The new role of the technological component in the social reality of the digital transition era

Authors

  • Irina G. Shestakova St Petersburg Mining University, 2, 21-ia liniia, V.O., St Petersburg, 199106, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2022.208

Abstract

The article explicates a new factor that is relevant for researchers of social processes occurring at a current time. For the first time in the history of mankind, activity at any given moment must be correlated with unpredictable revolutionary development of the technological environment, the result of which, during one human life, repeatedly transforms the socioeconomic environment. In the past history of mankind, when studying social dynamics at any particular moment in time, the factor of the development of the technological environment could be neglected, despite the fact that the state of the technological environment always predetermined the state of the social environment. This action was possible because, within the limits of human life, the technological environment could be perceived as static (constant scenery for the action of the social). Modernity, characterized by a specific pace of development of the digital environment, brings fundamental transformations to this picture. The radical acceleration of the pace of technological development, combined with the focus of this development on the field of information technology, determines the unprecedented originality of the digital era that has come. It is shown that under conditions of the critical speed of transformation processes, the horizons of scientific foresight are sharply narrowed. The author defines the fundamental need for a concept of “techno”. Thus, contemporary social theories require an inextricable connection between the concepts of “socio-technological”.

Keywords:

social environment, technological infrastructure, digital civilization, technological development, rate of scientific and technological progress, forecasting horizon, temporality, digital transformation

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Литература

Шестакова, И.Г. (2019), Новая темпоральность цифровой цивилизации: будущее уже наступило, Научно-технические ведомости СПбГПУ. Гуманитарные и общественные науки, т. 10, № 2, с. 20–29. https://doi.org/10.18721/ JHSS. 10202

Ницше, Ф. (2010), Веселая наука, СПб.: Азбука-классика.

Warwick, K. (2016), Homo Technologicus: Threat or Opportunity?, Philosophies, no. 1, pp. 199–208.

Adams, H. (1918), The Education of Henry Adams, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Wallerstein, I. (2011), The Modern World-System III: The second era of Great Expansion of the Capitalist World-Economy, 1730s–1840s, University of California Press.

Saint-Simon, H. (1825), Opinions littéraires, philosophiques et industrielles, Galerie de Bossange Père.

Kerr, C., Dunlop, J.T., Harbison, F.H. and Myers, C.A. (1973), Industrialism and industrial man, rev. ed., Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Goldthorpe, J.H. (1971), Theories of industrial society: Reflections on the recrudescene of historicism and the future of futurology, Archives Européennes de Sociologie, no. 12, pp. 263–288.

Coleman, D.C. (1983), Proto-Industrialization: A Concept Too Many, The Economic History Review. New Series, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 435–448.

Mokyr, J. (1999), Editor’s introduction. The new economic history and the industrial revolution, in: Moky, J. (ed.), The British Industrial Revolution: An Economic Perspective, Boulder, CO: Westview

Voigtländer, N. and Voth, H.-J. (2013), The Three Horsemen of Riches: Plague, War, and Urbanization in Early Modern Europe, The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 80, iss. 2, April, pp. 774–811.

Белл, Д. (1999), Грядущее постиндустриальное общество, М.: Академия.

Touraine, A. (1971), The Post-Industrial Society. Tomorrow’s Social History: Classes, Conflicts and Culture in the Programmed Society, New York: Random House.

Aron, R. (1962), Dix-huit lecons sur la societe industrielle, Paris: Gallimard.

Technology and the American Economy (1966), Report of the “National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress”, U. S. Department of Health, Education & Welfare Office of Education, vol. 1, Washington, DC.

Harari, Y.N. (2019), 21 lessons for the 21st century, London: Penguin Random House UK.

Тоффлер, Э. (2002), Шок будущего, М.: ACT.

Bell, D. (1979), Communications Technology: For Better or For Worse, Harvard Business Review, May — June, pp. 20–42.

Сорокин, П.А. и Мертон, Р.К. (2004), Социальное время: опыт методологического и функционального анализа, Социологические исследования, № 6, с. 112–119.

Бродель, Ф. (2000), История и общественные науки: историческая длительность, Философия и методология истории, Благовещенск: РИО БГК им. И.А.Бодуэна де Куртенэ, с. 115–142.

