Values of a Successful Person: a Postmodern Education in a Post-Industrial Society

Cover Page

Abstract


This article is devoted to the role of education in forming a successful personal development trajectory through a value system. Study shows that modern era can be described by categories of two concepts that are similar in essence and contradictory in certain manifestations: postmodernism and postindustrialism. Article hypothesizes that a postmodern value system is necessary to overcome digital destructive influence on education that is imposed by the information and digital priorities of postindustrialism. It shows that, with the universal digitization of knowledge, there is an urgent need to form three primary competencies of individual that can be provided only by education: values, communications, and knowledge, that are not subject to digital replication. It argues that growing trend of turning universities into digital corporations contains threats to the future development of the emerging personality and its value system. Article concludes that it is possible to overcome the identified threats in implementation of global educational policy, at national and global levels, which will require a critical understanding of emerging trends in digital world.


About the authors

Ekaterina A. Antyukhova

Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University), MFA of Russia

Author for correspondence.
Email: e.antyukhova@gmail.com
76 Prospekt Vernadskogo, Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation

PhD (Pol. Sci.), Senior Lecturer, Comparative Politics Department

References

  1. Forsberg S. Setting a global agenda of education: Cooperation and tension within the global education policy field. Geoforum. 2019; 100: 32–40.
  2. Jencks C. Language of post-modern architecture. Moscow: Stroizdat, 1985. 136 p. (In Russ.).
  3. Bell D. Coming post-industrial society. Experience in social forecasting. Moscow: Academia, 2004. 94 p. (In Russ.).
  4. Kasatkin P.I. Value component in education: is it needed today? VSU Bulletin. Series: Philosophy. 2017; 2: 42–50 (In Russ.).
  5. Inozemtsev V.L. Postmodern. New philosophical encyclopedia. Vol. 3. Moscow: Myusl, 2010: 296–297 (In Russ.).
  6. Lebedeva M. M. International-political processes of integration of education. Integration of education. 2017; 21 (3): 385–394 (In Russ.).
  7. Dobrorodny D. G. Internet as a technological basis of postmodern culture: philosophy of the Internet L. Ropolyi. Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy. Psychology. 2019; 2: 32–38 (In Russ.).
  8. Ropolyi L. Prolegomena to a Web-Life-Theory. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Communicatio. 2014; 1: 9–19.
  9. Bauman Z. Fluid modernity. Saint-Petersburg, Peter, 2008. 240 p. (In Russ.).
  10. Baudrillard J. In the shadow of the silent majority, or the end of the social. Ekaterinburg: Ural University Press, 2000. 124 p. (In Russ.).
  11. Volkov V.N. Postmodern and its main characteristics. Cultural Heritage of Russia. 2014; 5 (2): 3–8 (In Russ.).
  12. Inozemtsev V. Modern post-industrial society: nature, contradictions, prospects. Moscow: Logos, 2000. 304 p. (In Russ.).
  13. Lyotard J.-F. State of postmodernism. Moscow; Saint-Petersburg: Aleteia, 1998. 160 p. (In Russ.).
  14. Toynbee A. J. History research: In 3 vol. Saint-Petersburg: Publishing house of the St. Petersburg University: “Publishing house of Oleg Abyshko”, 2006. 478 p. (In Russ.).
  15. Hagurov T. Postmodernism in the field of mass culture. Sociological research. 2007; 9: 125–130 (In Russ.).
  16. Anderson P. Origins of Postmodernity. London, New York, Verso, 1998. 150 р.
  17. Jameson F. Postmodernism, Or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1990. 461 р.
  18. Inglehart R., Wayne E. Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values. American Sociological Review. 2000; 65 (1): 19–51.
  19. Beck U. The cosmopolitan perspective: sociology of the second age of modernity. British Journal of Sociology. 2000; 51 (1): 79–105.
  20. Inglehart R., Welzel С. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge University Press, 2005. 464 p.
  21. Mamina R.I., Tolstikova I.I. Generational problems in the digital age: philosophical projection. Discourse. 2019; 5 (6): 29–41 (In Russ.).
  22. Verger A., Lubienski C., Steiner-Khamsi G. The 2016 World Yearbook on Education: The Global Education Industry. Routledge, 2016. 314 р.
  23. Nordstrom K., Schlingmann P. Urban Express: 15 rules of the new world, in which the main roles of cities and women. Moscow: Alpina Publisher, 2019. 220 p. (In Russ.).
  24. Pronevskaya M.A. Transformation of social identity in the conditions of crisis of postmodern society and culture. Theory and practice of social development. 2015; 13: 34–37 (In Russ.).
  25. Bagdasaryan N.G. Value of education in a modernizing society, or Value of knowledge in a society of ignorance. Pedagogy. 2008; 5: 3–10 (In Russ.).
  26. Verger A., Novelli M., Altinyelken H.K. Global Education Policy and International Development: A Revisited Introduction. In Verger A., Novelli M., Altinyelken H.K. (eds). Global Education Policy and International Development: New Agendas, Issues and Policies (2nd edition) London: Bloomsbury, 2018: 1–34.

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 366

PDF (Russian) - 65

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


Copyright (c) 2020 Antyukhova E.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies