CC BY
18
^W^HHA y TEXHQC^EPI
UDC 141+304.2
S. K. KOSTYUCHKOV1*
''Kherson State University (Kherson, Ukraine), e-mail [email protected], ORCID 0000-0003-1708-643X
DIFFERENT HUMAN IMAGES AND ANTHROPOLOGICAL COLISSIONS OF POST-MODERNISM EPOCH: BIOPHILOSOPHICAL INTERPRETATION
Purpose. The research is aimed at substantiation of the process of formation of various human images in the postmodernism era in the context of biophilosophy, taking into account the need to find an adequate response to historical challenges and the production of new value orientations reflecting succession of civilization development. Theoretical basis. The author in his theoretical constructs proceeds from the need of taking into account the biophilosophical aspect of postmodern man, as the one who, remaining a representative of the species Homo sapiens, began to dynamically change, losing (weakening) its own natural and functional qualities, acquiring to a large extent the socio-technology-related qualities. The thesis that in the postmodern society the moral and legal foundations of existence of human being, as the subject of actions and responsibility for these actions, practically coincide with the biological foundations is taken as initial argument. New biological knowledge, as well as the related technologies, orient the public consciousness towards production of fundamentally new or modernization of the existing biophilosophical ideas. The author's vision of the anthropological collision of the Post-Modernism era is caused by the fact that the issues of a postmodern man acquire a special urgency at the end of the XX - early XXI century. A progressive disproportion between a human being, whose abilities as a representative of the species Homo sapiens are biologically limited, and the human community, which sees no limits in its information and technological expansion, is of current interest. Originality. The author reveals the key features of the Post-Modernism era, in which a fundamentally different civilizational space originates, and where a new type of person emerges in its internal culture, which is called the postmodern man. The postmodern man was considered through the prism of bio-philosophy. Its interest in man is caused by his or her place in nature, the prospects of development at the individual, population and species levels. Conclusions. In the process of development of bio-philosophy, its research field will be naturally expanded with the use of philosophical means of perception of life as such and filling the bio-philosophy with philosophical and biological issues. In contemporary conditions, the study of the boundaries of biological reality and its previously unknown properties, definition of new horizons of theoretical knowledge in the science of life, the critical rethinking of the concepts of biocentrism and anthropocentrism in the space of modern scientific knowledge, the definition of perspective trends in the study of man, his or her place and role in the planetary being is of great importance.
Keywords: anthropocentrism; biological finalism; biophilosophy; biocentrism; being; life; organism; PostModernism; human nature; ecocid
Introduction
XXI century is characterized by rapidity, variability and stochasticity of social, political and economic processes of public life. Various human images have become the foundation of certain ideas about man, as well as the basis for the formation of socio-cultural concepts in the research field of various sciences. Philosophical interpretation of man as a unique natural creature gives an idea of his or her as impersonated trinity of natural, social and spiritual. Development of the PostModernism society has intensified not only massive changes in social life, but also certain modifications of the worldview, world perception and world outlook of a person, generating the processes of formation of a new communication strategy of social interaction, which allows us to speak about the originality of "the postmodern man".
^ro^HHA У TEXHOCOEPI
Proceeding from the fact that a person is usually studied as a bio-social being, natural sciences converge with socio-political sciences, and the intensity and power of such a convergence is directly proportional to the depth, scope and content of research of various aspects of the natural and social life of man. New biological and, in particular, bio-philosophical knowledge, as well as the related technologies, orient the public consciousness towards the production of fundamentally new or modernization of existing bio-philosophical ideas. Any kind of reform in the social sphere, without taking into account the bio-philosophical component, provokes manifestations of powerful counter-trends, conditioned by the traditional approach to man as elementary social unit, excluding the fact that the whole history of mankind is a process of preserving and developing the creative (genetic) makings of the human race. Accordingly, it seems urgent the problem of a more profound scientific analysis of human nature, the study of the structural levels of man as a biosocial system in the third millennium, the realities of which doubt the very fact of preservation of nature on Earth; in circumstances where a person does not feel himself or herself either a part of nature or its owner. This provokes a universal sense of particularization from nature and a certain alienation of homo sapiens as a biological species. Thus, there is a need to substantiate the bio-philosophical approach to understanding the existence of a modern person, to create a coherent picture of nature, in which a person should be "inscribed" as a unique and specific, necessary and organic component.
The problem of man of the Post-Modernism era is one of the most urgent one in the evolution of society, it is studied in detail by both foreign and domestic scientists. The concept of "PostModernism", according to J. Lyotard (1998), appeared under the pen of sociologists and critics, denoting the state of culture after transformations in science, literature and art at the end of the XIX century. A. Giddens (1990) introduced a new meaningful content of the concept of "PostModernism". He denoted it as an era in the development of mankind, which is characterized by a qualitative increase in the uncertainty of a large part of social realities. R. Inglehart (2010) describes Post-Modernism as an era of changing values, transforming societies, emphasizing that the activity of processes associated with the transition from "traditional" society to the "modern" one has now reached its boundaries in the advanced industrial society, where the changes take a new direction.
