UDC: 165.12.
https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2025-6-164


viewing

SOCIAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF TRADITIONS AND INNOVATIONS INFLUENCING THE SUBJECTIVITY OF A SCIENTIST

E. V. Pleshachkov
Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, Saint-Petersburg, Russia
e-mail: pleshachkov@gmail.com

Abstract. The relevance of the study is determined by the profound transformation of science in the context of digitalization, total mediatization, and the proliferation of generative artificial intelligence technologies. The research aim is to study the mechanisms of the influence of mediatization and AI technologies on the key components of the formation of a scientist’s subjectivity. To achieve this aim, the methods of systems analysis, comparative analysis, and historicism are employed. These allow for the study of the evolution of conceptions of subjectivity from Antiquity to the present day and to determine the place and role of digital technologies in shaping the scientist’s subjectivity in the 21st century. The article notes the role of social, political, and economic factors in the formation of scientific subjectivity throughout the history of human civilization. The author concludes that in the context of crises of identity and subjectivity, digital technologies amplify the influence of external factors (such as altmetrics and platform logic) on the formation of a scientist’s subjectivity. The crisis of scientific subjectivity in the 21st century is not merely another stage of historical transformation but a qualitatively new condition. Its key distinguishing feature is the emergence of agents lacking human nature (AI, algorithms) that claim the role of autonomous subjects in science. If postmodernism declared the «death of the author», modernity is faced with the risk of the «death of the researcher» as such, which constitutes one of the global challenges for the scientific community. In contrast to the instrumental role of technology in classical epistemology, the qualitative distinction of the digital age is the transformation of technologies into active actors (agents) of the cognitive process, which calls into question the traditional configurations of scientific subjectivity. The scientific novelty of the work lies in defining mediatization as a fundamental mechanism for the transformation of a scientist’s subjectivity. By examining the mechanisms of how AI technologies influence the formation of new cognitive maps of reality, the author draws parallels with earlier research on the influence of information on the construction of semantic structures that predated the era of pervasive algorithmization. However, the qualitative difference of contemporary mediatization processes lies in the hyper-personalized distribution of meanings, which generates the phenomenon of an illusory free choice for the subject.

The author proposes a hypothesis suggesting that the influence of digital technologies should be considered within the context of «post-subjective subjectivity of the scientist». The research prospects are associated with the analysis of specific case studies of scientist-AI interaction and the development of criteria for preserving the human dimension in science.

Key words: scientist’s subjectivity, digital communication, mediatization, digitalization, artificial intelligence, transformation of social practices.

Cite as: Pleshachkov, E. V. (2025) [Social and philosophical analysis of traditions and innovations influencing the subjectivity of a scientist]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. Vol. 6, pp. 164–175. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2025-6-164.


