Философия - К-09.20.22
Социология - К-09.10.22
Искусствоведение - К-09.20.22
История - К-09.20.22
Культурология - К-09.20.22
Медицина - К-10.05.22
Педагогика - К-09.10.22
Политология - К-10.05.22
Право - К-09.15.22
Психология - К-09.10.22
Техника - К-10.05.22
Филология - К-09.20.22
Экономика - К-09.10.22
Информатика - К-10.05.22
Экология - К-10.05.22
Религиоведение - К-09.20.22
Научный мультидисциплинарный журнал
русский, английский, чешский
Идёт приём материалов
Информатика Искусствоведение История Культурология Медицина Педагогика Политология Право Психология Религиоведение Социология Техника Филология Философия Экология Экономика
O. Yu. Kolosova, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, associate professor,
Stavropol branch of Krasnodar university
of Ministries of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation,
Creativity becomes one of the important characteristics of a new type of intellectual worker and at the same time embodies the needs of modern production [2, p. 168–177]. Thus, a reasonably working man of the industrial era, whose image is formed by everyday routine labor, habitually ensuring his existence, in the age of information technology, when the character of intellectual labor acquires a creative connotation, turns into a person communicating with high creative potential [4, p. 118–124].
Meanwhile, there is no reason to believe that this quality will become ubiquitous for modern culture [13, p. 177–182]. For the majority of the population, the upcoming digital age is distinguished by a clear shift of emphasis from creative activity to reproductive activity, and in all sectors of human labor: from algorithm type of labour to science and art [9, p. 123–128]. They become the same production as material production.
A number of Western authors argue that the middle class in industrialized countries is eroding, and the trend – although remote – is such that in the future it will disappear almost completely. There will be a division of society into a narrow circle of intellectuals and all others who are able to perform only the simplest thought operations in a professional sense, which will be quite enough for a secure existence [1, p. 95–100]. Thus, if the middle class arose, alienating itself from large property and power, then in the future its disappearance will be initiated by alienation from creativity. The professional skills of many of its representatives are only partially in demand or not at all.
Accordingly, when large groups of the population are released from the labour market and a significant number of unemployed, people seek to fill the resulting employment vacuum through activity in the field of consumption. With what values does he claim in it? The former values of a rational social contract are proclaimed archaic by modern mass media, appealing not so much to logic as to emotions [11, p. 282–284].
Meanwhile, the spiritual sphere of society cannot remain strong under the prevailing conditions of abandonment of the opposites of progress and regression characteristic of classical culture, high and low, moral and immoral [12, p. 73–78]. A person who consumes, of course, needs control, which can be exercised either by a bureaucratic organization or by a self-organized society. The latter is certainly preferable, although much more difficult to achieve, since it implies the locality of management actions at different levels of society. But in the context of the collapse of network structures and the already entrenched mass culture by the middle of the 20th century, this can only be desired [6, p. 21–24].
Frankly commercial, postmodern culture proclaimed the time of fulfillment of desires. The sphere of the unconscious (the sphere of desire) is the sphere of freedom and creativity, and you should not strive to establish control over it [7, p. 6–9]. But this is precisely what the founder of psychoanalysis Z. Freud called for, although claiming at the same time that culture as a system of normative values leaves its deep traces on the human psyche.
Man became such not only due to the biological factor – the evolution of the brain, but also through such an element of sociality as a system of prohibitions (taboo). Permissiveness is also unacceptable for a person of modern culture, whose desires, at least to some extent, must be regulated by reason [8, p. 136–143].
It is to such cultural instability that a modern person is forced to adapt. In the world came disposability, modularity and continuous variability, accompanying a person throughout life. A person is required, first of all, to adapt to constant changes in society and culture [5, p. 21–24].
The tasks of such complexity, perhaps, have not yet faced humanity since its formation. After all, the inert majority, led by the creative minority, throughout the epochs exercised its choice of life styles, as well as values passively and non-independently.
At the beginning of the 20th century, N. A. Berdyaev justifiably argued that the masses do not like freedom and are afraid of it. Meanwhile, only intellectuals at all times dreamed of her. By the end of the second millennium, she was finally presented first of all, thanks to the media who did not expect such a gift to humanity. It was faced with freedom in the sphere of economics, politics, morality, art. For the first time in human history, culture as a way of producing life styles is formed by electronic media focused on maximum profits. Never before did society allow the commercial market to almost completely determine its values and role models.
At the same time, there is an extensive inclusion of various areas of culture, such as economics, politics, education, science, art, in the electronic space of the communicative Internet. The consequence of this, in turn, is the virtualization of both the processes of activity in these areas of culture and its products. As a result, the line between real and imaginary becomes increasingly mobile in the mind of the subject. The discovery of these processes in the modern socio-cultural reality makes obvious the current virtualization of culture [3, p. 80–85].
