The Increasing Role of the Digital Body in the Human Capital: changes in the nature if communications

The research is conditioned by the necessity to analyze new opportunities for the development of the human capital and the challenges to it, caused by the digital transformation. It is substantiated that under the influence of the time arrow effects (I. Prigozhin) the development of the human capital goes at an accelerating pace and in a more complicated way in the context of the formation of the complex socio-digital-natural reality. The process of the digitalization has an ambivalent impact on the content and character of the human capital: on the one hand, individuals, starting from their early socialization, use smart machines for self-development, communicate not only with their parents and peers, as it used to be, but practically with people around the world, grasping the diversity of cultures and creating their “digital bodies”; however, on the other hand, the digitalization depletes the values of their own world of life, minimizes face-to-face communication, dehumanizes education and training; however, on the other hand, digitalization dilutes the values of their own life world, minimizes face-to-face communications, and dehumanizes the education at “McUniversities” (G. Ritzer). Accordingly, there are limits to how the digital transformation can be used to develop the human capital. The challenges of COVID-19 to the functionality of the human capital at both the global and local levels are particularly addressed. At the same time, in the author’s opinion, U. Beck’s idea of the “metamorphosis of the world”, expressed in the emergence of the “positive side effects of the bads”, is applicable to the pandemic. In this connection, it is argued that the qualitatively new opportunities for the development of the human capital under conditions of the socio-natural turbulence and the coexistence of people with viruses are emerging in a non-linear way, including: the emergence of the homo epidemiologicus as a new social type - an individual who during his/her life reflexes to the epidemiological situation; the transition to the digital medical surveillance with a humanistic orientation; the distant treatment of those who have fallen ill according to the data of their “digital body”; the creation of the prerequisites for recognizing the unity of the human capital of the peoples of the world.

«цифровое тело», «стрела времени», digitalization, human capital, communication, “digital body”, global complexity, non-linearity, “arrow of time”, metamorphosis, humanism

1. Афанасьева А.Э. (2016). Новая история медицины в начале XXI века: основные тенденции развития // Преподаватель XXI век. № 4. Т. 2.

2. Делёз Ж., Гваттари Ф. (2007). Анти-Эдип: Капитализм и шизофрения. Екатеринбург: У-Фактория.

3. Коулман Дж. (2001). Капитал социальный и человеческий // Общественные науки и современность. № 3. С. 122-139.

4. Кравченко С.А. (2019). Многоликость метаморфоз: о новациях двух канадских социологов // Социологические исследования. № 2. С. 26-35.

5. Парсонс Т. (2002). О социальных системах. М.: Академический проект. Пригожин И., Стенгерс И. (2001). Порядок из хаоса. Новый диалог человека с природой. М.: Прогресс.

6. Agamben G. (1998). Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

7. Alexander J.C. (2017). The Drama of Social Life. Cambridge: Polity Press.

8. Beck U. (2016). The Metamorphosis of the World. Cambridge: Polity Press.

9. Beck U. (2010). World at Risk. Cambridge: Polity Press. Becker G.S. (1964). Human Capital. N.Y.: Columbia University Press.

10. Boudon R. (1982). The Unanticipated Consequences of Social Action. London: Macmillan.

11. Bourdieu P. (1986). The Forms of Capital / J. Richardson (ed.). Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. N.Y.: Greenwood.

12. Castells M. (2010). The Rise of the Network Society. 2nd ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

13. Giddens A. (2010). The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.

14. Kantorowicz E. (1989). Les Deux Corps du Roi. Essai sur la théologie politique du Moyen Age. Paris.

15. Kravchenko S.A. (2020a). The birth of “normal trauma”: The effect of non-linear development // Economics and Sociology. No. 2. P. 150-159. DOI: 10.14254/2071-789X.2020/13-2/11.

16. Kravchenko S.A. (2020b). Being Cosmopolitan and Anti-Cosmopolitan - The Complex Risks of Covid-19: The Demand to Move from the ‘Society of Normalisation’ to Global Medical Surveillance // The European Sociologist. Issue 45: Pandemic (Im)Possibilities. Vol. 1 [access mode]: https://www. europeansociologist.org/issue-45-pandemic-impossibilities-vol-1/being-cosmopolitan-and-anticosmopolitan---complex-risks.

17. Latour B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

18. Merton R. (1936). The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Action // American Sociological Review. Vol.1.

19. Mosco V. (2017). Becoming Digital. Toward a Post-Internet Society.

20. Ritzer G. (2013). The Mcdonaldization of Society. University of Maryland, Sage.

21. Shultz T. (1968). Human Capital // The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. N.Y. Vol. 6.

22. Urry J. (2008). Mobilities. Cambridge: Polity Press.

23. Urry J. (2011). Climate Change and Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

24. Vanderburg W.H. (2016). Our Battle for the Human Spirit. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.