The problematics of the postmodern era man, which is expressed as an anthropological collision of Post-Modernism, becomes particularly acute in the late XX and early XXI centuries. It is provoked by the progressive disproportion between a person whose abilities, as a representative of the species Homo sapiens, are biologically limited, and the human community, which sees no limits in its information and technological expansion. In this context, Z. Bauman (2005) points out that the postmodern perspective of a person's identity is heavily burdened by the very spirit of Post-Modernism and addresses the problem of individualized society.
M. Lazzarato (2005) considers the postmodern concept of "intangible labor", emphasizing that its share is increasing in the transition from the industrial to postindustrial/information society.
Recent researchers D. Bazargani and V. Larsari (2015) in their article "Postmodernism": "Is the Contemporary State of Affairs" "Correctly Described as" Postmodern "?" try to answer the question - does our era have quite distinctive features, which can be called postmodern. They emphasize that the postmodern era is characterized by three features that distinguish it from the modern era. They are the failure of the project of Enlightenment, the growth of ethnic diversity in societies and the ever-increasing speed of social, economic and technological changes.
In the postmodern society, the moral and legal boundaries of personality as the subject of action and responsibility for it almost coincide with the biological boundaries. Accordingly, in the XXI century the bio-philosophical studies of the postmodern era man, appear to be relevant. The
^ro^HHA y TEXHOCOEPI
bio-philosophical approach to the study of human personality of the Post-Modernism era actualizes the attitude to he or she as a socio-biological entity, and therefore it implies not only the individual-existential aspect but also the socio-ontological one. F. Fukuyama (Fukuyama, 2004), describing possible scenarios for human development in the future, discusses the prospects that offers to humanity the rapid development of medicine and biotechnology, to which social and political consequences can lead their achievements. In the last 2014-2017 years, the bio-philosophical subject and problems of the postmodern era man are reflected in the studies of both foreign A. Rosenberg (2017) investigates the interconnection and interinfluence of social and biological sciences; S. Koutroufinis (2014) examines the trends of modern bio-philosophy) and Ukrainian scientists. In particular, T. Danylova (2012) investigates the problem of human identity in the postmodern world picture. V. Zinchenko (2015) in his work "Institutional globalization as a system integration phenomenon of postmodern development" considers a mass personality as a spiritual substance, pluralistic in its actions, who in postmodern conditions has absolute freedom to accept/reject culture and civilization, is a subject of history and can become a creative potential, freely master all the achievements of culture. In his work, Burak (2015) describes the postmodern era, which puts forward new challenges for humanity caused by globalization of reality and contemplates a modern person who must have a sufficient spectrum of skills to be able to adequately respond to changing reality. The above-mentioned subject was also reflected in the work of the author of the proposed article (Kostyuchkov, 2016). However, in the bulk of contemporary works on philosophy, in our opinion, the methodological foundations of the bio-philosophical study of the human personality of the postmodern period are insufficiently analyzed. The complex analysis of the features of the postmodern socio-cultural crisis of human identity is relevant, and the role of the bio-philosophical component in the process of development and implementation of reforms in the social sphere is practically not studied. The author focuses on the ways of solving the problem of the postmodern era man through the prism of bio-philosophy, focused on a holistic understanding of the phenomenon of life, taking into account the fact that evolutionary processes in nature in a complex and unpredictable form interact with an actively expanding artificial environment, changing both the external and the inner world of man.
Purpose
The study is aimed to substantiate the formation of various images of the postmodern era man from the point of view of bio-philosophy, taking into account the need to find an adequate response to historical challenges and the production of new value orientations reflecting succession of civilization development.
Statement of basic materials
The multiplicity, multidimensionality and poly-aspect of the man phenomenon determines the interdisciplinary status of human research, which is in the field of philosophy, anthropology, cultural studies, as well as other social and natural sciences. It will not be an exaggeration to say that modern sciences - from astrophysics and space biology to molecular biology and genetics deeper and more intensively integrate man into the subject field of their research, synthesizing new hypotheses and ideas, forming progressive models of human relationships with the world around. Individual, personality, individuality - are inherently different characteristics of man, determined in the biogenetic, socio-cultural and personalist approaches.
^ro^HHA y TEXHOCOEPI
Formation of new philosophical ideas in the field of man study is caused not only by local problems and contradictions, but more broadly - by large-scale transformations in the cultural life of society, changes in its intellectual state, modernization of models of social interaction, taking into account new civilizational challenges. In the natural-scientific picture of the world a man has long been absent, while he or she should occupy a key position there. Consideration of man as a goal (according to V. Vernadskiy (1988)) is a necessary and inevitable element of the scientific world outlook. Thus, the anthropological collisions, caused by the influence on the biosocial nature of man by destructive processes in the ecosphere (biotic and abiotic factors) and in the social sphere, taking into account the wide spectrum of its components - political, economic, cultural, technological, informational, etc. (anthropogenic factors), become obvious.
