Methodological Strategies for the Philosophical Reception of Communication Processes in the Post-truth Era
Mariia Abysova
State University “Kyiv Aviation Institute”Serhii Ordenov
Ukrainian National Tchaikovsky Academy of MusicAbstract
The article presents a philosophical analysis of communication in the post-truth era, understood as a phenomenon emerging from structural transformations induced by digital capitalism. In this context, communication becomes increasingly detached from its epistemic function in the pursuit of truth, assuming instead the role
of a mechanism for behavioural influence, affective resonance, or the simulation of discursive exchange. The aim of the study is to conceptualise methodological strategies for the reception of these transformations. The paper identifies and examines three main groups of strategies – normative, critical-analytical, and post-normative – regarding the epistemological, ontological, and anthropological limitations of contemporary communication. While classical models continue to offer analytical insights, it is argued that they must be expanded to address the fragmentation of the communicative environment, the algorithmic structuring of language, and the evolving status of the subject. The typology proposed here is of heuristic significance for understanding the conditions under which responsible communicative practice remains possible when interaction can no longer rely on a stable foundation of truth.
Keywords:
post-truth, communication, deconstruction, post-normative strategies, digital capitalismReferences
Abysova Mariia, Shorina Tetiana and Skyba Ivan, 2025, Objectivity in scientific discourse in conditions of global crisis: Transformation of communicative strategies, Moderní aspekty vědy: International collective monograph, 55, p. 81–108. Czech Republic: International Economic Institute s.r.o., https://doi.org/10.52058/55-2025.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Apel Karl-Otto, 1996, Obgruntuvannia etyky vidpovidalnosti [Justification of the ethics of responsibility], in: Sytnichenko Liudmyla A. (ed.), Pershodzherela komunikatyvnoi filosofii [Primary sources of communicative philosophy], p. 46–60. Google Scholar
Baudrillard Jean, 1994, Simulacra and simulation, Glaser Sheila F. (transl.), University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Benhabib Seyla, 2002, The claims of culture: Equality and diversity in the global era, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Bolter Jay David and Grusin Richard, 2000, Remediation: Understanding new media, MA: MIT Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar
Castells Manuel, 2009, Communication power, Oxford University Press, Oxford & New York. Google Scholar
Deleuze Gilles and Guattari Félix, 1994, What is philosophy? Tomlinson Hugh & Burchell Graham (transl.), Columbia University Press, New York. Google Scholar
Derrida Jacques, 1982, Différance, in: Derrida Jacques, Margins of philosophy, Bass A. (transl.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 1–27, https://archive.org/details/marginsofphiloso0000derr (10.03.2025). Google Scholar
Drotianko Liubov, Ordenov Serhii, Kleshnia Hanna and Golovnia Alla, 2023, Human nature transformation in the context of ecosystem recovery, E3S Web of Conferences, 452, 07001, https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202345207001.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Foucault Michel, 2002, The archaeology of knowledge, Sheridan Smith A.M. (transl.), Routledge, London. Google Scholar
Habermas Jürgen, 1986, Moralität und Sittlichkeit. Treffen Hegels Einwände gegen Kant auch auf die Diskursethik zu?, in: Kuhlmann Wolfgang (ed.), Moralität und Sittlichkeit: das Problem Hegels und die Diskursethik, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, p. 16–37. Google Scholar
Habermas Jürgen, 1986, Komunikatyvna diya i dyskurs [Communicative action and discourse], in: Sytnichenko Liudmyla A. (ed.), Pershodzherela komunikatyvnoi filosofii [Primary sources of сommunicative philosophyLybid], Kyiv, p. 84–90. Google Scholar
Lanier Jaron, 2010, You are not a gadget, Alfred A. Knopf, New York. Google Scholar
Levchenko Diana, 2024, Artificial Intelligence as an Object of Global Digital Governance, Advanced Space Law, vol. 14, p. 45–52, https://doi.org/10.29202/asl/14/4.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Levinas Emmanuel, 1998, Otherwise than being or beyond essence, Lingis Alphonso (transl.), Duquesne University Press, Pittsburgh. Google Scholar
Lipovetsky Gilles, 1983, L’Ère du vide: essais sur l’individualisme contemporain [The Era of emptiness: essays on individualism in contemporary life], Gallimard, Paris. Google Scholar
Lyotard Jean-François, 1984, The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, https://archive.org/details/ThePostmodernCondition_201812 (16.03.2025). Google Scholar
Massumi Brian, 1995, The autonomy of affect, Cultural Critique, 31, p. 83–109.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Massumi Brian, 2002, Parables for the virtual: movement, affect, sensation, Duke University Press, Durham and London.
Crossref
Google Scholar
McLuhan Marshall, 1994, Understanding media: the extensions of man, MA: MIT Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar
Mouffe Chantal, 2000, The democratic paradox, Verso, London. Google Scholar
Nancy Jean-Luc, 1991, The inoperative community, Connor Peter et al. (transl.), University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Google Scholar
Nancy Jean-Luc, 2007, Listening, Mandell Charlotte (transl.), Fordham University Press, New York. Google Scholar
Oxford Dictionaries, 2016, Post-truth named 2016 word of the year, [online] Oxford Languages, https://languages.oup.com/word-of-the-year/2016/ (1.03.2025). Google Scholar
Pearce W. Barnett and Cronen Vernon, 2011, Сoordinated management of meaning (СММ), in: Griffin Em (ed.), A First Look at Communication Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 67–83. Google Scholar
Postman Neil, 2005, Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business, Penguin Books, New York. Google Scholar
Rorty Richard, 1989, Contingency, irony, and solidarity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Sardar Ziauddin (ed.), 2019, The Postnormal Times Reader. Herndon, VA: International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) in cooperation with Centre for Postnormal Policy & Futures Studies, https://iiit.org/wp-content/uploads/BiB-The-Postnormal-Times-Reader-Combined.pdf (8.04.2025). Google Scholar
Sardar Ziauddin, 2017, Postnormal times revisited, Futures, 93, p. 17–21, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2017.02.003. Google Scholar
Sitnichenko Liudmyla, 1996, Pershodzherela komunikatyvnoi filosofii [Primary sources of communicative philosophy], Lybid, Kyiv, p. 7–24. Google Scholar
Svyrydenko Denys, Boichenko, Nataliia and Bondarenko, Galyna, 2024, Axiological dimension of the modern science communication. Philosophy and Cosmology, 32, p. 97–106. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/32/7
Crossref
Google Scholar
Tesich Steve, 1992, A government of lies, The Nation, 6/13 January, p. 12–14. Google Scholar
Thrift Nigel, 2008, Non-representational theory: Space, politics, affect, Routledge, London & New York.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Waldenfels, Bernhard, 2007, The question of the other, Chinese University Press, Hong Kong.
Crossref
Google Scholar
von Weizsäcker Ernst Ulrich and Wijkman Anders, 2018, Come on! Capitalism, short-termism, population and the destruction of the planet – A report to the Club of Rome. Springer, New York, https://www.lifewatchitaly.eu/wp-content/uploads/Come_On.pdf (5.04.2025).
Crossref
Google Scholar
Yakushik Valentin, 2025, Is a Global Compromise Possible? Ukrainian Policymaker, vol. 16, p. 142–157, https://doi.org/10.29202/up/16/11.
Crossref
Google Scholar
Young Iris Marion, 2000, Inclusion and democracy, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Google Scholar
State University “Kyiv Aviation Institute”
Ukrainian National Tchaikovsky Academy of Music
