UDC: 130.2:004.8
https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2026-4-132


viewing

THE CONCEPT OF «POST-DIGITAL COMPLEXITY» AND ITS ANTHROPOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS

P. V. Opolev
Omsk State Technical University, Omsk, Russia
e-mail: pvo-sinergetica@rambler.ru

Abstract. Digital reality is currently ceasing to be a local technological environment, becoming a significant component of physical and sociocultural interactions and acquiring the status of a mode of human existence. Digitalization processes are facilitating the emergence of new technologies and the interweaving of digital, physical, social, and mental realities. The boundaries between these phenomena are blurring, giving rise to anthropological consequences. This circumstance requires a relevant conceptual framework that captures the hybrid nature of contemporary reality, which determines the relevance of turning to the concept of «post-digital complexity». The aim of this article is to substantiate the heuristic potential of the concept of «post-digital complexity», outline its conceptual features, and document the anthropological consequences (redefinition of subjectivity, the crisis of analog boundaries, distributed and asymmetric human agency) of the recognition of this phenomenon. The methodological tools of the work include historical and philosophical reconstruction, an interdisciplinary approach, and a dialectical method. This paper presents a conceptualization of the concept of «post-digital complexity», highlighting its key properties (opacity, nonlinearity, emergence, and dynamic stability). The author proposes to consider the concept of «post-digital complexity» as an ontological and value-laden characteristic of contemporary human existence. Post-digital complexity is defined as a state of hyper-connectedness and interpenetration, in which differentiation between the natural and artificial, the real and the virtual, loses explanatory power. The study demonstrates the relevance of this concept to post-humanist discourse and documents the epistemological (the impossibility of an external observational position), ethical (the value-laden nature of algorithms), and anthropological implications of recognizing post-digital complexity. The scientific novelty of this paper lies in its substantiation of post-digital complexity not as a property of individual technical systems, but as a characteristic of contemporary human existence. Post-digital complexity captures the asymmetry and distributed agency of modern humans and non-human actors (algorithms, interfaces, digital platforms). The practical significance of this work lies in the fact that the identified properties and methodological principles of post-digital complexity research (the rejection of an external observational stance and the inadequacy of analytical reduction) can be applied to the analysis of socio-cultural practices generated by post-digital culture, as well as to the development of educational and ethical strategies relevant to contemporary processes.

Key words: posthumanism, post-digital culture, post-digital complexity, distributed agency, hyperconnectivity, digitalization, emergence.

Cite as: Opolev, P. V. (2026) [The concept of «post-digital complexity» and its anthropological implications]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. Vol. 4, pp. 132–144. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077- 7175-2026-4-132.


