, 2022, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 461–480.
10. Norris P. Cancel Culture: Myth or Reality?. In: Political Studies, 2021, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 145–174.