Therefore, "the modus of human being is changing in the eco-social space, the extreme points of which are consensus and conflict". In our opinion, the process of human existence in the modern world:
Is characterized by ambiguity, stochasticity, and eventuality; being determines the essence of man, his or her nature as a universal and at the same time particular substance. These process is also defined as such, in which concrete-empirical experience is obtained in the process of learning human essence: the subjectivity of the background knowledge is transformed into the personal sphere of society by internalizing social values and mechanisms of subjectivation and subjectivization. Man becomes a full-fledged civic person when he or she becomes a full and autonomous subject of his or her own life, a person who is responsible not only for him- or herself but for other people, for the outside world. (Kostyuchkov, 2016, p. 55)
The context of the study with necessity requires a very detailed approach to the definition of "postmodern". The most successful is the definition of "postmodern" proposed by J. Lyotard (1998), since it contains an indication of, at least, the chronological sequence of the modern, and at the same time fixes the fact of the end of the previous era. Post-Modernism, as pointed out by modern scientists, is a time which, with full reason, can be defined as "dark" time, rich in conflicts, uncertainty states, in the absence of clear orienting points indicating the direction of further development. It is characterized by:
Total critique of the mind as an instance of unity, which justifies suppression of diversity and ensures the domination of certain forms of life, types of discourse, political, legal and economic practices. Postmodern-
^ro^HHA y TEXHOCOEPI
ists have declared radical value pluralism exclusively the normal state of socio-cultural existence, since it is it that provides the opportunity for free self-realization of all its participants. Attempts to impose something as an integrating principle, common denominator, or organizational center were qualified as a hidden pursuit of domination. (Kalnaya, & Gorban, 2011, p. 88)
In postmodern era arose a fundamentally different civilizational space and also new in its internal culture dominant type of personality, which has every reason to be called a postmodern human. The reality is changing rapidly, increasing its own stochasticity and eventuality, it provokes manifestations of powerful counter-trends in all spheres of public life, destabilizes existing and well-organized systems, increases the number of interpretive scenarios and options for future development. Strengthening social differentiation transforms structural interactions in society, and also affects the cardinal revision of values, both from an individual, and on a scale of ethno-national, cultural or religious communities. Approved in the postmodern finality of human existence is also confirmed by its historical determinism - Post-Modernism does not cancel division of time into the past (potential), present (actual) and future (perpetual) - it changes the degree of their predominance. In the "premodern" (traditional) society the past reigned over the present and the future; social development was based on the observance of the laws, customs and traditions of the past. Modern (industrial) society believed in the infinite possibilities of the mind, its prognostic possibilities, created daring futuristic projects, idealized the future in relation to the present and the past. Postmodern (post-industrial) society asserts domination of the present over both the past and the future.
It should be noted that the postmodern anthropological collision is provoked by the progressive disproportion between a person whose abilities, as a representative of the species Homo sapiens, are biologically limited, and the human community, which sees no limits in its information and technological expansion. This fact leads to postmodern "sensitivity", which causes a certain kind of indifference, secession, and often - hostility in relation to the events of the world around. A postmodern person finds around him- or herself the fragments of his or her own appearance, familiar qualities, structures, properties, images, connections, but not only him- or herself. He or she has a relative freedom, capable of autotranscendence, that is, to go beyond the limits of his or her own being "here, now and so".
Post-Modernism is characterized by refusal from seeking the truth, neglecting "immersion" in the essence and content of objects, processes and phenomena the world around, associated with the transformation of bio-social nature of man, who the state Leviathan (according to T. Hobbes) strives to make an obedient puppet, elementary social unit that is easy to manipulate, to impose the ideas, values, and symbols generated by the ruling circles, which are perceived by person ap-odictically and with which he or she gradually identifies him- or herself. Man of the postmodern era lives in the world of rules and norms limited by chance and randomness, which have no limitations. The postmodern man is open to all, perceives the world as a symbolic space having no desire to penetrate into the content of things, the essence of phenomena, the interpretation of images and the meaning of signs, choosing a symbolic, "gliding" being.
^ro^HHA y TEXHOCOEPI
The history of mankind proves that one can not neglect the individual part of human life in the interests of the social-collective one, as evidenced in the national history of the XX century, when socialism failed the "humanity" test. Being constantly changing by nature, the postmodern era man changes his or her own social space according to the vision and world perception. By the end of the XX man was overfilled and overloaded with qualities that practically do not define he or she as an individual. At the turn of the century, the most important in the psychogenetic history of humanity was the transition - indivisible in qualities and properties, the individual begins to give way to the dividual. An individual, a holistic person, goes away in the past, a dividual comes to his place, a person of many faces, ceasing to try to "be like everyone" - this is his or her main philosophy and socio-psychological basis of his or her behavioral manifestations. With some degree of irony, one should speak not about the plurality of postmodern human states, but about the expanded gallery of "characters" inhabiting he or she.
