• The authors:
    Sergey A. Kravchenko
  • Issue: July 24-26th, 2019
  • Pages: 488-493
  • URL:
  • DOI:

Abstract. The digitalization of socium has traumatic consequences – affects
the consciousness and behavior of the young people which is specifically
manifested in their disembedding from the context of social bonds. This
presupposes the departure from the historically prescribed social forms and
attachments which are parts of the process of the youth’s socialization and
education. On the one hand, the youth as a social group is being subjected to
the process of fragmentation of society caused by the fact that the
educational institutions designed to act as mediators for the interests of the
young people lose touch with them leading to an increase in uncertainty in
the understanding of basic values. On the other hand – this fragmentation of
the society is also promoted by the “digital risk” and “digital metamorphosis
of society” which, according to U. Beck, causes a “radical type of
individualization”: the young people tend to get rid of institutional relations,
attachments to the local cultural context and begin to depend on the
consequences of their own risks. The concrete factors of these processes are
as follows. The digitalization of society radically changes the socialization
of the young people. They have become addicted to “googling”. They rely
more not on parents and teachers but on the opinions available from their
mobile computers. As a result, the young people, being exposed to the codes
of signification of Good and Evil taken from “googling”, become dependent
on digital realities that determine the nature of their behavior in which the
values of novelty begin to prevail. At the same time, their way of thinking is
especially deformed, likened to the functioning of computers. Historically,
the younger generation was socially and financially dependent on the older
generation which actually caused a conflict between fathers and children.
However, the circumstances of life in one socio-cultural space and time
settled these contradictions quite successfully. Today the socialization takes
on a digital character that is not directly related to the specific socio-cultural
worlds of people, their previous status and roles. If socialization usually
means the transfer of the values and norms from the older generation to the
younger generation that are necessary for entering the existing social and
political order, making young people actually social beings, now, according
to U. Beck, with socialization there is a metamorphosis: “the young
DOI: 10.22363/09669-2019-488-493
generations, on the contrary, were already born as ‘digital being’. What has
been packed into the magic word ‘digital’ has become part of their ‘genetic
outfit’” (Beck, 2016: 189).
The digitalization of socium that has come into our lives brought social and
cultural changes, radically transformed the nature of society and the young
people. In my view, the adoption by scientists and then politicians of the
integralism of digital and humanistic turns can ensure the transition of
civilizations and societies to a fundamentally different trend of
development. Our optimistic forecast regarding these opportunities is based
on the following assumption: the existing very deep intergenerational
conflict is not eternal – it may be forecasted that in a generation it will
exhaust itself in the current forms because practically the socialization of all
people will assume the mastery of values and norms necessary for the
management of becoming socio-techno-natural realities in the humane
interests of the mankind.
Keywords: digital metamorphosis, digital socialization, digital youth,
digital turn, humanistic turn

Sergey A. Kravchenko
Moscow State University of International Relations, MFA of Russia
(MGIMO University), Moscow, Russia, e-mail:
ORCIDID: 0000-0003-2528-5703

Beck, U. 2002. Individualization. London: Sage, 222 pp.
Beck, U. 2016. The Metamorphosis of the World. Cambridge: Polity Press,
223 pp.
Beck, U., Beck-Gernsheim, E. 2014. Distant Love: Personal Life in the
Global Age. Beck-Gernsheim, 216 pp.
Bustillos, J. 2017. The Digital Divide. Neoliberal Imperatives and
Education. In: Isaacs S. (eds). European Social Problems. Routledge:
London and New York, pp. 149-165.
Elliott, A., Urry, J. 2010. Mobile Lives. New York: Routledge, 188 pp.
Kravchenko, S.A. 2010. Dynamics of Contemporary Realities: Innovative
Approaches. Sotsiologichecheskie Issledovania. № 10, pp. 14-25.
Kravchenko, S.A. 2013. Becoming Complex Social Reality: Issues of New
Vulnerabilities. Sotsiologichecheskie Issledovania. № 5, (2013)
Kravchenko, S.A. 2014. “A Normal Anomie”: Contours of Conception.
Sotsiologichecheskie Issledovania. № 8, pp. 3-10.
Marres, N. 2017. Digital Sociology. The Reinvention of Social Research.
Cambridge: Polity Press, 240 pp.
Prigogine, I. 1997. The End of Certainty. Free Press, New York, 228 pp.
Riesman, D. 2001. The Lonely Crowd: A Study of the American Character.
Yale University Press, 315 pp.
Vanderburg W.H. 2016. Our Battle for the Human Spirit. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press, 421 pp.