UDC

1(091)

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V227

Authors

Ekaterina S. Lebed’
Surgut State University; prosp. Lenina 1, Surgut, 628412, Russian Federation; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4241-8395 e-mail: kkovaleva2@yandex.ru

Abstract

In this article, on the basis of the philosophical method of Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), an attempt is made to show how the distance separating the world of philosophy from the world of high technology can be overcome. The purpose of the study is to extrapolate Heidegger’s way of thinking onto the modern processes of technologization and digitalization as well as to demonstrate how Heideggerian philosophy can be used in practice today. Thus, we need to take a step back and reconsider Heidegger’s attempts to develop a new way of questioning and thinking. This article is relevant due to the increasing technologization and digitalization of all spheres of human life, including education, culture and philosophy. To identify the weaknesses and shortcomings of the concept of digitalization, it is contrasted with the Heideggerian critique of technological thinking in general and its digital component in particular. The paper demonstrates the way to bridge the gap between technology and the true being of humans. Further, the article considers the evolution of Heidegger’s analysis and attitude to technology during the development of his philosophical thought: from analysing Dasein (human existence as being) in the early period to shifting the focus to language, poetry and language of poets in the later period. In Heidegger’s philosophy, such poetry is the poetry of Friedrich Hölderlin (1770–1843). The concept of Machenschaft (machination) as a justification of the manufacturability of the processes of human life is considered. The main signs of machination are presented: transformation of the social sphere into a huge mechanism – “machine” – controlled by technology; digitalization as an equalization of individuals; recognition of the omnipotence of technologies implemented as “programmes of action”. In the era of machination, a person cannot yet recognize himself as a machine and considers himself a living being with his own experiences. It is concluded that philosophy should take on a leading role in determining and critically evaluating the new human worldview on a global scale.

Keywords

philosophy of technology, human existence, M. Heidegger, history of philosophy, digitalization, machination, manufacturability

References

1. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 474 Dated 21 July 2020 “On the National Development Goals of the Russian Federation for the Period up to 2030”. Accessed from Consultant Plus Law Assistance System (in Russ.).

2. Mikhaylovskiy A.V., Pilyavskiy N.A. Martin Khaydegger i budushchee: pochemu u tekhniki ne tekhnicheskaya sushchnost’ i zachem nuzhna poeziya v XXI veke? [Martin Heidegger and the Future: Why Does Technology Have No Technical Essence and Why We Need Poetry in the 21st Century?]. Romanenko Yu.M. (ed.). M. Khaydegger i russkaya filosofskaya mysl’ [Martin Heidegger and Russian Philosophical Thought]. St. Petersburg, 2021, pp. 356–378.

3. Dreyfus H. Khaydegger o vzaimosvyazi nigilizma, iskusstva, tekhniki i politiki [Heidegger on the Connection Between Nihilism, Art, Technology, and Politics]. Dorofeev D.Yu. (comp.). Martin Heidegger. St. Petersburg, 2004, pp. 508–541.

4. Khesle V. Filosofiya tekhniki M. Khaydeggera [M. Heidegger’s Philosophy of Technology]. Filosofiya Martina Khaydeggera i sovremennost’ [Martin Heidegger’s Philosophy and Modernity]. Moscow, 1991, pp. 138–153.

5. Luckner A. Heidegger und das Denken der Technik. Bielefeld, 2008. 150 p.

6. Zimmerman M.E. Heidegger’s Confrontation with Modernity: Technology, Politics, and Art. Bloomington, 1990. 336 p.

7. Pertsev A.V., Tsiplakova Yu.V. Khaydegger I i Khaydegger II: o mikroparadigmakh v istoriko-filosofskoy nauke [Heidegger I and Heidegger II: On Micro-Paradigms in Historical and Philosophical Science]. Manuskript, 2020, vol. 13, no. 12, pp. 162–169. DOI: 10.30853/mns200569

8. Heidegger M. Bytie i vremya [Being and Time]. Kharkiv, 2003. 503 p.

9. Heidegger M. Osnovnye problemy fenomenologii [Key Problems of Phenomenology]. St. Petersburg, 2001. 446 p.

10. Zwart H. Coming to Terms with Technoscience: The Heideggerian Way. Hum. Stud., 2020, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 385–408. DOI: 10.1007/s10746-020-09554-3

11. Guardini R. Hölderlin: Weltbild und Frömmigkeit. Leipzig, 1939. 564 p. (Russ. ed.: Gvardini R. Gel’derlin. Kartina mira i bogovdokhnovlennost’. St. Petersburg, 2015. 490 p.).

12. Heidegger M. Gesamtausgabe. Vol. 66: Besinnung (1938–1939). Frankfurt am Main, 1997. 437 p.

13. Pertsev A.V., Kovaleva E.S. Istoriya filosofii kak nauka i diagnostika sovremennosti (ot makhinativnosti do pank-kinizma) [History of Philosophy as a Science and as a Diagnostics of Modernity (from Machination to Punk-Cynicism)]. Filosofiya segodnya: tsennosti, perspektivy, smysly [Philosophy Today: Values, Prospects, Meanings]. Yekaterinburg, 2021, pp. 33–58.

14. Mikhaylovsky A.V. Heidegger’s Early Theory of Technology: Between Cultural Criticism and Heroic Realism. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Ser.: Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Pedagogika, 2016, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 387–393 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.18500/1819-7671-2016-16-4-387-393

15. Pertsev A.V., Kovaleva E.S. “Spiritual Situation of Time” as a Historical and Philosophical Diagnosis of the Era. Intellect. Innov. Invest., 2021, vol. 3, рр. 117–129 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.25198/2077-7175-2021-3-117