Shestakova, I.G. (2018), To the question of the limits of progress: is singularity possible? Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, vol. 34, iss. 3, pp. 391–401. https://doi. org/10.21638/11701/spbu17.2018.307

Шестакова, И.Г. (2021), Прогрессофобия в новой темпоральности цифрового мира, Вопросы философии, т. 7, с. 61–71. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2021-7-61-71

Шестакова И.Г. (2020), Человек и социум в темпоральности цифрового мира: дис. … д-ра филос. наук: 09.00.11. СПб.

Headrick, D.R. (2009), Technology: a world history, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Haferkamp, H. and Smelser, N.J. (eds) (1992), Social Change and Modernity, Berkeley: University of California Press.


References

Shestakova, I.G. (2019), New temporality of digital civilization: future has come, in: St Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 20–29. https://doi. org/10.18721/JHSS.10202 (In Russian)

Nietzsche, F. (2010), Jovial science, St Petersburg: Azbuka-klassika Publ. (In Russian).

Warwick, K. (2016), Homo Technologicus: Threat or Opportunity?, Philosophies, no. 1, pp. 199–208.

Adams, H. (1918), The Education of Henry Adams, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Wallerstein, I. (2011), The Modern World-System III: The second era of Great Expansion of the Capitalist World-Economy, 1730s–1840s, University of California Press.

Saint-Simon, H. (1825), Opinions littéraires, philosophiques et industrielles, Galerie de Bossange Père.

Kerr, C., Dunlop, J.T., Harbison, F.H. and Myers, C.A. (1973), Industrialism and industrial man, rev. ed., Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Goldthorpe, J.H. (1971), Theories of industrial society: Reflections on the recrudescene of historicism and the future of futurology, Archives Européennes de Sociologie, no. 12, pp. 263–288.

Coleman, D.C. (1983), Proto-Industrialization: A Concept Too Many, The Economic History Review. New Series, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 435–448.

Mokyr, J. (1999), Editor’s introduction. The new economic history and the industrial revolution, in: Moky, J. (ed.), The British Industrial Revolution: An Economic Perspective, Boulder, CO: Westview

Voigtländer, N. and Voth, H.-J. (2013), The Three Horsemen of Riches: Plague, War, and Urbanization in Early Modern Europe, The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 80, iss. 2, April, pp. 774–811.

Bell, D. (1999) Future postindustrial society. Moscow: Akademiia Publ. (In Russian)

Touraine, A. (1971), The Post-Industrial Society. Tomorrow’s Social History: Classes, Conflicts and Culture in the Programmed Society, New York: Random House.

Aron, R. (1962), Dix-huit lecons sur la societe industrielle, Paris: Gallimard.

Technology and the American Economy (1966), Report of the “National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress”, U. S. Department of Health, Education & Welfare Office of Education, vol. 1, Washington, DC.

Harari, Y.N. (2019), 21 lessons for the 21st century, London: Penguin Random House UK.

Toffler, A. (2002), Future shock, Мoscow: AST Publ. (In Russian)

Bell, D. (1979), Communications Technology: For Better or For Worse, Harvard Business Review, May–June, pp. 20–42.

Sorokin, P.A., Merton, R. (2004), Social time: Experience of methodological and functional analysis, in: Sociological studies, no. 6, pp. 112–119. (In Russian).

Brodel, F. (2000), History and social sciences: continuity of history, in: Philosophy and methodology of history, Blagoveshchensk: RIO BGK im. I.A.Boduena de Kurtene Publ., pp. 115–142. (In Russian).

Shestakova, I.G. (2018), To the question of the limits of progress: is singularity possible? Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, vol. 34, iss. 3, pp. 391–401. https://doi. org/10.21638/11701/spbu17.2018.307

Shestakova, I.G. (2021), Progressophobia in the New Temporality of the Digital World, in: Problems of Philosophy, 2021, no. 7, pp. 61–71. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2021-7-61-71 (In Russian)

Shestakova, I.G. (2020), Man and society in the temporality of the digital world. Dr. Sci. thesis. St Petersburg.

Headrick, D.R. (2009), Technology: a world history, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Haferkamp, H. and Smelser, N.J. (eds) (1992), Social Change and Modernity, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Философия и конфликтология, Том 38, No 2, 2022

Downloads

Published

2022-07-21

How to Cite

Shestakova, I. G. (2022). The new role of the technological component in the social reality of the digital transition era. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 38(2), 242–253. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2022.208

Issue

Vol. 38 No. 2 (2022): Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies

Section

Cultural studies

License

Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.