- The authors:
Sergey Kravchenko - Pages: 616-626
- Section: INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION, DIGITAL EDUCATION AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT
- URL: http://conferences-ifl.rudn.ru/2686-8199-2020-7-616-626/
- DOI: 10.22363/2686-8199-2020-7-616-626
It is shown that the human capital is developing at an accelerating pace and in a more complex way, largely influenced by the educational process. The digitalization of education allows creating both the social and “digital” bodies of a student, which form the socio-digital human capital. This process has an ambivalent impact: unprecedented social lifts and life chances are opened, but there are negative side effects in the form of dehumanization of social practices. The existing pragmatic trend of the digitalization leading directly and indirectly to such ills as dehumanization, displacement of cultural values and human spirit is considered. The objective of the study is to provide the evidence that the main reason for the negative consequences of the digitalization of education is contained in the principles of formal rationality and pragmatism — most of the challenges to humanism result from the conflicts between the “world” of the digital and human life. The basic results are: due to the digitalization of education students are forming both social and “digital” bodies — there have been substantiated the contours of the concept of the socio-digital human capital. The integral methodology is in demand: the concept of the “body without organs” (G. Deleuze and F. Guattari) and I. Prigozhin’s postulate of the “arrow of time” are used to show that the digitalization of education has led to the non-linear effects on the human capital. The conclusion is made about the necessity of the transition of the digitalization of education from pragmatic to the humanistic vector of development. The author proposes a road map for the concrete improvement of the digitalization of the education: the adaptation of the education to the realities of the “global complexity”; the orientation of the strategy of the human capital development to ensure a balance between the social and “digital” bodies; taking into account local cultures and national character of students while teaching ethical topics of using the digital; adapting students to the realities of the “digital” world and the perception of a growing complexity of humanism; preparing the students for co-functioning with the digital non-human actants; the transition from the administrative to “smart management”.
Keywords: digitalization of education, human capital, “digital” body, sociodigital-natural realities, non-linearity, global complexity, “normal trauma”, humanism
Sergey Kravchenko
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia Moscow, Russia
Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences Moscow, Russia
e-mail: sociol7@yandex.ru ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2528-5703
Andreev, I.L., Nazarova, L.N. 2014. The playing brain: Who is gambling: The player, his brain, or both? Psychological Health 4: 87–96.
Bauman, Z. 2011. Culture in a Liquid Modern World. Polity Press, Cambridge, 144 p.
Beck, U. 2016. The Metamorphosis of the World. Polity Press, Cambridge, 223 p.
Becker, G.S. Human Capital. 1964. Columbia University Press, New York, 187 p. Berne, E. 1964. Games People Play. Ballantine Books, New York, 216 p. Bourdieu, P. 1986. The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.) In: Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, Westport, CT: Greenwood, pp. 241–258.
Braidotti, R. 2015. The Posthuman. Polity Press, Cambridge, 180 p. Castells, M. 2010. The Rise of the Network Society. Second Ed. WileyBlackwell, Oxford, 565 р.
Coleman, J.S. 1988. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. The American Journal of Sociology 94: 96–120.
Deleuse, G., Guattari, F. 1983. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. University of Minneapolis Press, Minneapolis, 400 p.
Fuller, S. 2016. Is Future ‘Human’, ‘Posthuman’ or Trunshuman’. In: 3rd Forum of Sociology. The Futures We Want: Global Sociology and the Struggles for a Better World, Vienna, Austria, 10–14 July 2016.
Kravchenko, S.A. 2014. “A normal anomie”: Contours of conception. Sociological Studies 8: 3–10.
Kravchenko, S.A. 2010. Dynamics of contemporary realities: innovative approaches. Sociological Studies 10: 14–25.
Kravchenko, S.A. 2020. The birth of “normal trauma”: The effect of nonlinear development. Economics and Sociology 13 (2): 150–159.
Kravchenko, S.A. 2019. The many faces of metamorphoses: About innovations of two Canadian sociologists. Sociological Studies 2: 26–35.
Mead, G.H. 2015. Mind Self & Society. The Definitive Edition. Edited by Charles W. Morris. Annoted Edition by Daniel R. Huebner and Hans Joas, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 536 p.
Mosco, V. 2017. Becoming Digital. Toward a Post-Internet Society. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, 227 p.
Obasogie, O.K., Darnovsky, M. 2018. Beyond Bioethics: Toward a New Biopolitics. University of California Press, California, 552 р.
Parsons, T. 1951. The Social System. Free Press, Glencoe, IL, 575 p. Prigogine, I., Stengers, I. 2018. Order Out of Chaos: Man’s New Dialogue with Nature, Verso, 384 p.
Shankland, S., Ryan, J. 2020. Elon Musk shows Neuralink brain implant working in a pig. Cnet. URL: https://www.cnet.com/news/elon-musk-showsneuralink-brain-implant-working-in-a-pig/ [Accessed September 14, 2020].
Schultz, T. 1971. Investment in Human Capital, New York, 272 p. Vanderburg, W.H. 2016. Our Battle for the Human Spirit. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 440 р.
Urry, J. 2019. Global Complexity. Polity Press, Cambridge, 184 p.
World Health Assembly Update, World Health Organization. URL: https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/22-05-2019-world-health-assembly-72-update [Accessed September 14, 2020].