The proposed article considers the problem of determining the basis of mythologemization of information about the existence of socio-historical phenomena represented in digital space. History, reflected in the picture of socio-historical, unfolds as a form of expression of an information project, which determines the vision of a historical event in the parameters necessary for the subject. The formation of the information model of history in practice is accompanied by the leveling of objective and actualization of subjective components. Providing society with a historical tool for justifying one's own being is an objective factor in social reproduction, despite the fact that the filling of existential paradigms of social being with a certain content has an obvious subjective format. The question of human mastering the information space of history involves an appeal to its socio-cultural meanings. The information resource involved in the complex of organizing the content of the picture of socio-historical reality inevitably loses its own ontological independence and becomes part of the socio-cultural and epistemological system of organizing the subject. The interpretation of information sets the angles of perception of a historical phenomenon, its "visibility" and the level of mastery. The parameters of the historical model are due to the movement of information flows, the vector aspiration of which depends on the coordinates of the gnoseological system and the axiological imperatives of the cultural matrix of the subject.
Keywords: Determination, digitalization, electronic resources of humanities, history, mythology
The desire to improve the methodology of mastering reality is an integral factor in the way a person lives. The development of institutions of knowledge increment, due to the combination of social, technical and technological changes that engulfed civilization in the last third of the twentieth century and were gaining in intensity, provided an opportunity to implement new approaches in reflecting reality. The transition to the format of using first electronic-cybernetic and then information-digital systems in all spheres of social life turned them from a means of increasing technological efficiency into a universal cultural value (Alexandrov et al., 2019). The potential of cyber-digital culture definitely increases the availability of information technology resources in principle, and for the scientific community, first of all, by providing opportunities to design both new images of reality and ways of knowing it. The scale of the penetration of digital technologies into the social system inevitably determines the modification of the concepts of worldview, the visualization complexes of the object-subject sphere, the format of emotional and psychological experiences. Obviously, such a state of affairs urgently needs a deep understanding of its causes, states and consequences, which require their reproduction in a general scientific picture of reality (Mukina et al., 2018).
Digitalization involves the transformation of information into digital form as the most effective means of realizing cognitive, communicative, production and other opportunities for social activity. By enriching these capabilities, digital technologies create new, different from the usual traditional ideas of the human self-realization system, claiming their better replacement (Halin & Chernova, 2018). The use of digital technologies transforming human capabilities forms the foundations of new ontological and sociocultural realities. In the space of digital technologies, a person repeatedly increases his potential as an open system, activating a complex of relevant competencies. The information-digital space is inherent in a specific context for presenting research material that can reveal new semantic features and specifics of the data used, which could not be noticed without their visual representation (Maslanov, 2019).
The digital field, saturated with inexhaustible information resources and intellectual programs for their development and practical implementation, is constitutionalized as a new sphere of culture free from formal-traditional restrictions. The multimedia segment complements the known world with a complex of virtual objects that are devoid of constant parameters, which makes it relatively easy to extract information, transform and interpret it thereby changing both the ontological and axiological statuses of the object (Yaroslavceva, 2020). Information and digital technologies not only create a world of new subject phenomena, as, for example, is happening in the field of production of values of material culture, but also create a special virtual reality, a priori having a significantly large potential for interpretive transformation of the information provision of the picture of the world as a whole and the picture of social history including.
Society is certainly historical, in connection with which the mastery of the instrumentation for the formation of images of historical reality in the context of information and digital culture becomes an existential necessity. Attracting the resources of information and digital technologies into scientific and philosophical practice inevitably entailed a change in the parameters of constructing images of reality in general and the socio-historical sphere as a whole. The development of digital culture and its increasing social influence led to the emergence of a new type of knowledge - digital humanities and a new type of sciences - digital humanities (Ivashevsky & Strokov, 2020). The object-subject database of Digital Humanities consists of a set of issues related to the operation of cyber resources (digitized data), capable of mastering information arrays at a fundamentally different technical and not only analytical level. The content of digital space, along with the recognition of obvious advantages (for example, solving search tasks), causes in the environment of the humanitarian community certain fears associated with the problem of the influence of digital content on the ability of a subject in conditions of intense information influence to preserve intellectual and worldview independence, establishing the dependence of the subject on the algorithm of the search program, ambiguity of the system access to obtaining information, its reliability, etc. This circumstance initiates the need to identify the ontological and cognitive-heuristic statuses of information institutions of social history in the context of its implementation in the digital environment. The development of the space of social history in the media-digital environment inevitably entails the updating of issues related to the establishment of the essence of the mechanisms for the production of information, the choice of the source, the degree of validity, the assessment of methodological tools (Ivashevsky, 2008).
