Transversal subjectivity in the dimensions of virtual reality

author: Olena Yatsenko

Urgency of the research problem. The problem of consciousness, soul, individuality and personality, its ways of life and interaction with the world and its own kind have been the main research focus of worldview research throughout history. The information society is characterized by the total expansion of the virtual one into the socio-cultural dynamics of modernity, which has a direct impact on the format of formation and definition of subjectivity. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider the need to determine the specifics of the impact that the virtual has on the subjectivity, models of its identification and interaction with the Other as an urgent issue of modern humanities.

Target setting. The problem of essential change in the constants of determination of subjectivity under the influence of the widespread use of virtual reality technologies to the course of daily practices of the modern individual.

Actual scientific research and issues analysis. Phenomenological concepts presented in the works of E. Husserl, J.-P. Sartre and M. Heidegger, note temporality as a fundamental attribute of subjectivity. Authors of the ontology of the first person, D. Dennett, J. Searle, and S. Chavier, determine the procedures for constituting meaning by the constant formation of subjectivity. This position is closely correlated with the hermeneutic theories of subjectivity presented in the works of W. Dilthey, P. Reeker and G. Gadamer. J. McRoberts, O. Elkhova, S. Horujy, S. Turkle, M. Savin-Baden and L. Falconer, P. H. Cheong and K. Gray, D. Doyle and T. Kim and others study the problem of influence virtual reality technologies on current configurations of subjectivity.

The research objective. To analyze the current problem field of the specifics of the influence of the virtual space on the modern image of subjectivity and strategies of its interaction in the socio-cultural space.

The statement of basic material. The modern development of technologies, both mass media and virtual reality, declare the mobility of the boundaries of private and public life. This fact proves the existence of a significant number of social networks, branding and image technologies, biometrics, and profiling of employees of high-tech corporations, big data technologies, cookies, and the Social Credit System in China. The scale of this phenomenon is explained by the collision of two trends which are oriented against each other: on the one hand, subjectivity seeks to maximize expression and self-presentation in cyberspace, and on the other hand, stakeholders, guided by economic, political, religious, and other motives use published information for pragmatic influence on subjectivity, first of all, manipulative one. The strategy of the morality of the virtual world provides a wide range of assessments: from identification with the Stoic principles of ataraxia and autarky to the accusations of irresponsibility, impersonality and escapism. Therefore, we consider it appropriate to define the modern type of actualization and representation of subjectivity as transversal, i. e. complex, contradictory, integrative and motivated by certain intentions and aspirations of the person.

Conclusions. Subjectivity in cyberspace is represented as an avatar, by praxis of the mythopoetic tradition of self-identification. Given this playful and conditional nature of the representation of subjectivity, there is a mobility of the boundaries of private and public in modern culture, or in the accustoming of the world to the social content of subjectivity. That is the kind of specific features of modern subjectivity give grounds to affirm its transversal character, that is, the situational integrity of a set of individual factors in accordance with the pragmatics of thought and action.

Keywords: subjectivity, sociality, culture, virtual, virtual reality.

 

References:

  1. Dacyuk, S 1997. Nou-hau virtualnyh tehnologij (Know-how of virtual technologies). Available from: <http://www.zhurnal.ru/5/vir_tech.htm>. [25 December 2020].
  2. Dekomb, V 2011. Dopolnenie k subektu: issledovanie fenomena dejstviya ot sobstvennogo lica (Addition to the subject: a study of the phenomenon of action on one's own behalf), Moskva: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 576 s.
  3. Elhova, OI 2011. Ontologiya virtualnoj realnosti (Ontology of virtual realit), Ufa: RIC BashGU, 228 s.
  4. Nosov, NA 1999. ʻVirtualnaya realnost (Virtual reality)ʼ, Voprosy filosofii, № 10, c. 152–164.
  5. Sartr, Zh.-P 2004. Bytie i nichto: Opyt fenomenologicheskoj ontologii (Being and Nothing: An Experience of Phenomenological Ontology), per. s fr., predisl., primech. V. I. Kolyadko, Moskva: Respublika, 639 s.
  6. Hajdegger, M 2015. Bytie i vremya (Being and Time), per. s nem. V. V. Bibihin, Moskva: proekt, 447 s.
  7. Bivins, Thomas H & Newton, Julianne H 2003. ʻThe Real, the Virtual, and the Moral: Ethics at the Intersection of Consciousnessʼ, Journal of Mass Media Ethics. Exploring Questions of Media Morality,. Volume 18, Issue 3-4, p. 213-229. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/08900523.2003.9679665>. [25 December 2020].
  8. Cheong, PH & Gray, Kishonna 2011. ʻMediated Intercultural Dialectics: Identity Perceptions and Performances in Virtual Worldsʼ, Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, Volume 4, Issue 4, p. 265-271. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/17513057.2011.598047>. [25 December 2020].
  9. Denegri, Knott Janice & Molesworth, Mike 2010. ʻConcepts and practices of digital virtual consumptionʼ, Consumption Markets & Culture, Volume 13, Issue 2, p. 109-132. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/10253860903562130>. [25 December 2020].
  10. Doyle, D & Kim, T 2007. ʻEmbodied narrative: The virtual nomad and the meta dreamerʼ, International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media, Volume 3, Issue 2-3, p. 209-222.
  11. Fenech, G 2017. ʻIntermezzo: play trajectories in mixed reality worldsʼ, Journal for Cultural Research, Volume 21, Issue 4: Critical Distance, p. 383-393. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/14797585.2017.1370489>. [25 December 2020].
  12. Gallese, V & Metzinger, Th 2003. ʻMotor ontology: the representational reality of goals, actions and selvesʼ, Philosophical Psychology, Volume 16, Issue 3, p. 365-388. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/0951508032000121760>. [25 December 2020].
  13. Hassan, I 2003. ʻBeyond postmodernism. Angelakiʼ, Journal of the Theoretical Humanities,. Volume 8, Issue 1, p. 3-11. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/09697250301198>. [25 December 2020].
  14. Horujy, Sergey S 2019. ʻThe Posthuman and the Virtual Man in Their Modes of Socializationʼ, Russian Studies in Philosophy, Volume 57, Issue 1: Contemporary Russian Philosophers: Sergey S. Horujy, р. 97-115. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/10611967.2019.1545993>. [25 December 2020].
  15. McRoberts, Jamie 2018. ʻAre we there yet? Media content and sense of presence in non-fiction virtual realityʼ, Studies in Documentary Film, Volume 12, Issue 2: Virtually Real: Exploring VR Documentary, р. 101-118. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/17503280.2017.1344924>. [25 December 2020].
  16. Savin-Baden, M & Falconer, L 2016. ʻLearning at the interstices; locating practical philosophies for understanding physical/virtual inter-spacesʼ, Interactive Learning Environments, Volume 24, Issue 5: TEL - the crisis and the response, p. 991-1003. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1128212>. [25 December 2020].
  17. Turkle, Sherry 1994. ʻConstructions and reconstructions of self in virtual reality: Playing in the MUDsʼ, Mind, Culture, and Activity, Volume 1, Issue 3. Pages 158-167. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039409524667>. [25 December 2020].
  18. Tyminski, R 2018. ʻAddiction to cyberspace: virtual reality gives analysts pause for the modern psycheʼ, International Journal of Jungian Studies, Volume 10, Issue 2, p. 91-102. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1080/19409052.2017.1390483>. [25 December 2020].
  19. Wennberg, T 2000. ʻVirtual life: self and identity redefined in the new media ageʼ, Digital Creativity, Volume 11. Issue 2, p. 65-74. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1076/1462-6268(200005)11:2;1-R;FT065>. [25 December 2020].
  20. Werbart, A 2014. ʻEmile, or on Devastation: When Virtual Boundlessness Meets Inner Emptinessʼ, The Psychoanalytic Quarterly, Volume 83, Issue 1, p. 71-96. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2167-4086.2014.00077.x>. [25 December 2020].
  21. Zahavi, D 2006. Subjectivity and Selfhood: Investigating the First-Person Perspective, , 266 р.