SOCIAL PHENOMENOLOGY OF CYBER-COMMUNICATION

Abstract

The paper presents social-phenomenological concept of cyber-communication developed in the context of theory of A. Schutz. The paper considers specifics of on-line communication and, first of all, chat-communication. One of the main peculiarities of cyber-communication is its «no-corporality». The situation of «no-corporality» of cybercommunication can lead to certain negative consequences. The impossibility to see the body, the eyes of an interlocutor calls into question the personality of relationship, excludes the possibility of perceiving a «fellow-man» as a unique Human. Communicating with nickalternates of living personalities, participants in cyber-communication inevitably and necessarily create images of typical actors that are typically acting. It would be correct to talk about blending of two forms of social relations within cyber-communication – Werelation of fellow-men and They-relation of contemporaries, the elements of which are simultaneously present in a chat room. They can be connected to the third form – Theyrelation with «predecessors» and «successors», which in virtual space can act as real interlocutors (their physical non-presence becomes unnoticeable with respect to nocorporality of cyber-communication). Another feature of «no-corporal» cyber-communication can be called superficiality of communication between cyber-actors. True involvement and interest in communication are possible only between bodily co-present, seeing each other, close people who do not and cannot «suddenly» interrupt communication without any reason, refuse to communicate with a fellow-man. As for cyber-communication, the easiness and indifference of its nobodily contacts presupposes the possibility of a special mode of interaction, which D. Ivanov defined as «freedom of entry/exit». Such easiness of exit from communication space, the freedom to interrupt the interaction and refusal to extend a chat contact produces foundations for new forms of interaction in real sociality characterized by a non-involved and non-responsible attitude to social partners. If the bodily communication is carried out in a two-phase mode – the immediacy of experience is replaced by detached-reflective comprehension – then cyber-communication is fundamentally one-phase. Since the immediacy of experience of a fellow-man in cyberrelations becomes impossible (precisely because his body and his living reactions are absolutely inaccessible), since cyber-communication is performed in writing form, then online communication always assumes only one modus of perception, namely, reflexive modus. Actors can perceive cyber-communication somewhat «from the side», as a visualized text «object». Being «in the process» of communication, they, at the same time, are always «late» for its natural flow, comprehending its meaning ex post facto. The fact of this temporal bias of cyber-communication in relation to the live process of communication obviousness can only be the result of a synchronized rather than delayed staying of a person «inside» a certain event, «inside» event time, but not «out» and «after» it). Just because of the delayed nature of cyber-communication, it is accompanied by a risk for a person to be «interrupted», «excluded from communication». If live communication makes difficult a sudden and unreasonable interruption of communication, if bodily copresence presupposes a certain order of interaction that can not be «suddenly» stopped, cyber-communication can move to the «out» mode, when cyber-actors can leave the communication for some time, postpone their response or even keep «silent»; they can react to the communication process after a certain time when the situation «has already cooled down» and will be perceived not directly. «Potentialization» of cyber-communication appears itself in the ability to retain a response, ignore a message, a superficial understanding, or even non-understanding of information contained in it. On one hand, non-intrusive character of cyber-communication should be assessed very highly since it creates a non-repressive space of free cybercommunication. On the other hand, the «potentiated» nature of cyber-communication leads to the situation of existential sluggishness of relationship between cyber-partners, who may delay the interaction.