A subject in digital space inevitably becomes an interactive system that not only acquires relevant information competencies, but also finds itself under the inevitable influence of an information flow of a certain quality, caused by actualization of those initiated by the requests of the subject himself. The area of interest of the researcher determines his choice of the information equipment of the study, its causes, the course of implementation and consequences. Moreover, the concentration of the researcher's attention is actualized selectively, denying all that is not significantly related to the problematic situation. The digital space is extremely sensitive to individual qualities of the subject/user. Human and information-digital complexes acquire complex, multidimensional, correlation relationships. Issues arising from the formation of interdependence are due to the fact that the subject, immersing himself in a certain information field, considers it as a sphere of his own development/expression, while he does not fully understand the situation, since he is determined by the format for submitting/broadcasting/demonstrating information that was laid down by its producers. The logic of the demonstration of the information model creates a special world where certain aspects of the information content of the object are updated, and others, on the contrary, are retouched. The world of relations of things is replaced by the information lens of the subject's requests, and the system of various relations between objects of reality is replaced by the images of the virtual world. In this case, the information and digital environment ceases to be an institution of socio-cultural development of the subject, enriching him with new knowledge. It becomes apparent that digital content information is a phenomenon capable not only of providing the subject/user with the necessary resources, but also, in a sense, of subjecting it to certain logic. In this view, does the question inevitably arise about the substantive superiority of the subject or information?
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study is to analyze the mythology of the picture of socio-historical reality in the context of establishing the typological characteristics of the reflection of the historical process in digital space.
The basis of the methodological base of the article was the methods of the neoclassical model of scientific reflection, which involves a synthesis of rational and value-oriented, scientist and humanistic, structural and anthropological, systemic and dynamic paradigms of its organization in their correlation with the socio-cultural conditions of the production of historical knowledge (Lubsky, 2013). The cognitive potential of the neoclassical concept provided an opportunity to identify the specifics of the formation of mythology in the context of the mutual influence of systems of perception and the formation of images of historical reality; to reveal the complex of determination of the content of the picture of socio-historical reality by the sociocultural environment, to establish the mechanisms of interaction between the institutions of projection and the content of reflection paradigms, which, in turn, allowed to reveal the directions of improvement of the gnoseological potential of socio-historical research.
Due to the natural openness of the system of self-existence to the outside world, man is constantly in a state of continuous influence on his sensory and analytical structures of an infinite information flow, which gives rise to complexes of irritations, perceptions, impressions, etc. Obviously, the human body in the process of processing the totality of incoming information should experience serious burdens. For example, in a person, more than a million channels are concentrated in one viewing system alone. This number far exceeds our ability to process information, which is limited to about 25 bits of binary information per second (Bakaeva et al., 2014). Overloading a person with an excessive amount of information does not contribute to an effective (adequate) reflection of reality, but, on the contrary, creates conditions for the formation of a system of information illusions that create insurmountable obstacles to the implementation of the process of producing knowledge corresponding to the actual state of affairs. Despite the fact that - no matter how much they criticize Ranke's formula "wie es eigentlich gewesen war" (since it really is), no matter how much they talk about the unattainability of absolute truth, it remains an axiom: "If you are not looking for truth, then you are not engaged in science" (Ferguson et al., 2019).
The specificity of the information-digital space provides an opportunity to realize the professional competencies of not only historians, but also heuristic claims of specialists in other branches of knowledge, as well as representatives of political and cultural elites who initiate an endless collage of mutually exclusive theories and interpretations of whose concepts are presented in cognitive-heuristic meaning as equivalent. As a result, a situation was formed of radical "reconciliation" of historical knowledge, incorrect introduction into the production of its content of theoretical and methodological paradigms of natural science, mathematics and literature, which could not but affect the intellectual, cognitive and sociocultural viability of historical knowledge (Lubsky & Volkov, 2018). The production of historical knowledge in such a situation is carried out by the corresponding types of cognitive practices of digital space, the effectiveness of which is determined by the information context of the given object, which in turn initiates the convention of objectivity of historical knowledge, and forms an idea of permanent relativism of reading historical. The parameters of information and digital culture become the initial point of knowledge in general and the determining factor in the organization of images of history. Information institutions involved in the production of historical knowledge have a direct impact on the content and structure of the picture of socio-historical reality, the motivation of the activities of its creator, and the criteria for the truth of its provisions.
The incredible increase in the potential of managing the content of the information space, within the framework of digital multimedia technologies the ability to manipulate information, has led to an unprecedented format for interpreting information, which cannot but affect the quality of the image of the picture of social history. This circumstance, combined with the specifics of the object of historical research and the forms of organization of knowledge about it, can act as a factor in manipulating historical facts, thereby creating grounds for incorrect falsification of history and as a result of the negative transformation of historical knowledge in general. Distortion of information is becoming an increasingly spreading and extremely dangerous feature of modern digitalization in its consequences (Ivashevsky, 2020). The informational content of the picture of social history is obviously creative, the subject actively intervenes in the content of historical fact, thereby transforming it. This circumstance allows us to characterize the picture of socio-historical reality as a mental construct, where objective reality, at best, only initiates and, perhaps, correlates our knowledge (Lubsky, 2013).
History in the format of cyber-digital space appears as a mythologized form of reflection of the past, determined by the perspective of the information context - the cognitive resources of the subject make such changes in the content of the information at their disposal that make it possible to reproduce the story only in the form of mythology (Stepanov et al., 2020). Images of history in information-digital format, in essence, there are concepts of historical narrative, largely set by the organizer of information, which in a certain way identifies their qualities and updates them. The mythology of the picture of social history in the methodological potential of digital modeling is realized as a manifestation of the information determination of the subject of historical knowledge. The predisposition to the adoption of certain content is due to the fact that the mastery of objective information is realized not suddenly, simultaneously, but in the process of gradually adjusting a reflexive resource that learns about the parameters of the data of the object under study. Mythology appears as a form of information lenses in the context of a thematic query.
The formation of the information model of history in practice is accompanied by both the leveling of objective historical and the actualization of the existentially subjective. Providing society with a historical tool for substantiating one's own being is an objective factor in social reproduction, despite the fact that the filling of existential paradigms with a certain content has an obvious subjective format. People do not live in objective knowledge of past events, but in how they are formulated in a public agenda and what is considered correct (Ivanova, 2013). Understanding historicity is impossible outside of a certain perspective of the information context, and historical subjectivity is due to the specifics of epistemological procedures and the content of information support (Sokolova, 2019).
The format of information deployment is due to the need to effectively solve practical issues of the formation of historical knowledge. In this perspective, mythology carries not only negative moments of the formation of a picture of socio-historical reality, but to a certain extent contributes to the development of scientific and practical knowledge, allowing us to correct gnoseological practice, orienting subjects of historical reflection on rational-creative, transformative activity. The mythology of the picture of socio-historical reality is a consequence of a certain level of development of methods for the formation of historical information, it is realized as an act of conscious reflection, the functional significance of which lies in the organization of the existence of new knowledge stable in all respects and its inclusion in the information security system of forms of social existence.
Thus, the picture of socio-historical reality obtained in the parameters of the information-digital model remains mythological due to the fact that it is a representation of interpretations. The subject has a real relation only to the part of reality that he knows and transforms, which makes the model of historical reality of conditioned interest and the needs of the subject, introducing into the historical image, the fact that it is not directly related to it, but ensures its adequacy to the socio-cultural paradigm. The postulated need to characterize information as reliable brings to life the phenomena of mythology as an institution that ensures the consistency of the content of the event image with its objective properties and qualities within the framework of speculative combinations. The mythological component is not realized as a simple consequence of the activity of the subject, but as a result of the transformation of the object in the subject. The process of mythologizing the informational qualities of a picture of socio-historical reality should not be understood as subjective arbitrariness, this is a specific cognitive reflection of reality, through which objective historical reality becomes the property of human consciousness.
Alexandrov, A. Yu., Vereshchak, S. B., & Ivanova, O. A. (2019). Tsifrovizatsiya rossiyskogo obrazovatel′nogo prostranstva v kontekste garantiy konstitutsionnogo prava na obrazovaniye [Digitalization of the Russian educational space in the context of guarantees of the constitutional right to education]. Higher education in Russia, 28(10), 73-82.
Bakaeva, J. Yu., Zakhryapin, A. V., & Petukhov, A. V. (2014). Osobennosti i tendentsii razvitiya sovremennogo informatsionnogo sotsiuma [Features and trends of the development of the modern information society]. Regionology, 2(87), 152-158.
Ferguson, N., Almond, M., & Jackson, E. (2019). Virtual History: Alternatives and Assumptions, Corpus, 656.
Halin, V. G., & Chernova, G. V. (2018). Digitalization and its impact on the Russian economy and society: advantages, challenges, threats and risks. Management consulting, 10, 46-63.
Ivanova, T. N. (2013). Intellektual′naya istoriya kak komponent istoricheskogo obrazovaniya [Intellectual history as a component of historical education]. Dialog so vremenem, 45, 369-373.
Ivashevsky, S. L., & Strokov A. A. (2020). Tsifrovaya kul′tura i otechestvennoye obrazovaniye [Digital culture and domestic education]. Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod Institute of Management, 2(56), 31-34.
Ivashevsky, S. L. (2008). Vyssheye obrazovaniye: idealy kul′tury i pravovyye normy [Higher education: ideals of culture and legal norms]. Higher education in Russia, 6, 169-171.
Ivashevsky, S. L. (2020). Social problems of digitalization of humanitarian knowledge. Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod Lobachevsky University, 1(57), 52-57.
Lubsky, A. V. (2013). Istoricheskaya nauka: intellektual′naya situatsiya posle postmodernizma [Historical science: the intellectual situation after postmodernism]. Electronic scientific and educational journal "History," 2(18), 3.
Lubsky, A. V., & Volkov, Yu. G. (2018). Sociology as a way of self-knowledge of society. Sociological Studies, 7(411), 3-12.
Maslanov, E. V. (2019). Tsifrovizatsiya i razvitiye informatsionno-kommunikatsionnykh tekhnologiy: novyye vyzovy ili obostreniye starykh problem? [Digitalization and development of information and communication technologies: new challenges or exacerbation of old problems?]. The Digital Scholar: Philosopher`s Lab, 2(1), 6-21.
Mukina, I. V., Sokolova, L. Yu., & Mukin, V. A. (2018). Korrelyatsionnyye svyazi regional′noy kul′tury s prostranstvom opornogo universiteta [Correlation of regional culture with the space of the reference university]. Bulletin of Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University, 8(2), 153-172. DOI:
Sokolova, T. D. (2019). Istoricheskoye a priori Elen Mettszher i sovremennyye kontseptsii [Historical a priori by Ellen Metzger and modern concepts of a priori]. In L. V. Shipovalova (Ed.), Historical epistemology - History, ontology, epistemology (pp. 10-15). Conflictology Development Fund (St. Petersburg).
Stepanov, A. G., Bakaeva, Zh. Yu., & Steklova, I. V. (2020). Mifologema istoricheskogo obraza [Mythologeme of the historical image]. Context and reflection: Philosophy about the world and man, 9(1), 12-18.
Yaroslavceva, E. I. (2020). Potentsial tsifrovykh tekhnologiy i problemy tvorchestva cheloveka [The potential of digital technologies and the problems of human creativity]. Voprosy Filosofii, 11, 58-66. https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2020-11-58-66
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
28 December 2021
Print ISBN (optional)
Culture, communication, history, mediasphere, education, law
Cite this article as:
Stepanov, A. G. (2021). Mythology Of Information-Digital Space Of Historical Reality Picture. In D. Y. Krapchunov, S. A. Malenko, V. O. Shipulin, E. F. Zhukova, A. G. Nekita, & O. A. Fikhtner (Eds.), Perishable And Eternal: Mythologies and Social Technologies of Digital Civilization, vol 120. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 73-79). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2021.12.03.10