Post-Anthropocentric Model of the Development of the Humanities

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The article examines the emergence of a post-humanities model of scientific knowledge, formed against the backdrop of the crisis of classical humanistic studies, cognitive capitalism, and the processes of posthuman convergence. Particular attention is given to the transition from humanistic and anthropocentric epistemological paradigms to posthumanist and post-anthropocentric approaches grounded in transversality, multiplicity, and relational forms of subjectivity. The study analyzes the transformation of the disciplinary structure of science, within which the boundaries between the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences are redefined through the inclusion of non-human agents – animals, technologies, media environments, and ecological systems – into the field of inquiry. The article substantiates the philosophical and methodological foundations of the post-humanities approach, including the ontology of vital new materialism, the principles of relationality and transversality, as well as a critique of universalist notions of scientific objectivity and validity. Key categories are highlighted, such as defamiliarization, nomadism, affectivity, and ecosophy, which shape new cognitive and educational models. The methodological framework of the study relies on a broad post-anthropocentric perspective, incorporating postdisciplinary and transversal approaches. The research employs philosophical-hermeneutical analysis, critical discourse analysis, and comparative methods. The scientific novelty of the study lies in clarifying the methodological foundations of post-humanities and substantiating the concept of transversality as a principle of organizing contemporary humanistic knowledge. The work reveals the potential of post-humanities as a form of critical nomadic thought that combines the ontology of vital new materialism with affirmative ethics and ecological sensitivity. It offers an original interpretation of the post-humanities paradigm as a transition from disciplinary humanism to relational and ecosophical models of knowledge, where the knowing subject is conceived as a multiple, distributed, affective, and responsible assemblage. The article also highlights both the productive possibilities of the post-humanities perspective – expanding the horizons of knowledge and rethinking the subject and ethics – and its potential risks, such as methodological fragmentation, researcher desubjectivation, and the reproduction of hegemonic attitudes under the guise of critical discourse.

References

  1. Брайдотти P. Постчеловек / пер. с англ. Д. Я. Хамис. М.: Изд-во Института Гайдара, 2021.
  2. Crawford E. Nationalism and Internationalism in Science, 1880–1939: Four Studies of the Nobel Population. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
  3. Proctor R. Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988.
  4. Dupré J. Against Scientific Imperialism // PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. 1994. Vol. 2. Pp. 374-381.
  5. Quijano A. Coloniality of Knowledge, Eurocentrism, and Latin America // Nepantla: Views from South. 2000. No. 1(3). Pp. 533-580.
  6. Jong A. Modern Episteme, Methodological Nationalism and The Politics of Knowledge in Political Science // Frontiers in Political Science. 2023. Vol. 5. URL: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2023.1172393/full doi: 10.3389/fpos.2023.1172393 EDN: VMWQII.
  7. Braidotti R. Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory. NY: Columbia University Press, 2011.
  8. Braidotti R. Transversal Posthumanities // Philosophy Today. 2019. No. 63(4). Pp. 1181–1195.
  9. Chandler J. Critical Disciplinarity // Critical Inquiry. 2004. No. 30(2). Pp. 355-360.
  10. LeMenager S., Foote S. The Sustainable Humanities // Publications of the Modern Language Association of America. 2012. No. 127(3). Pp. 572-578.
  11. Мёрчант К. Антропоцен и гуманитарные науки. От эпохи изменений климата к новой эре устойчивости / пер. с англ. П. Гаврилова. СПб: Academic Studies Press, 2023.
  12. Hayles K. N. How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1999.
  13. Феррандо Ф. Философский постгуманизм / пер. с англ. Д. Кралечкина. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2022.
  14. Делёз Ж., Гваттари Ф. Что такое философия? / пер. с фр. и послесл. С. Зенкина. М.: Академический проект, 2009. EDN: QXAEFV.
  15. Moulier-Boutang Y. Cognitive Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2012.
  16. Срничек Н. Капитализм платформ / пер. с англ. и науч. ред. М. Добряковой. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2019. EDN: VRPYEZ.
  17. Шваб К. Четвертая промышленная революция / под ред. А. Меркурьевой. М.: Эксмо, 2021.
  18. Crutzen P. J., Stoermer E. F. The ‘Anthropocene' // Global Change Newsletter. 2000. No. 41. Pp. 17-18.
  19. Kolbert E. The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History. NY: Henry Holt Company, 2014.
  20. Principles of Transversality in Globalization and Education / Ed. by D.R. Cole, J.P. Bradley. New York: Springer, 2018.
  21. Åsberg C., Koobak R., Johnson E. Post-humanities Is a Feminist Issue // Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research. 2011. No. 19(4). Pp. 213-216.
  22. Lykke N. Postdisciplinarity // Posthuman Glossary. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2017. P. 332-335.
  23. Брайдотти Р. Критическая постгуманитаристика, или Относятся ли медиа-природы к природо-культурам так же, как zoe – к bios? // Опыты нечеловеческого гостеприимства. М.: V-A-C press, 2018. C. 24-41.
  24. Braidotti R. Metamorphoses: Towards a Materialist Theory of Becoming. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2002.
  25. Делёз Ж., Гваттари Ф. Тысяча плато: Капитализм и шизофрения / пер. с франц. Я. И. Свирского. Екатеринбург; М.: Астрель, 2010.
  26. Nomadic Education: Variations on a Theme by Deleuze and Guattari / Ed. by I. Semetsky. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2008.
  27. Татищев А. А. Аппарат аффекта иммерсивных сред в теории современной культуры // Международный журнал исследований культуры. 2023. № 2 (51). С. 81-87. doi: 10.52173/2079-1100_2023_2_81 EDN: ISRQYZ.
  28. Alaimo S. Bodily Natures: Science, Environment, and the Material Self. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010.
  29. Ferrando F. Towards A Posthumanist Methodology. A Statement // Frame Journal for Literary Studies. 2012. No. 25(1). Pp. 9-18.
  30. Фейерабенд П. Против метода. Очерк анархистской теории познания / пер. с англ. A. Л. Никифорова. М.: АСТ, 2007.
  31. Marcus G. E. Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography // Annual Review of Anthropology. 1995. No. 24. Pp. 95-117. EDN: HFAHYV.
  32. Spry T. Performing Autoethnography: An Embodied Methodological Praxis // Qualitative Inquiry. 2001. No. 7(6). Pp. 706-732. doi: 10.1177/107780040100700605 EDN: JPCYIV.
  33. Bonta M., Protevi J. Deleuze and Geophilosophy. A Guide and Glossary. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004.
  34. Дьяков А. В. Теоретический антигуманизм в гуманитарных науках: к вопросу о перспективах антропоцентризма // Известия Тульского государственного университета. Гуманитарные науки. 2023. № 3. С. 184-191. doi: 10.24412/2071-6141-2023-3-184-191 EDN: KLCAKG.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).