Moreover, it was in line with modern computer technologies and the capabilities provided by them that the term virtual reality received the largest application and wide resonance in modern culture. With the development of computer networks and the global spread of the Internet, this term began to be applied to the electronic communicative environment of interactions within a single conglomerate of networks.
Indeed, as M. McLuhan predicted back in the 60–70s. XX century, electronic means of communication become the nervous system of mankind. And if you turn to a specific consideration of various areas of culture, you can find that all of them are necessarily present in network virtual reality. In many ways, while maintaining traditional forms of industrial interaction, they bring them into interactive mode.
The virtualization of culture in the information technology aspect occurs as a kind of immersion in a single electronic virtual environment, which forms a new cultural reality, the beginning of which was the emergence of a personal computer and the formation of computer networks.
According to the well-known representative of postmodern thought J. Bodriyar, our life at present is a continuous circulation of signs. This process includes what happened in the world (signs of news), the impression that a person wants to make on others (signs of himself), the position of the person in society (signs of status and respect), the functional load of the infrastructure environment (architectural and interior signs), existing aesthetic preferences (posters, serving, advertising, design). However, if earlier signs, first of all, pointed to the reality hidden behind them, now there are signs that only simulate and, rather, hide the entity, rather than give a real idea of it
The structural unit that dominates modern culture, according to J. Bodriyar, is a simulacrum that replaces agonizing reality through simulation. As a result, with the accession of artificiality, the distinction between real and unreal, authentic and inauthentic, between true and false, disappears. And modern culture, thus, appears as a kind of virtual system, where the true sociocultural reality is replaced by simulation hyper reality [14, p. 10–16].
Sociocultural unification and primitivization almost universally convert culture to civilization [10, p. 87–93]. At the same time, cultures do not receive a impulse for self-disclosure, but are leveled, countries do not co-evolve, collaborating, but are unified. The question of the preservation of multiculturalism and their equality is therefore of great importance to mankind. Perhaps it is this element of the standard model of culture that is most in demand and marks the fact that each of the existing cultures is self-valuable, original and unique.
1. Бакланова О. А., Бакланов И. С., Ерохин А. М. Методологические конструкты исследования социальности современного общества // Историческая и социально-образовательная мысль. - 2016. - Т. 8. - № 3-1. - С. 95-100.
2. Бакланова О. А., Бакланов И. С. Современная российская социальность в контексте социального конструкционизма // Вопросы социальной теории. - 2015. - Т. 7. - № 1-2. - С. 168-177.
3. Болховской А. Л., Говердовская Е. В., Ивченко А. В. Образование в глобализирующемся мире: философский взгляд // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2013. - № 5. - С. 80-85.
4. Говердовская Е. В., Добычина Н. В. Взаимные референции между реальным и виртуальным пространством: новая коммуникационная среда // Социально-гуманитарные знания. - 2014. - № 7. - С. 118-124.
5. Гончаров В. Н. Информационная потребность в обществе: социокультурный аспект // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2012. - №6. - С. 21-24.
6. Гончаров В. Н. Информатизация образования общества: фундаментальный аспект исследования информатики // Фундаментальные исследования. - 2012. - № 3-1. - С. 21-24.
7. Daraganova Yu.S. Философия науки // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2011. - № 4. - С. 6-9.
8. Джиоева Д. А., Камалова О. Н. Значение сенсорных технологий в жизнедеятельности человека // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. 2011. - № 1. - С. 136-143.
9. Ерохин А. М. Научно-информационный аспект исследования социокультурного развития общества в области культуры и искусства // Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2015. - № 2. - С. 123-128.
10. Камалова О.Н., Карпун А.Б. Основные структурные элементы политической власти // Гуманитарные и социальные науки. - 2010. - № 1. - С. 87-93.
11. Лобейко Ю.А. Социальная активность личности в обществе: социально-педагогические аспекты формирования // European Social Science Journal. - 2014. - № 7-2 (46). - С. 282-284.
12. Лобейко Ю. А. Социально-психологические проблемы общения в контексте межличностных общественных отношений// Экономические и гуманитарные исследования регионов. - 2015. - №4. - С. 73-78.
13. Несмеянов Е. Е. Соотношение религии и науки в гуманитарном знании и современном обществе (по материалам монографии К.В. Воденко и А.А. Мекушкина «Христианство и наука: история и современность» (М., 2014)) // Гуманитарий Юга России. - 2015. - № 1. - С. 177-182.
14. Матяш Т. П., Матяш Д. В., Несмеянов Е. Е. «Науки о природе» и «науки о духе»: судьба старой дилеммы // Гуманитарные и социально-экономические науки. - 2015. - № 1 (80). - С. 10-16.