Mythological Metamorphosis And The Genesis Of Individuality In The Information-Digital Space

Abstract

Digital space is a unique specific artificial reality that allows people to go beyond their capabilities and limitations. In relation to objective reality, this environment does not have an identical existence, but, for example, in terms of the individual’s attitude to it within it, this environment is quite capable of replacing the objective reality. The influence of the objective world in digital space is minimized. The possibilities of the latter have potentially endless characteristics, which generates fertile ground for various myth-making processes. The created artificial mythologemes operate not only within this space. They go beyond it, they emanate through an individual, who is the part of objective reality. Through an individual’s consciousness, thinking and attitudes, such mythologemes are rooted as some objective and existing phenomena. Due to its specifics, digital reality is an effective surrogate that forms an individual, replacing, in particular, society, culture, morality, etc. in the aspect of an individual’s formation. However, the appearance and formation of a new digital individual is subject to many trends and changes. The paradox of the digital space is that for all the individuality of the approach to everyone who exists in it, it also imposes certain requirements that the one who is present in it should meet. Many attitudes towards the formation of the information space identity contain trends of destructing an individual’s direct relationship to many of its spheres, creating a kind of autonomous world, isolating the presence of objective reality from an individual.

Keywords: Artificial autonomous spacechaosdespairfearmyth-makingnew personality

Introduction

Digital space is an autonomous territory that has its own temporal and local characteristics that are subject to its internal rules. In this aspect, the virtual space in its characteristics is similar to the phenomenon of the game, since it has similar qualities. There is no doubt that there is interpenetration between virtual and real space, and there are certain elements responsible for their synchronization (Alavesa, 2018). It is worth noting that modern research is aimed at studying the trend of mutual integration of these areas (Serino et al., 2017; Stoyanov et al., 2018) to create a hybrid space, as well as to study the consequences and possibilities of such a synthesis. The influence of the objective world in digital space is minimized, and the possibilities have potentially endless characteristics, which forms fertile ground for various mythological processes. The created artificial mythologemes operate not only within this space. They go beyond its borders, they emanate through a person who is part of objective reality, and through consciousness, thinking and attitude, they are rooted as some objective and existing phenomena.

Today researchers indicate the urgent need to study social myth and secondary ideological myth-making in order to curb negative trends (Ponizovkina, 2017). The modern denial of mythologization as a tendency of worldview is the result of rationalization, self-belief in the absence of the supernatural, the flourishing of spiritualism (faith in ghosts, spirits, etc.), characteristic of Europe (Josephson-Storm, 2017). Modern myths may have a rational, even scientific justification, but they are characterized by a lack of empirical evidence (Leeming, 2020).

Problem Statement

2.1. The research problem is the genesis of individuality in the digital space and the determination of the catalytic nature of this space for the formation of a new individuality.

2.2. Also, the problematic of this research is analysis of personal transformations of an individual in digital space, the identification of pathological, destructive and hyperbolic tendencies.

Research Questions

3.1. What is the impact of digital space on the formation of personality, and what is its specificity?

3.2. What are the specifics, features and characteristics of a digital personality?

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to identify the specifics of the formation of a new personality in the modern world, that is initiated within the digital space.

In addition, the purpose of this work is to emphasize, label and analyze the nature of the specific myth-making of the new digital personality.

Research Methods

In this work, the dialectical method was used as a tool for considering internal contradictions, which find their manifestation in the genesis and subsequent functionality of the new individuality. The analytical methodology involves the use of an in-depth analysis of the authenticity and behavior of a modern individual in the digital space, in particular in social networks. This is necessary for synthesizing the obtained results, which, in addition to the modeling method, allowed us to form the characteristic features of a digital personality. Elements of an ethical and psychological approach were also used in this process, in particular to identify the specifics of behavior and thinking. The comparative method and religious studies approach were used to identify the specifics of the myth creation of the modern individual within the framework of virtual space. In this work, we also use the ratio/synthesis between the approaches of essentialism and constructivism, necessary to consider complex phenomena, in particular ethics and religion (Latysheva et al., 2019). It is used when considering the destruction and restructuring of the individual within the virtual-digital space.