References

  1. Aristotle (1983) Sochineniya: V 4 t. [Works: In 4 volumes]. Vol. 4. Moscow: «Thought», 830 p. (In Russ., transl. from Ancient Greek).
  2. Barth, R. (1994) Izbrannyye raboty: Semiotika. Poetika [Selected works: Semiotics. Poetics]. Moscow: Progress: Univers, 615 p. (In Russ., transl. from French).
  3. Berger, P., Luckmann, T. (1995) Sotsial’noye konstruirovaniye real’nosti: traktat po sotsiologii znaniya [The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise on the Sociology of Knowledge]. Moscow: Medium, 322 p.
  4. Descartes, R. (1989) Pervonachala filosofii [Principles of Philosophy]. Descartes. Works: In 2 volumes. Vol. 1. Moscow, 654 p.
  5. Kuhn, T. S. (1977) Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions]. Moscow: Progress, 300 p. (In Russ., transl. from Eng.).
  6. Leontiev, A. N. (1975) Deyatel’nost’. Soznaniye. Lichnost’ [Activity. Consciousness. Personality]. Moscow: Politizdat, 304 p.
  7. McLuhan, M. (2023) Ponimaniye media. Vneshniye rasshireniya cheloveka [Understanding Media. External Extensions of Man]. Moscow: Kuchkovo field, 464 p.
  8. Libkind, A. N., et al. (2018) [The Altmetrics Indicator as One of the Indicators of the Scientific Impact of a Publication]. Vestnik Rossiyskoy akademii nauk [Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences]. Vol. 88. No. 9, pp. 811–818. – https://doi.org/10.31857/S086958730001694-1. (In Russ.).
  9. Trishchenko, N. D. (2025) [Altmetrics as a Tool for Assessing the Significance of Scientific Research in the Information Age]. Informatsionnoye obshchestvo [Information Society].Vol. 2, pp. 148–157. – https://doi.org/10.52605/16059921_2025_02_148. (In Russ.).
  10. Fedotova, N. N. (2023) [Identity Crisis in the Context of Globalization]. Chelovek [Personality].Vol. 6, pp. 50–58. (In Russ.).
  11. Filimonov, F. V. (2024) [Mediatization of Politics and Changing Political Communication Systems in the Modern World]. Aktual’nyye voprosy istorii, arkheologii, filosofii, mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniy i turizma. Materialy simpoziuma XIX (LI) Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii studentov, aspirantov i molodykh uchenykh [Current Issues in History, Archeology, Philosophy, International Relations and Tourism. Proceedings of the Symposium of the XIX (LI) International Scientific Conference of Students, Postgraduates and Young Scientists]. Kemerovo, pp. 339– 341. (In Russ.).
  12. Kiyashchenko, L. P., et al. (2022) Chelovek kak otkrytaya tselostnost’ [Man as an Open Integrity]. Novosibirsk: OOO Akademizdat, 420 p.
  13. Shipunova, O. D. (2002) Intellekt i sub”yektivnost [Intelligence and Subjectivity]. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, 299 p.
  14. Shchedrovitsky, G. P. (1995) [The Problem of Historical Development of Thinking]. G. P. Shchedrovitskiy Izbrannyye trudy [G. P. Shchedrovitsky Selected Works]. Moscow, 800 p. (In Russ.).
  15. Balalle, Н., Pannilage, S. (2025) Reassessing academic integrity in the age of AI: A systematic literature review on AI and academic integrity. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, Vol. 11. No. 1. Article 101229. – https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101299. (In Eng.).
  16. David, C. Lindberg (2007) The Beginnings of Western Science: The European Scientific Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, Prehistory to A.D. 1450, Second Edition, 488 p. (In Eng.).
  17. Floridi, L. (2014) The Fourth Revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford University Press, 256 p. (In Eng.).
  18. Hjarvard, S. (2008) The mediatization of religion: a theory of the media as agents of religious change. Northern Lights: Film and Media StudiesYearbook Vol. 6. No. 1, pp. 9–26. – https://doi.org/10.1386/n1.6.1.9_1. (In Eng.).
  19. McCombs, M. E., Shaw, D. L. (1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly. Vol. 36. No. 2, pp. 176–187. – https://doi.org/10.1086/267990. (In Eng.).
  20. Minsky, M. (1974) A framework for representing knowledge . MIT-AI Laboratory, 74 p. (In Eng.).
  21. Nechesov, А., Dorokhov, I., Ruponen, J. (2025) Virtual Cities: From Digital Twins to Autonomous AI Societies. IEEE Access. Vol. 13, pp. 13866–13903. – https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2025.3531222. (In Eng.).
  22. Shilina, M. G., Wirth, J. (2021) Immersive technologies in media: Towards the concept of generative mediatization? RUDN Journal of Studies in Literature and Journalism, Vol. 26. No. 4, pp. 672–680. – https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9220-2021-26-4-672-680. (In Eng.).
  23. Verbeek, P. P. (2015) Cover story: Beyond Interaction: a short introduction to mediation theory. Interactions (ACM), Vol. 22. No. 3, pp. 26–31. – https://doi.org/10.1145/2751314. (In Eng.).
  24. Zuboff, S. (2015) Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization. Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 30. No. 1, pp. 75–89. – https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2015.5. (In Eng.).
Error