UDC

101.1:316

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V295

Authors

Andrey L. Kraynov
Saratov State University of Genetics, Biotechnology and Engineering named after N.I. Vavilov; prosp. im. Petra Stolypina 4, str. 3, Saratov, 410012, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2129-0065 e-mail: krainoval@sgau.ru

Abstract

Digitalization, which has penetrated all spheres of human activity, is purposefully creating a digital human being, who will be existing simultaneously and inseparably in the ordinary and digital worlds with the help of augmented and virtual reality technologies. Digital human beings can have a chip implanted in the brain to be in constant communication with the digital environment; moreover, they can exist in a completely digitized form in a digital universe. The key issue that requires philosophical analysis is the expediency of creating a digital human being. The main question to be answered is “When should we stop?”. Undoubtedly, digitalization is a boon for the development of society, and many of its processes are firmly rooted in social practice. Is it necessary to change the status of this process from instrumental (auxiliary) to ontological (essential)? Experiments on the digitization of human consciousness, creation of a metauniverse, and such projects as Neuronet and University 4.0, as well as Industry 4.0 actively contribute to changing the status of digital technologies from human assistant to essential component of humans. At the stage of developing a digital model of society, it is still difficult to predict all its negative aspects. However, based on the existing risks in the field of digitalization, it can be assumed that this innovation initially poses a threat to humanity. The most likely risks that digital humans will face include depersonalization and high exposure to suggestion as well as loss of personal space and economic independence. In this regard, one should be critical of total digitalization and stop its advancement in time.

Keywords

digitalization, digital human being, digital person, digital culture, digital society, digital risks, digital security

References

1. Roessler B. Mark of the Human: On the Concept of the Digital Human Being. EDPL, 2021, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 157–160. DOI: 10.21552/edpl/2021/2/5
2. Nekrasov A.S., Nekrasov S.I., Nekrasova N.A., Klepatskiy V.V. Ot “cheloveka informatsionnogo” k “cheloveku tsifrovomu” [From the “Information Man” to the “Digital Man”]. Vestnik Universiteta Rossiyskoy akademii obrazovaniya, 2019, no. 3, pp. 4–10.
3. Clark A.C.R. Library as Place: Being Human in a Digital World. Christ. Libr., 2014, vol. 57, no. 1. Art. no. 7. DOI: 10.55221/2572-7478.1438
4. Bikmullin A. Tsifrovaya ekonomika kak instrument sotsial’nogo razvitiya rossiyskogo obshchestva [Digital Economy as a Tool for the Social Development of Russian Society]. Regional’nyy ekonomicheskiy zhurnal, 2018, no. 3-4, pp. 52–54.
5. Kultaieva M. Homo Digitalis, Digital Culture and Digital Education: Explorations of Philosophical Anthropology and of Philosophy of Education. Philos. Educ., 2020, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 8–36. DOI: 10.31874/2309-1606-2020-26-1-1
6. Spirova E.M. Apofeoz bezlichnogo v tsifrovoy real’nosti [Apotheosis of the Impersonal in Digital Reality]. Vestnik Vyatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2020, no. 2, pp. 7–16. DOI: 10.25730/VSU.7606.20.019
7. Zakharov M.Yu., Starovoytova I.E., Shishkova A.V. Digital Culture – a Historical Stage in the Development of the Information Culture of Society. Vestnik universiteta, 2020, no. 5, pp. 200–205 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.26425/1816-4277-2020-5-200-205
8. Naumenko T.V., Sekretareva K.N. Kitayskaya sistema sotsial’nogo kredita: antiutopiya ili faktor obshchestvennogo blagopoluchiya? [China’s Social Credit System: Dystopia or Public Welfare Factor?]. Zhurnal issledovaniy sotsial’noy politiki, 2022, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 419–432. DOI: 10.17323/727-0634-2022-20-3-419-432
9. Listvina EV. Digital Society: A Sociocultural Analysis of the Digital Footprint. Aspirantskiy vestnik Povolzh’ya, 2020, no. 7-8, pp. 14-18 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17816/2072-2354.2020.20.4.14-18
10. Arpent’eva M.R. Tsifrovizatsiya sistemy obrazovaniya: opasnyy shag k “sisteme sotsial’nogo kredita” [Digitalization of the Educational System: A Dangerous Step Towards a Social Credit System]. Modernizatsiya rossiyskogo obshchestva: strategii upravleniya, voprosy pravoprimeneniya i podgotovki kadrov [Modernization of Russian Society: Management Strategies, Issues of Law Enforcement and Personnel Training]. Taganrog, 2019, pp. 16-21.
11. Fadeev A.S., Zmeev O.A., Gazizov T.T. Model’ universiteta 4.0 [University Model 4.0]. Pedagog. Rev., 2020, no. 2, pp. 172-178. DOI: 10.23951/2307-6127-2020-2-172-178
12. Dyatlov S.A. Iskusstvennyy intellekt kak institut razvitiya tsifrovoy neyro-setevoy ekonomiki [Artificial Intelligence as an Institute for the Development of the Digital Neural Network Economy]. Izvestiya Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta, 2021, no. 2, pp. 25-29.
13. Yudina T.N. Ot “tsifrovoy ekonomiki” k “koronaekonomike” v epokhu global’noy turbulentnosti (kak real’nyy mir-khozyaystvo prevrashchayut v virtual’nyy, a chelovechestvo pereformatiruyut) [From the “Digital Economy” to the “Corona Economy” in an Era of Global Turbulence (How the Real World Is Turned into Virtual and Humanity Is Reformatted)]. Teoreticheskaya ekonomika, 2020, no. 5, pp. 68-79.