UDC: 304.9
https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2025-5-123


viewing

TRAPS OF ALIENATED INVOLVEMENT AND A WAY OUT OF THEM

M. A. Sokolov
Samara National Research University, Samara, Russia
e-mail: maksim.sokolov.prof@yandex.com

Abstract. The general aim of the research is to reveal the potential of philosophical reflection regarding urgent challenges posed by the digital reality in the most essential aspects of human existence. The specific target of the investigation is to identify those aspects of digital reality which simultaneously carry the threat of dehumanization and leave the possibility of inverting such a condition from a theoretical and a practical standpoint. The relevance of philosophical reflection is conditioned by the fact that, on the one hand, the digital world engages the human being, providing the coherence of existence that humans have always sought, and on the other hand, it prevents the active synthesis of ideas and concepts, as in the case of clip thinking. The ambivalence of such a phenomenon prompts us to use the dialectical method – following the spirit of Hegelian logic – to investigate such pairs of concepts as alienation-involvement, authenticity-unauthenticity, and coherence-kenosis in the context of digital situations. The instrumental principle of the work is to achieve an organic combination of an objective focus on the phenomena of the recent era together with a methodological reliance on the works and thoughts of classical scholars such as Kant, Hegel, and Heidegger. Based on this principle, the article initially builds on the four Kantian questions of philosophy in the context of the notion of connectedness and moves to an existential interpretation of connectedness as engagement in order to more precisely select concepts that reflect the essential challenges of digitalization, taking into account the balance of adequacy and universality. To this end, the relevance of Heidegger’s philosophy, his philosophical-etymological, phenomenological attitudes and existentials in the context of digitalization are explored and a dialectical development of his thought is proposed for modern socio-historical conditions. The concept of «alienated engagement» is constructed and its explicative potential in relation to digital reality is analyzed. This approach allows us to consider four types of interaction between humans and their digital environment (social media, AI dialogue systems, consciousness transplantation, the use of «big data») as traps of alienated engagement, transforming human cognition as well as the human faculties of explanation and understanding the world and oneself. The scientific novelty of the work consists in the fact that it has become possible to comprehensively diagnose the problematic features of the digital age from the philosophical and conceptual point of view, relying in the construction of concepts upon classical and general philosophical methods and principles, reflecting and preserving the continuity and contiguity of philosophical thought. The relevance of the current work is related to the fact that the work does not suggest solving the problem of digitalization by abstaining from the use of digital infrastructure: the work offers a path for a more thoughtful and active engagement of human beings in constructing digital reality. Such a suggestion delineates ways of overcoming the philosophical and scientific problem of asynchronicity between technological progress and human development. In conclusion, we propose a type of Hegelian way out of the path of alienation onto the path of comprehension for the 21st century human being: the scheme that is put forward, referring to a new formula for the synthesis of theory and practice in terms of general semiotics, contains implications for practical realization.

Key words: connectivity, alienation, involvement, digitalization, artificial intelligence, freedom, traps of alienated involvement.

Cite as: Sokolov, M. A. (2025) [Traps of alienated involvement and a way out of them]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. Vol. 5, pp. 123–132. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2025-5-123.


References

  1. Aristotle (2020) Metafizika [Metaphysics] (A. Kubitskiy, Trans.). Alphabet, 413 p.
  2. Bibliya [The Bible] (2009) OLMA Media Grupp, 1006 p. (In Russ.).
  3. Burkhanov, R. A., Nikulina, O. V. (2018) [The concept of existential in Martin Heidegger’s fundamental ontology]. Manuskript [Manuscript]. No. 5(91), pp. 65–68. – https://doi.org/10.30853/manuscript.2018-5.14. (In Russ.).
  4. Gasparov, B. M. (1996) Yazyk, pamyat’, obraz : Lingvistika yaz. sushchestvovaniya [Language, memory, image: Linguistics of lang. existence]. New literature review, 351 p.
  5. Hegel, G. W. F. (2000) Fenomenologiya dukha [Phenomenology of spirit]. Science, 495 p.
  6. Hegel, G. W. F. (2005) Nauka logiki = Wissenschaft der logik [Science of logic]. Science, 799 p. (In Russ.).
  7. Hegel, G. W. F. (1990) Filosofiya prava [Philosophy of right]. Thought, 524 p. (In Russ., transl. from German).
  8. Greenbaum, O. N. (2015) [A.S. Pushkin’s poem «I erected a monument to myself not made by hands» and its final lines in the light of harmony]. Philologia Classica [Philologia Classica]. Vol. 10, pp. 284–302. (In Russ.).
  9. Husserl, E. (2010) Kartezianskiye meditatsii [Cartesian meditations]. M. : Academic Project, 229 p. (In Russ., transl. from German).
  10. Dzhalal, Ale-Akhmada (2024) Garbzadegi [Westoxification]. Ad Marginem, 228 p. (In Russ.).
  11. Dilthey, W. (2004) Postroyeniye istoricheskogo mira v naukakh o dukhe [Construction of the historical world in the human sciences] M.: House of Intellectual Books, 2. Vol. 3: Construction of the Historical World in the Sciences of the Spirit. Vol. 3, edited by V. A. Kurenny, 418 p. (In Russ., transl. from German).
  12. Erakhtin, A. V. (2019) [Humanities, philosophy and clip thinking]. Vestnik IvGU. Seriya: Gumanitarnyye nauki [Ivanovo State University Bulletin. Series: Humanities]. Vol. 2 (19), pp. 35–41. (In Russ.).
  13. Zenkovsky, V. (2001) Istoriya russkoy filosofii [History of Russian Philosophy]. M. : Academic Project, Antiquity, 880 p. (In Russ.).
  14. Zinchenko, V. P. (2014) Posokh Osipa Mandel’shtama i Trubka Mamardashvili [Osip Mandelstam’s staff and Mamardashvili’s pipe: Towards the origins of organic psychology]. Direkt-Media, 445 p. (In Russ.).
  15. Imamov, M. M. (2023) [Using ChatGPT in the economy]. Diskussiya [Discussion]. Vol. 4 (119), pp. 62–72. – https://doi.org/10.46320/2077-7639-2023-4-119-62-72. (In Russ.).
  16. Kant, I. (2019) Kritika sposobnosti suzhdeniya [Critique of judgment]. St. Petersburg: Aphabet, 444 p. (In Russ., transl. from German).
  17. Kant, I. (2008) Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of pure reason]. Science, 606 p.
  18. Kant, I. (2006) Prolegomeny ko vsyakoy budushchey metafiziki, mogushchey poyavit’sya kak nauka = Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen metaphysik, die als wissenschaft wird auftreten können ; Religiya v predelakh tol’ko razuma = Die Religion innerhalb der grenzen der blossen vernunft ; Logika. Posobiye k lektsiyam = Logik. Ein handbuch zu vorlesungen [Prolegomena to any future metaphysics that may appear as a science; Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone; Logic: A manual for lectures]. Science, 549 p. (In Russ.).
  19. Kant, I. (1993) Immanuila Kanta prolegomeny ko vsyakoy budushchey metafizike, mogushchey vozniknut’ v smysle nauki [Immanuel Kant’s Prolegomena to any future metaphysics that may emerge in the sense of science]. M. : Progress: VIA, 236 p. (In Russ., transl. from German).
  20. Kacherauskas, T. (2004) [Paradigm of philosophical poetics and hermeneutic-phenomenological philosophy]. Vestnik TGPU [Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin]. Vol. 2 (39), pp. 122–126. (In Russ.).
  21. Konev, V. A. (2022) [Reflection on one of S.N. Bulgakov’s theses initiated by the idea of process logic]. Filosofskiy zhurnal [Philosophical Journal]. Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 69–77. – https://doi.org/10.21146/2072-0726-2022-15-4-69-77. (In Russ.).