Perception of the world by postmodern man...
Undergoes dramatic changes in the direction of plurality, temporality and complexity. Increasingly, people feel that the usual world of order and stability gives way to a world of chaotic, unpredictable world, existing according to the rules known only to itself, such Kantian "thing-in-itself. The former scientific theories, ideologies, systems of values are being destroyed, which leads to understanding of the ambiguity and fragility of human existence, and this is precisely because of the expansion of the functional field of ways of explaining and mastering the reality. (Danylova, 2012, p. 17)
It should be emphasized that the present demands more attention from the scientific community to the field of interdisciplinary research, the content of which is in the formation and development of new, non-traditional branches of scientific knowledge and research directions. One of these sense-forming trends is bio-philosophy, as a product of civilization culture, represented by a specific convergent complex of biology and philosophy, aimed at a holistic understanding of the phenomenon of life. Bio-philosophy realizes the search for ontological grounds of the worldview, based on the results of the study of living both from the point of view of biology and philosophy. Understanding bio-philosophy, as an axiological-cognitive form of modern biology is an attempt to create a holistic, integrated theoretical image of a generalized living, taking into account the relationship of the universe, nature and man.
Modern scientists consider bio-philosophy as a philosophical tradition that originates from the Antiquity and includes a set of very different, heterogeneous philosophical reflections on life. At the same time, the key question is about understanding the concept of "life", its semantic continuation, which in our time attains a status of philosophical category, which has many meanings. In modern bio-philosophy, this concept has a fairly wide range of connotations: at one level the life is seen as a set of processes occurring in any physical object, described as an "organism".
doi: 10.15802/ampr. v0i13.131967 © S. K. Kostyuchkov, 2018
^ro^HHA y TEXHOCOEPI
At another level, this concept refers to an infinite number of such objects. Thus, "life" is often referred to the groups of organisms of the same species (for example, colonies of animals) or to interacting species of the ecosystem and even - the entire biosphere. Often, "life" means all organisms that have arisen since the first cell appeared on the early Earth; some representatives of bioethics even use this concept to appeal to all future organisms. Sometimes the concept of "life" also includes hypothetical biological events that may occur outside the planet Earth (exobiology), going beyond the space-time boundaries of evolution on Earth (Koutroufinis, 2014).
Heterogeneity of biological science is particularly evident in bio-philosophy, which is associated with heterogeneity of the world as an ontological problem of existence of various spheres of being, interconnected within the same real world. Bio-philosophy is bringing of everything to "measure of life," and in the context of anthropocentrism, to "measure of man." This involves focusing on alternative, human-oriented technologies, including social ones; control and restrictions for the use of such industrial technologies, which certainly stimulate the imbalance in the system "nature - man". Instead of hoping for noosphere, which should control processes in the atmosphere, the lithosphere, the hydrosphere, the biosphere, bio-philosophy examines the possibilities of controlling the noosphere itself. It is for this purpose that it is important to preserve the "human dimension" of the mind, without which for mankind it is capable of transforming into something not only intelligent, but also the dangerous one, since the mind can become enemy of man.
Proceeding from the above-mentioned, consideration of the postmodern era man through the prism of bio-philosophy is relevant, logical, and grounded. Modern bio-philosophy, focused on a holistic understanding of the phenomenon of life, focuses attention on a man based on several basic prerequisites. Firstly, the evolutionary processes in nature in a complex and unpredictable form interact with dynamically expanding artificial environment, changing both the external and the inner world of man. Secondly, the classical biological laws in the process of social development are etiologically supplemented by laws of anthropogenic nature.
Thirdly, humanity, due to a certain set of reasons, has come to the point of bifurcation, after which - either the preservation of life on Earth with, unfortunately, significant reduction of the species diversity of flora and fauna, or omnicide (Latin omni - all, caedere - to kill), whose perspectives go beyond abstract eschatological rhetoric. In such conditions, there is a pressing problem of fundamental revision of the traditional (mechanistic) picture of the world, which does not take into account the planetary function of living matter, and creation of the new one, based on the provisions of bio-philosophy, biologically oriented picture of the world.
In modern bio-philosophy, the main interest concerning man is caused by his or her place in nature, the prospects of development on the individual, population and species levels. However, it is mandatory to take into account the biosocial nature of man, his or her membership in two spheres of life - natural-biological and social one at the same time. Accordingly, bio-philosophy focuses not only on the biological life of man as the process of organism functioning, but also on the social life, which is characterized mainly by the concepts of "the right to life" and "the value of life." In the bio-philosophical sense, the value of human life is determined by the approach, which by virtue of its specificity adjusts the view on the status of human life in society and the very concept of "the right to life". Man becomes one of the decisive manifestations of social reality and at the same time - one of the basic principles of its existence and development. A similar aspect transforms the human right to life from the subjective-ontological category to the objective-praxeological one, that is, from the biological to the social essence of the concept itself.
