The dissertation is devoted to the research of relevant philosophical problems of nomadism in social and discursive practices in the context of historical retrospective and contemporary actualization. Sedentary and nomadic practices are proposed to be considered from the following points: 1) attitudinal (as a set of beliefs, evaluations, views and principles of vision and understanding of the world, the place of the individuals in it, their life positions, programs of behavior and activity); 2) ontological (as a certain way of life); 3) epistemological (as certain theoretical representations) positions developing in complexity; 4) axiological (as a set of spiritual, moral, ethical, aesthetic and other values, their relationships with sociocultural factors and personality on the basis of socially approved principles, norms, rules, canons, ideals, etc.); 5) psychological (such factors as motivation, acceptance, beliefs, attitudes, etc. influencing the development of nomads and sedentaries’ psyche, in particular, their mentality).
The compelling nomadization of the population of Western European countries and sedentarization of Ukrainians, constant aspiring for freedom caused the development of practices of a person’s «varying boundaries» and the formation of specific features of each people’s mentality. The further perspectives for developing the society of nomads and sedentaries is outlined on the following basis: 1) the impossibility of keeping either a sedentary or nomadic basis in the volatile modern world; 2) the modern society needs nomads, neo-nomads and sedentaries; 3) the necessity for nomads and sedentaries to unite in creating an exclusively new community based on diversity rather than unification; 4) owing to complementary and liminal practices, nomads and sedentaries have to constantly move beyond the boundaries of their own advancement, reaching another level of progress; 5) owing to the transformation of both already existing and developing nomadic and sedentary practices, it will be possible to «mitigate» «future shock» and «culture shock» (according to Alvin Toffler) consequences for a man. The exit «beyond the boundaries» of scientific paradigms, the transition from physical and mathematical to historical and geographical basis, opened new opportunities for «extending the boundaries» not exclusively of the spatial and temporal movements, but also of the anthropological properties of the human body.
The research confirms and emphasizes the perception of the modern network as fourth-order cyberspace and non-linear formation, which is the environment of modern social and discursive nomadic practices. On the basis of considering complexity at the present stage of its development, an upgrade is attested, which accompanies it in the post-non-classical period (from observing systems (subject – subject) to a self-evolving environment (subject-polysubject), with compulsory presence of a person (nomad and sedentary), hyphaespace (introduction of the observer-neo-nomad, a user (users-neo-nomads), a subject (subjects) of cognition into human-dimensional combined networks (subject-polysubject environment) with increasing human-dimensionality (subject – subject)), that is the fact of a non-subjective post/non/management. Subsequently, owing to new scientific discoveries such a multivariate will allow creating environments with predetermined parameters, as well as managing the processes that occur in them through nomadic practices. In its turn, hyphaespace is suggested to be considered as a metaphorical abstraction evolving in complexity and constitutes virtual and social reality – the components of the Noosphere. This is a world existing in the computer network with the active involvement of observers-neo-nomads (nomads travelling through the Internet sites), which are the subject of cognition. Hyphaespace appears to be an environment in which the nomadic and sedentary practices are advancing and improving.
There has been proposed an independent classification of types of nomadism. The types of nomadic practices are grouped regarding the following characteristics: those that a person can change and those that he cannot influence (so far). The given classification is based on the anthropic principle and does not claim to be exhaustive and complete. The further research can be aimed at outlining the prospects for their development and application, as well as reflecting them in sociocultural discourse. Moreover, nomadic practices can come handy while researching and explaining processes and phenomena that are occurring in society.
Keywords: nomadism, neo-nomadism, sedentarism, mobility, nomadic, sedentary and educational practices, classification of nomadic practices, a person’s «varying boundaries», education, LLL-education, rhizome, radix, hyphae, cyberspace, hyphaespace.