  22. Levitsky, S. A. (1996) Ocherki po istorii russkoy filosofii. Ot istokov do XIX veka, tom pervyy [Essays on the history of Russian philosophy. From its origins to the 19th century, Volume One]. M. : Kanon, 494 p.
  23. Lepskiy, V. E. (2018) [Philosophical and methodological foundations of the formation of third-order cybernetics]. Filosofskiye nauki [Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences]. Vol. 10, pp. 7–36. – https://doi.org/10.30727/0235-1188-2018-10-7-36. (In Russ.).
  24. Nesterov, A. Yu. (2016) [Epistemological and ontological problems of the philosophy of technology: F. Dessauer’s «Fourth Kingdom»]. Ontologiya Proektirovaniya [Ontology of Design]. Vol. 6, No. 3 (21), pp. 377– 389. – https://doi.org/10.18287/2223-9537-2016-6-3-377-389. (In Russ.).
  25. Nesterov, A. Yu. (2023) [Ways of representing creativity and intuition in the theories of creativity of P.K. Engelmeier and F. Dessauer]. Naukovedcheskie Issledovaniya [Science Studies]. Vol. 4, pp. 110–123. – https://doi.org/10.31249/scis/2023.04.07. (In Russ.).
  26. Pavlenko, A. N. (2003) [Martin Heidegger: The essence of modern technology]. Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Filosofiya [RUDN Journal of Philosophy]. Vol. 1, pp. 67–75. (In Russ.).
  27. Rozin, V. M. (2022) [A. P. Ogurtsov on the humanitarian-anthropological turn]. Filosofskaya Mysl’ [Philosophical Thought]. Vol. 5, pp. 22–30. – https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-8728.2022.5.38137. (In Russ.).
  28. Smirnov, A. (2015) [Substantial and processual worldview (on the question of the typology of cultures and worldviews)]. Filosofskaya Antropologiya [Philosophical Anthropology]. Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 62–81. (In Russ.).
  29. Smirnov, A. V. (2021) Logika smysla kak filosofiya soznaniya. Priglashenie k razmyshleniyu [The logic of meaning as the philosophy of consciousness. Invitation to reflection]. M. : YASK, 445 p.
  30. Heidegger, M. (1993) Vremya i bytie [Time and Being]. Moscow: Republic, 445 p.
  31. Heidegger, M. (2017) O poetah i poezii. Gyol’derlin, Ril’ke, Trakl’ [On poets and poetry. Hölderlin, Rilke, Trakl]. Moscow: Water-carrier, 238 p.
  32. Heidegger, M. (2013) Osnovnye ponyatiya metafiziki [Basic concepts of metaphysics]. Saint Petersburg: Vladimir Dal’, 590 p. (In Russ., transl. from German).
  33. Tsukanov, E. A. (2021) [A world split in two: for whom does the virtual bell toll?]. Nauka. Iskusstvo. Kul’tura [Science. Art. Culture]. Vol. 2 (30), pp. 161–167. (In Russ.).
  34. Shadrikov, V. D. (2004) [On psychological constructs and the sequence of their study in the training of psychologists]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal VShE [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 37–43. (In Russ.).
  35. Shaforostov, A. I. (2023) [History of fundamental ideas: determinism]. Izvestiya Laboratorii Drevnikh Tekhnologii [News of the Laboratory of Ancient Technologies]. Vol. 19, No. 2 (47), pp. 91–102. – https://doi.org/10.21285/2415-8739-2023-2-91-102. (In Russ.).
  36. Shilkina, I. S. (2014) [The doctrine of the soul in the framework of the philosophical and psychological views of Aristotle]. Vestnik Kostromskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriya: Pedagogika. Psikhologiya. Sotsiokinetika [Vestnik of Kostroma State University. Series: Pedagogy. Psychology. Sociokinetics]. Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 61–64. (In Russ.).
  37. Bertinetto, A., et al. (2020) Kant’s concept of power of judgment and the logic of artistic improvisation. In Kant’s Aesthetics in XX. Century. De Gruyter, рр. 315–337. (In Eng.).
  38. Chomsky, N. (1981) On cognitive capacity. In The Language and Thought Series. Harvard University Press, рр. 305–323. (In Eng.).
  39. Johansson, A., et al. (2018) «Shut up and calculate»: The available discursive positions in quantum physics courses. Cultural Studies of Science Education, Vol. 13, pp. 205–226. (In Eng.).