The modern status of human life is determined by the unconditional self-value of man as an organic part of nature and the element of the Cosmos, which is characterized by auto-catalytic self-development and self-perfection; binary asymmetric determination - the biological and social one;
^ro^HHA y TEXHOCOEPI
the status of human life is also caused by the position and quality of rights in society. Postmodern brings not only new social relations and ways of life, another economics, new political conflicts and a transformed consciousness, but also improving the understanding of the status of human life. Determining the status of human life, in our opinion, is to reveal and articulate the key principles that govern society in its attitude towards the person to the extent that it realizes itself as a society of the appropriate level of development. The universal, trans-historical principle of social attitude to human life is the recognition of its unconditional value in various dimensions - religious, philosophical, and scientific ones. Religious, in particular, the Biblical doctrine insists that the value of human life derives from the sense of human dignity createdin the image of God as the intelligent being that comes to Earth as, in a sense, the representative of God.
Originality
The article reveals peculiarities of Post-Modernism, in which a fundamentally different civilizational space emerges and new in its internal culture dominant type of personality, which is called the "postmodern man" emerges. A person of the postmodern era is examined through the prism of bio-philosophy, whose interest in man is caused by his or her place in nature, the prospects of development at the individual, population and species levels. At the same time, attention is focused on the bio-social nature of man, his or her belonging to two spheres of being - the natural-biological and social one.
Conclusions
The above-mentioned gives grounds for formulating some conclusions, among which the main ones are:
1. The person of postmodern, while remaining representative of the species Homo sapiens, began to dynamically change, losing/reducing his or her own natural-functional qualities, gaining in great measure the quality of socio- technology-related ones. At the same time there is a growing control of society over person, carried out not only through consciousness or ideology, but also in the body and with the body (Fuko, 2006). For a post-industrial society biological and somatic (bodily) measurements, transformation of man corporeality, his or her orientation to artificiality, caused by necessity of technological intervention to save health and life of person (exo- and endoprosthesis, pacemakers, therapeutic complexes connected with so-called "machine aggression"); restructuring of individual consciousness in the direction of virtualization of real and realization of virtual become relevant. The implication of the biological life of man (zoe) and the political spheres (polis), that is, the politicization of life as such, is an extremely important process characterizing the postmodern era.
2. In the postmodern society, the moral and legal foundations of human existence, as the subject of action and responsibility for these actions, practically coincide with the biological foundations. In a liberal market, human life is predominantly characterized by competition and market relations, therefore, a person becomes a specific capital, a source of profit; the processes of correction of such bio-political aspects of public life as birth rate, state of health, life expectancy and its quality are steadily intensifying.
3. Modern civilization, generalized by the principle of egocentrism, particularized indivual from his or her main wealth - the mechanisms of harmonious coexistence with the surrounding world, laid down by nature. Postmodern has intensified the transformation of man into a one-dimensional being - homo consumer, while modernity (often called in tradition the
^ro^HHA y TEXHOCOEPI
post-postmodern) puts forward new historical tasks for humanity. Among these tasks the key one is the problem of preserving life on Earth, since the present state of nature gives reasons to talk about the need to include in the problem core of bio-philosophy the aspects of fundamental possibility of the disappearance of life on Earth, summarized in the form of a concept of biological finalism.
4. A postmodern person becomes a unit, an element, an agent created by his or her complex, largely obscure world, gaining independence from its creator. The postmodern "individual" does not divaricate and even does not double - he or she dynamically and often spontaneously passes from one life project to another, doing both under the influence of life circumstances, and in search of aesthetic pleasure from play of his or her physical, intellectual and spiritual forces. The volume of realization of the potential of a modern man is measured not by the "heights", not by the proximity to some ideal person, but by the discrete, emancipated, and situational embodiment of real powers and opportunities. The boundedness in the disclosure of one's own forces makes people equal to one another - in dignity, self-respect, in striving to reveal their own potential, which is very organically connotes with the maxim "All different - all equal".
5. The bio-philosophical aspect of postmodern man is concentrated on the fact that he or she being a usually-unlimited creature (according to G. Deleuze and M. Fuko) represents a unique combination of forces and possibilities - both his or her own ones and those that are appropriates from the external environment. From the standpoint of bio-philosophy postmodern, as a historical epoch, demonstrates the possibility of biological finalism on Earth and at the same time - reveals a real combinatorial unlimitedness of human life that remains, of course, biologically limited.
There are good reasons to argue that in the process of development of bio-philosophy, its research field will be naturally expanded with the use of philosophical means of knowledge of life as such and the filling of bio-philosophy with both philosophical, and biological issues. In contemporary conditions, the study of the boundaries of biological reality and its previously unknown properties, the definition of new horizons of theoretical knowledge in the science of life, the critical rethinking of the concepts of biocentrism and anthropocentrism in the space of modern scientific knowledge, the definition of promising trends in the study of man, his or her place and role in the planetary being acquire a considerable significance. Research interest in the problems of the phenomenon of life is etiologically associated with the "perplexity" of man by the meaning of his or her own being. It stimulates the further expansion of the space for cooperation of philosophers, biologists, political scientists, sociologists, representatives of other disciplines traditionally focused on the comprehension of secrets of life, on study of the forms of implication of biological and social life of man.
REFERENCES
Bauman, Z. (2005). The individualized society. V. L. Inozemtsev (Ed.), Trans. from Engl. Moscow: Logos. (in Russian)
Bazargani, D. T., & Larsari, V. N. (2015). "Postmodernism": Is the Contemporary State of Affairs Correctly
Described as "Postmodern"? Journal of Social Issues & Humanities, 3, 89-96. (in English) Brawn, R. (Ed.). (1995). Postmodern representations: Truth, power, and mimesis in the human sciences and public
culture. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois Press. (in English) Burak, O. S. (2015). Holistic conception of education in formation of holistic personality of postmodern age.
Continuing Professional Education: Theory and Practice, 3(44), 52-56. (in Ukrainian) Craver, C., & Darden, L. (2013). In search of mechanisms: Discoveries across the life sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (in English)
ЛЮДИНА У ТЕХНОСФЕР1
Danylova, T. V. (2012). The problem of human identity in postmodern world view. Anthropological Measurements
of Philosophical Research, 2, 16-22. doi: 10.15802/ampr2012/7833 (in Ukrainian) Fuko, M., & Bolshakov, V. P. (Ed.). (2006). Intellektualy i vlast: Izbrannye politicheskie stati, vystupleniya
i intervyu ( P. 3). B. M. Skuratov, Trans. from French. Moscow: Praksis. (in Russian) Fukuyama, F. (2004). Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. M. B. Levin, Trans.
from Engl. Moscow: ACT: LYuKS. (in Russian) Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Redwood City: Stanford University Press. (in English) Inglehart, R. (2010). Globalization and postmodern values. The Washington Quarterly, January, 215-228.
doi: 10.1162/016366000560665 (in English) Kalnaya, I. I., & Gorban, A. V. (Eds.). (2011). Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo v epokhu totalnoy globalizatsii:
Monografiya. Simferopol: ARIAL. (in Russian) Kostyuchkov, S. K. (2016). Place and role modern man in planetary existence: Biopolitical interpretation. Future
Human Image, 3(6), 53-66. (in Ukrainian) Koutroufinis, S. A. (2014). The Need for a New Biophilosophy. In S. A. Koutroufinis (Ed.), Life and Process.
Towards a New Biophilosophy (pp. 1-35). Berlin: De Gruyter. (in English) Lazzarato, М. (2005). Biopolitique/Bioéconomie. Multitudes, 22, 51-62. doi: 10.3917/mult.022.0051 (in French) Lyotard, J.-F. (1998). la condition postmoderne. N. A. Shmatko, Trans. from French. Moscow: Institut
eksperimentalnoy sotsiologii; Saint Petersburg: Aleteyya. (in Russian) Rosenberg, A. (2017). Why Social Science is Biological Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science,
48(3), 341-369. doi: 10.1007/s10838-017-9365-0 (in English) Rosenberg, A., & McShea, D. (2008). Philosophy of Biology: A Contemporary Introduction. London: Routledge. (in English)
Vernadskiy, V. I. (1988). Neskolko slov o noosfere. In Filosofskie mysli naturalista (pp. 503-510). Moscow: Nauka. (in Russian)
Zinchenko, V. V. (2015). Institutional globalization as a system of integration the phenomenon of the postmodern development. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, 8, 74-85. doi: 10.15802/ampr2015/55731 (in Ukrainian)
LIST OF REFERNCE LINKS
Бауман, З. Индивидуализированное общество / З. Бауман ; пер. с англ., под ред. В. Л. Иноземцева. -
Москва : Логос, 2005. - 390 с. Bazargani, D. T. "Postmodernism": Is the Contemporary State of Affairs Correctly Described as "Postmodern"? / D. T. Bazargani, V. N. Larsari // Journal of Social Issues & Humanities. - 2015. - Vol. 3, Is. 1. - P. 89-96. Postmodern representations: Truth power, and mimesis in the human sciences and public culture / Ed. by
R. Brawn. - Urbana-Champaign : University of Illinois Press, 1995. - 146 р. Бурак, О. С. Концепцш холктично! освгги у процеа формуванш цшсно! особистосп постмодерну /
О. С. Бурак // Неперервна освта: теорш i практика. - 2015. - № 3 (44). - С. 52-56. Craver, C. In search of mechanisms: Discoveries across the life sciences / С. Craver, L. Darden. - Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2013. - 227 р. Данилова, Т. В. Проблема людсько! вдентичносп у постмодернш картиш свпу / Т. В. Данилова // Антрополопчш вимiри фшософських дослвджень. - 2012. - Вип. 2. - С. 16-22. doi: 10.15802/ampr2012/7833 Фуко, М. Интеллектуалы и власть: избранные политические статьи, выступления и интервью / М. Фуко ; перевод с фр. Б. М. Скуратова ; под общ. ред. В. П. Большакова. - Москва : Праксис, 2006. - Ч. 3. -320 с.
Фукуяма, Ф. Наше постчеловеческое будущее: последствия биотехнологической революции / Ф. Фукуяма ;
перевод с англ. М. Б. Левина. - Москва : ACT : ЛЮКС, 2004. - 349 с. Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity / A. Giddens. - Redwood City : Stanford University Press, 1990. -188 р.
Inglehart, R. Globalization and postmodern values / R. Inglehart // The Washington Quarterly. - 2010. - January. -
P. 215-228. doi: 10.1162/016366000560665 Гражданское общество в эпоху тотальной глобализации : монография / науч. ред. И. И. Кальной, А. В. Гор-
бань. - Симферополь : АРИАЛ, 2011. - 648 с. Костючков, С. К. Мкце i роль сучасно! людини у планетарному бутл: бюполггачна iнтерпретацiя /
С. К. Костючков // Future Human Image. - 2016. - Vol. 3, Is. 6. - P. 53-66. Koutroufinis, S. A. The Need for a New Biophilosophy / S. A. Koutroufinis // Life and Process. Towards a new Biophilosophy / Ed. by S. A. Koutroufinis. - Berlin : De Gruyter, 2014. - Р. 1-35.
ЛЮДИНА У ТЕХНОСФЕР1
Lazzarato, М. Biopolitique/Bioeconomie / М. Lazzarato // Multitudes. - 2005. - № 22. - P. 51-62. doi: 10.3917/mult.022.0051
Лиотар, Ж.-Ф. Состояние постмодерна / Ж.-Ф. Лиотар ; первод с фр. Н. А. Шматко. - Москва : Институт
экспериментальной социологии ; Санкт-Петербург : Алетейя, 1998. - 160 с. Rosenberg, A. Why Social Science is Biological Science / А. Rosenberg // Journal for General Philosophy of Science. - 2017. - Vol. 48, Is. 3. - Р. 341-369. doi: 10.1007/s10838-017-9365-0 Rosenberg, A. Philosophy of Biology: A Contemporary Introduction / А. Rosenberg, D. McShea. - London : Routledge, 2008. - 240 р.
Вернадский, В. И. Несколько слов о ноосфере / В. И. Вернадский // Вернадский, В. И. Философские мысли
натуралиста / Вернадский, В. И. - Москва : Наука, 1988. - C. 503-510. Зшченко, В. В. 1нституцшна глобалiзацiя як системне штеграцшне явище постмодерного розвитку / В. В. Зшченко // Антрополопчш вимiри фшософських дослвджень. - 2015. - Вип. 8. - С. 74-85. doi: 10.15802/ampr2015/55731
С. К. КОСТЮЧКОВ1*
1 Херсонський державний уншерситет (Херсон, Украша), ел. пошта [email protected], ORCID 0000-0003-1708-643X
Р1ЗН1 ОБРАЗИ ЛЮДИНИ ТА АНТРОПОЛОГ1ЧН1 КОЛ1ЗП ЕПОХИ ПОСТМОДЕРНУ: Б1ОФ1ЛОСОФСЬКА 1НТЕРПРЕТАЦ1Я
Мета. Дослщження спрямовано на обгрунтування процесу формування рiзних образiв людини в епоху постмодерну в контекст бюфшософи, з урахуванням необхщносп пошуку адекватно! вiдповiдi на юторичш виклики i продукування нових цшшсних орieнтирiв, якi вiдображають наступництво цившзацшного розвитку. Теоретичний базис. У сво!х теоретичних побудовах автор виходить i3 необхiдностi врахування бiофiлософського аспекту постмодерно! людини, як тако!, котра залишаючись представником виду Homo sapiens, стала динамiчно змiнюватися, втрачаючи (послаблюючи) власнi природно-функцiональнi якостi, набуваючи в значнш мiрi якостей соцiально-техногенних. У якосл вихщно! обстоюеться теза про те, що в постмодерному суспiльствi морально -правовi основи буття людини, як суб'екта ди i вiдповiдальностi за цi дil, практично збиаються з основами бiологiчними. Новi бiологiчнi знання, а також пов'язаш з ними технологii орiентують суспшьну свiдомiсть на продукування принципово нових або модершзацш вже iснуючих бюфшософських iдей. Авторську вiзiю щодо антрополопчних колiзiй епохи постмодерну обумовлено тим, що проблематика людини постмодерно! набувае особливо! гостроти в кшщ ХХ - на початку ХХ1 столгть. Актуальною е прогресуюча диспропорц1я мш людиною, чи! можливостi, як представника виду Homo sapiens, бюлопчно обмежеш, i людським спiвтовариством, яке не бачить меж у сво!й шформацшнш i технологiчнiй експансii. Наукова новизна. Автором виявлено ключовi особливостi епохи постмодерну, в якш зароджуеться принципово шший цивiлiзацiйний простiр i де виникае новий за своею внутршньою культурою тип особистосп, який iменуеться людиною постмодерну. Здiйснено розгляд людини епохи постмодерну крiзь призму бюфшософи, штерес яко! щодо людини обумовлений його мкцем у природi, перспективами розвитку на шдивщуальному, популяцшному i видовому рiвнях. Висновки. В процеа розвитку бiофiлософii !! дослщницька сфера буде закономiрно розширюватися з використанням фiлософських засобiв пiзнання життя як такого i наповнення бюфшософи як фшософською, так i бюлопчною проблематикою. В умовах сучасностi безумовну значимiсть набувають дослiдження меж бюлопчно! реальносп та !! невiдомих рашше властивостей, визначення нових горизонтiв теоретичного знання в наущ про життя, критичне пе-реосмислення концепц!й бюцентризму i антропоцентризму в просторi сучасного наукового знання, визначення перспективних трендiв дослщження людини, !! мюця i ролi в планетарному бутп.
Ключовi слова: антропоцентризм; бiологiчний фiналiзм; бiофiлософiя; бiоцентризм; буття; життя; органзм; постмодерн; природа людини; екоцид
ЛЮДИНА У ТЕХНОСФЕР1
С. К. КОСТЮЧКОВ1*
1 Херсонский государственный университет (Херсон, Украина), эл. почта [email protected], ORCID 0000-0003-1708-643X
РАЗНЫЕ ОБРАЗЫ ЧЕЛОВЕКА И АНТРОПОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ КОЛЛИЗИИ ЭПОХИ ПОСТМОДЕРНА: БИОФИЛОСОФСКАЯ ИНТЕРПРЕТАЦИЯ
Цель. Исследование направлено на обоснование процесса формирования разных образов человека в эпоху постмодерна в контексте биофилософии, с учетом необходимости поиска адекватного ответа на исторические вызовы и продуцирования новых ценностных ориентиров, которые отображают преемственность цивилизационного развития. Теоретический базис. В своих теоретических построениях автор исходит из необходимости учёта биофилософского аспекта постмодерного человека, как такового, который оставаясь представителем вида Homo sapiens, стал динамично изменяться, теряя (ослабляя) собственные при-родно-функциональные качества, приобретая в значительной степени качества социально-техногенные. В качестве исходного отстаивается тезис о том, что в постмодерном обществе нравственно-правовые основы бытия человека как субъекта действия и ответственности за эти действия, практически совпадают с основами биологическими. Новые биологические знания, а также связанные с ними технологии ориентируют общественное сознание на продуцирование принципиально новых или модернизацию уже существующих биофилософских идей. Авторское видение относительно антропологических коллизий эпохи постмодерна обусловлено тем, что проблематика человека постмодерна приобретает особую остроту в конце ХХ - начале XXI веков. Актуальной является прогрессирующая диспропорция между человеком, чьи возможности, как представителя вида Homo sapiens, биологически ограничены, и человеческим сообществом, которое не видит границ в своей информационной и технологической экспансии. Научная новизна. Автором выявлены ключевые особенности эпохи постмодерна, в которой зарождается принципиально иное цивилизационное пространство и где возникает новый по своей внутренней культуре тип личности, именующийся человеком постмодерным. Осуществлено рассмотрение человека эпохи постмодерна сквозь призму биофилософии, интерес которой относительно человека обусловлен его местом в природе, перспективами развития на индивидуальном, популяционном и видовом уровнях. Выводы. В процессе развития биофилософии её исследовательская сфера будет закономерно расширяться с использованием философских средств познания жизни как таковой и наполнения биофилософии как философской, так и биологической проблематикой. В условиях современности безусловную значимость приобретают исследования пределов биологической реальности и её неизвестных прежде свойств, определение новых горизонтов теоретического знания в науке о жизни, критическое переосмысление концепций биоцентризма и антропоцентризма в пространстве современного научного знания, определение перспективных трендов исследования человека, его места и роли в планетарном бытии.
Ключевые слова: антропоцентризм; биологический финализм; биофилософия; биоцентризм; бытие; жизнь; организм; постмодерн; природа человека; экоцид
Received: 22.09.2017 Accepted: 23.03.2018