References

  1. Arshinov, V. I. (2023) [Perspectives of Anthropocentrism in the Optics of the Digital Age]. Voprosy Filosofii [Questions of Philosophy]. Vol. 6, pp. 79–82. – https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-6-79-82. (In Russ.).
  2. Arshinov, V. I., Svirskiy, Ya. I. (2023) [Relational-Transductive Thinking as an Aspect of Thinking-Together-with-Complexity: An Experience of Cognitive Immersion]. Nauka i chelovek v epokhu tsivilizatsionnogo makrosdviga [Science and Man in the Era of Civilizational Macroshift]. Moscow: Institute of General Humanitarian Research, pp. 158–266. – https://doi.org/10.29039/via-jis-158-266. (In Russ.).
  3. Braidotti, R. (2021) Postchelovek [The Posthuman]. Moscow: Gaidar Institute Press, 408 p. (In Russ., transl. from Engl.).
  4. Budanov, V. G. (2023) [Evolution of Anthropological Profiles, Risks and Scenarios of Civilizational Transit]. Voprosy Filosofii [Questions of Philosophy]. Vol. 6, pp. 75–78. – https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-6-75-78. (In Russ.).
  5. Deleuze, G., Guattari, F. (2010) Tysyacha plato: Kapitalizm i shizofreniya [A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia]. Ekaterinburg: U-Factoriya; Moscow: Astrel, 895 p. (In Russ., transl. from French).
  6. Denikin, A. A. (2017) [«Post-Digital Aesthetics» in Artistic Practices of Digital Art]. Nauka televideniya [Science of Television]. Vol. 13. No. 2, pp. 106–123. (In Russ.).
  7. Descola, Ph. (2012) Po tu storonu prirody i kul’tury [Beyond Nature and Culture]. Moscow: New Literary Review, 580 p. (In Russ., transl. from French).
  8. Elkina, E. E. (2018) [Digital Culture as a Field of Interdisciplinary Research: Methodological Approaches and Development Trends]. International Journal of Open Information Technologies. Vol. 6. No. 12, pp. 67–78. (In Russ.).
  9. Istomina, O. B. (2024) [Biosocial Transformations of Postdigital Existence]. Vestnik Buryatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Buryat State University]. Vol. 4, pp. 48–55. – https://doi.org/10.18101/1994-0866-2024-4-48-55. (In Russ.).
  10. Castells, M. (2004) Galaktika Internet: razmyshleniya ob Internete, biznese i obshchestve [The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society]. Ekaterinburg: U-Factoriya, 328 p. (In Russ., transl. from Engl.).
  11. Castells, M. (2000) Informatsionnaya epokha: ekonomika, obshchestvo i kul’tura [The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture]. Moscow: HSE University, 608 p. (In Russ., transl. from Engl.).
  12. Castro, E. V. (2017) Kannibal’skie metafiziki: rubezhi poststrukturnoy antropologii [Cannibal Metaphysics: For a Post-structural Anthropology]. Kralechkin. Moscow: Ad Marginem, 200 p. (In Russ., transl. from Portug.).
  13. Kohn, E. (2018) Kak myslyat lesa: k antropologii po tu storonu cheloveka [How Forests Think: Toward an Anthropology Beyond the Human]. Moscow: Ad Marginem, 344 p. (In Russ., transl. from Engl.).
  14. Latour, B. (2006) Novogo vremeni ne bylo. Esse po simmetrichnoy antropologii [We Have Never Been Modern. Essays in Symmetrical Anthropology]. St. Petersburg: European University at St. Petersburg Press, 240 p.
  15. Lévi-Strauss, C. (2008) Totemizm segodnya. Nepriruchennaya mysl’ [Totemism Today. The Untamed Mind]. Moscow: Academic Project, 520 p. (In Russ., transl. from Engl.).
  16. Maturana, H., Varela, F. (2019) Drevo poznaniya: Biologicheskie korni chelovecheskogo ponimaniya [The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding]. Moscow: URSS; LENAND, 320 p. (In Russ., transl. from Engl.).
  17. Melikyan, M. A., Smirnov, G. S. (2020) [Noospheric Character: Conceptual Logic of Anthropological Transitivity]. Vestnik Ivanovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki [Bulletin of Ivanovo State University. Series: Humanities]. Vol. 1, pp. 109–115. (In Russ.).
  18. Nazarov, Yu. V. (2023) [Art of the Postdigital Era]. Akademicheskiy vestnik UralNIIproekt RAASN [Academic Bulletin UralNIIproekt RAACS]. Vol. 1 (56), pp. 110–113. – https://doi.org/10.25628/UNIIP.2023.56.1.019. (In Russ.).
  19. Noë, A. (2023) Vsyo perepleteno. Kak iskusstvo i filosofiya delayut nas takimi, kakie my est’ [Strange Tools: Art and Human Nature]. Transl. from English by V. V. Fedyushin. Moscow: AST Publishing House, 320 p. (In Russ.).
  20. Opolev, P. V. (2023) [Problems of Understanding Complexity in Russian and Foreign Philosophy]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya [Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science]. Vol. 71, pp. 128–137. – https://doi.org/10.17223/1998863X/71/13. (In Russ.).
  21. Opolev, P. V. (2019) [Complexity in the Historical and Philosophical Tradition: An Experience of Understanding]. Voprosy Filosofii [Questions of Philosophy]. Vol. 5, pp. 128–137. – https://doi.org/10.31857/S004287440005063-4. (In Russ.).
  22. Svirskiy, Ya. I. (2023) [Digitalization and Anthropocentrism]. Voprosy Filosofii [Questions of Philosophy]. Vol. 6, pp. 83–86. – https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-6-83-86. (In Russ.).
  23. Ferrando, F. (2022) Filosofskiy postgumanizm [Philosophical Posthumanism]. Moscow: HSE University Press, 360 p (In Russ., transl. from Engl.).
  24. Haraway, D. (2005) [A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the 1980s]. Gendernaya teoriya i iskusstvo. Antologiya: 1970–2000 [Gender Theory and Art. Anthology: 1970–2000]. ed. by C. Deepwell, L. Bredikhina. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 128 p. (In Russ.).
  25. Andersen, C. U., Cox, G., Papadopoulos, G. (2014) Postdigital Research. A Peer-Reviewed Journal About. Vol. 3. No. 1, pp. 4–7. – https://doi.org/10.7146/aprja.v3i1.116067. (In Eng.).
  26. Campbell, C., Hoeller, T. (2025) Postdigital Complexity Science. Encyclopedia of Postdigital Science and Education, pp. 1–9. – https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35469-4_94-1. (In Eng.).
  27. Hayles, N. K. (1999) How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 350 p. (In Eng.).
  28. Jandrić, P., et al. (2018) Postdigital science and education. Educational Philosophy and Theory. Vol. 50. No. 10, pp. 893–899. – https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2018.1454000. (In Eng.).
  29. Mitchell, M. (2009) Complexity: A Guided Tour. New York, Oxford University Press, 368 p. (In Eng.).
  30. Pepperell, R., Punt, M. (2000) The postdigital membrane: imagination, technology and desire. Bristol: Intellect, 181 p. (In Eng.).
  31. Peters, M. A., Besley, T. (2019) Critical Philosophy of the Postdigital. Postdigital Science and Education. Vol. 1. No. 1, pp. 29–42. – https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-018-0004-9. (In Eng.).
  32. Pond, P. (2020) Complexity, Digital Media and Post Truth Politics: A Theory of Interactive Systems. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 255 p. – https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44537-9. (In Eng.).

In order for us to provide you with high-quality services, we use cookies that are stored on your computer (location information; ip-address; type, language, OS and browser version; device type and screen resolution; source from which you came to site the user; what pages the user opens and what buttons the user clicks; the same information is used to process statistical data on the use of the site through the Yandex.Metrika Internet service). By clicking the "I agree" button, you confirm that you are informed about the use of cookies on our website. You can disable cookies in your browser settings.