Findings

6.1. Digital space contributes to “zeroing”, which leads to a distortion of the true identity and submission to the digital space system.

6.2. The process of personality restructuring removes responsibility from the individual and literally “deifies the person.

6.3. The genesis of the “new personality” has an autopoietiques character. Digital space gives it a certain “personality” in accordance with its own requirements for it.

6.4. Digital space in a special way mystifies “normality” and “innovation”, redrawing individuals to their own requirements.

Conclusion

Digital space has a mixed effect on the individual. On the one hand, it opens up a wide range of possibilities, on the other, it deforms individuality, turning a person into a mechanical element of the digital world system, which the human created.

The amorphous nature of such an individual does not indicate particular existential flexibility, but rather shows a weakening of volitional qualities, a lethargy of existence and consciousness.

References

1. Alavesa, P. (2018). Playful appropriations of hybrid space: combining virtual and physical environments in urban pervasive games. University of Oulu.
2. Djakov, A. V. (2012). Feliks Guattari, filosof transversal’nosti [Felix Guattari, Philosopher of Transversality]. Vladimir Dal’.
3. Fromm, E. (2009). Sindrom raspada [Syndrome of decay]. In Krizis soznaniya [Crisis of Consciousness] (pp. 82-97). Algoritm.
4. Fromm, E. (2016). Anatomiya chelovecheskoy destruktivnosti [Anatomy of Human Destructiveness]. AST.
5. Hechta, H., Welscha, R., Viehoffa, J., & Longo, M. R. (2019). The shape of personal space. Acta Psychologica, 193, 113-122. DOI:
6. Josephson-Storm, J. A. (2017). The myth of disenchantment: magic, modernity, and the birth of the human sciences. University of Chicago Press. DOI:
7. Kierkegaard, S. (2014). Kontseptsiya strakha [The Concept of Fear]. Akademicheskij proekt.
8. Kierkegaard, S. (2019). Bolezn’ k smerti [The Sickness unto Death]. Akademicheskij proekt.
9. Latysheva, Zh., Arinin, E., Petev, N., & Barashkov, V. (2019). Dialectic of essentialism and constructivism in modern sociohumanistic research (illustrated by ethical and religious range of problems). In B. Yazyev (Ed.) International Scientific Conference: «Achievements and Perspectives of Philosophical Studies» (APPSCONF-2019), 72.  EDP Sciences. DOI: 10.1051/shsconf /20197203020
10. Leeming, D. A. (2020). Modern mythology. In Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion, 1496-1498. Springer. DOI:
11. Ponizovkina, I. (2017). Social myth in modern society. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 40, 648-653. DOI:
12. Ryu, S. (2020). Performing virtual bodies. International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media, 16(2), 1-17. DOI:
13. Serino, A., Noel, J. -P., Mange, R., Canzoneri, E., Pellencin, E., Ruiz, J. B., & Herbelin, B. (2017). Peripersonal Space: An Index of Multisensory Body–Environment Interactions in Real, Virtual, and Mixed Realities. Front. ICT, 4(31), 1-12. DOI:
14. Stoyanov, S., Glushkova, T., Stoyanova-Doycheva, A., & Doychev, E. (2018). Virtual Physical Space – An Architecture Supporting Internet of Things Applications. 20th International Symposium on Electrical Apparatus and Technologies (SIELA), IEEE. DOI:
15. Touzeau, N. (2017). Differentiations between the Real World and the Virtual Space. Journal of Forensic Research, 8(6), 400-401. DOI:
16. Weech, S., Kenny, S., & Barnett-Cowan, M. (2019). Presence and Cybersickness in Virtual Reality Are Negatively Related: A Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(158), 1-19. DOI: