The Ambivalences of Digitalization: the Demand of its National-Cultural Model for Sustainable Development

Occupation: Head of the Department of Sociology; Chief Researcher
Affiliation:
MGIMO-University
Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Science
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow

Journal name

Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya

Edition

Issue 9

Pages

29-37

Abstract

The author has analyzed the ambivalences of digitalization, which change the factors that ensured the sustainable development of socium and nature. It is shown that their consequences have a complex causality – they are depended not only on the objective trends of self-development of modern realities, but largely on people's choice of ways of implementation of digital innovations, that are nationally and culturally conditioned. The rational-formal model of digitalization, established in the West and imposed on us, is dominated by trends of chaotization and dehumanization, its inherent is the “cancel culture” of values of other nations. As an alternative to it, there has been proposed a national and cultural model of digitalization, which aims to create qualitatively new opportunities for sustainable development of the country, taking into account the confrontational geopolitical realities that have arisen. The author substantiates the basic components of this model, the quintessence of which is the governance of the content and characteristic features of digitalization processes, taking into account the culture and mentality of the Russians, their own civilizational specificity. In this context, the reorientation of the digitalization of education from Western pragmatism to the goals of comprehensive personal development is justified; the digitalization of health care – from the absolutization of the treatment protocol to finding its optimal balance with the art of healing. It is concluded that the proposed model of digitalization will nonlinearly increase the potential for sustainable development of our society.

Keywords

digitalization, ambivalence, sustainable development, non-linearity, complexity, “cancel culture”, humanism

Received

28.09.2022

Publication date

29.09.2022

Number of characters

23182

Cite

GOST	Kravchenko S. The Ambivalences of Digitalization: the Demand of its National-Cultural Model for Sustainable Development // Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya – 2022. – Issue 9 C. 29-37 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/socis/s013216250020181-2-1-en (circulation date: 29.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250020181-2
MLA	Kravchenko, Sergey A. "The Ambivalences of Digitalization: the Demand of its National-Cultural Model for Sustainable Development." Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya 9 (2022):29-37. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250020181-2
APA	Kravchenko S. (2022). The Ambivalences of Digitalization: the Demand of its National-Cultural Model for Sustainable Development. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya (9), pp.29-37 DOI: 10.31857/S013216250020181-2

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 612

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Alexander J.C. (2012) Trauma: A Social Theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.
2. Alexander J.C. (2017) The Drama of Social Life. Cambridge: Polity Press.
3. Baudrillard J. (1994) Simulacra and Simulation. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
4. Baudrillard J. (2000) De la Seduction. Moscow. Electronic publishing: Center for Humanitarian Technologies. 18.07.2008. URL: https://gtmarket.ru/library/basis/3429/3430  (accessed 04.05.2022). (In Russ.)
5. Bauman Z. (2011) Collateral Damage. Social Inequalities in a Global Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
6. Beck U. (2007) Cosmopolitan Version. Cambridge: Polity Press.
7. Beck U. (2016) The Metamorphosis of the World. Cambridge: Polity Press.
8. Braidotti R. (2013) The Posthuman. Cambridge: Polity Press.
9. Castells M. (2010) The Rise of the Network Society. Second Ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
10. Castells M. et al. (2017) Another Economy is Possible. Cambridge: Polity Press.
11. Fedotova V.G., Kolpakov V.A. (eds) (2014) The History of Modernization as a Subject of Socio-Philosophical Analysis. Moscow: IF RAN. (In Russ.)
12. Foucault M. (2004) Archaeology of Knowledge. St. Petersburg: Gumanitarnaya Academia; Univer. kniga. (In Russ.)
13. Giddens A. (2016) Turbulent and Mighty Continent. What Future for Europe? Cambridge: Polity Press.
14. Giddens, A. (2003) The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Moscow: Akadem. proekt. (In Russ.)
15. Gorshkov M.K. (2020) “There is Such a profession – To Study Society”. Selected Articles, Interviews, Biographical Revelation. Moscow: Ves' Mir. (In Russ.)
16. Knyazeva E.N. (2002) Foundations of Synergetics. Regimes with Aggravation, Self-Organization, and Tempo-Worlds. St. Petersburg: Aletheia. (In Russ.)
17. Kravchenko S.A. (2019) Sociology on the Move: The Demand for Humanistic Digital Turn. Vestnik RUDN. Serija: Sociologija [RUDN Journal of Sociology]. Vol. 19 No. 3: 397–405. DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2019-19-3-397-405.
18. Kravchenko S.A. (2020) The birth of “normal trauma”: The effect of non-linear development. Economics and Sociology. No 2: 150–159. DOI:10.14254/2071-789X.2020/13-2/11.
19. Kravchenko S.A. (2021) The Demand for the “Rigidity Turn” for the Sustainable Development: Contours of a Concept. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 10: 12–22. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250015998-0. (In Russ.)
20. Lapin N.I. (2021) The Complexity of New Russia’s Becoming. Anthroposophical and Socio-Cultural Approach. Moscow: Ves' Mir. (In Russ.)
21. Latour B. (2014) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Moscow: VSHE. (In Russ.)
22. Latour B. (2018) Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences Into Democracy. Moscow: Ad Marginem Press. (In Russ.)
23. Law J. (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. London, New York: Routledge.
24. Luhmann N. (2004) Society as a social system. Moscow: Logos. (In Russ.)
25. Merton R. (2006) Social Theory and Social Structure. Moscow: AST. (In Russ.)
26. Merton R.K. (1976) Sociological Ambivalence and Other Essays. New York: Free Press.
27. Mosco V. (2017) Becoming Digital. Toward a Post-Internet Society. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.
28. Obasogie O.K., Darnovsky M. (eds). (2018) Beyond Bioethics: Toward a New Biopolitics. California: University of California Press.
29. Parsons T. (1994) Some Problems of General Theory in Sociology. In: Modern Western Theoretical Sociology. Moscow: INION RAS. (In Russ.)
30. Tikhonov A.V. (2007) Sociology of Governance. Moscow: "Kanon+" ROOI “Rehabilitation”. (In Russ.)
31. Toshchenko Zh.T. (2001) Paradoxical Man: Monograph. Moscow: Gardariki.
32. Toshchenko Zh.T. (2011) The Centaur-Problem: A Philosophical and Sociological Analysis. Moscow: Novyi Khronograf. (In Russ.)
33. Toshchenko Zh.T. (2020) Society of Trauma: Between Evolution and Revolution (A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis). Moscow: Ves' Mir. (In Russ.)
34. Urry J. (2008) Mobilities. Cambridge: Polity Press.
35. Urry J. (2011) Climate Change and Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
36. Vanderburg W.H. (2016) Our Battle for the Human Spirit. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.