The Concept of Post-Truth as aFactor in the Distortion of Knowledge in the EducationalProcess of the Informational World
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63437/3083-6425-2025-4(99)-02Keywords:
knowledge, science, education, informational and digital reality, post-truth, digital human, personalityAbstract
This article explores the impact of information and digital technologies on the individual, who is regarded as the primary capital of modern civilization. It emphasizes that the value of a person lies not only in their civic stance and professionalism, but also in the presence of high-quality thinking. The foundation of such thinking has been, and continues to be, knowledgе – key factor in social, economic, and cultural development.
The article highlights that the advancement of information and digital technologies has led to the deontologization of knowledge – a phenomenon that underpins the existence of the informational world, or infosphere. This infosphere has become a decisive factor in the life of modern individuals, shaping their aspirations, initiatives, and freedom of choice.
It is noted that a significant outcome of integrating information and digital technologies into the educational process has been the transformation of society into a “knowledge society”. The existence of such a society has established both theoretical and practical imperatives for prioritizing a core value of European culture: the institution of education. Today, education carries out its mission within the framework of an informational and digital reality.
At the center of this reality is the Internet, which functions both as a realm of personal virtual observation and as a space for user activity. In the educational process, this manifests as the intensification of interaction between the subject and object of learning. The paper argues that the active reality of the infosphere necessitates a theoretical foundation for the concept of post-truth, which characterizes the socio-cultural specificity of the global world.
The article substantiates that, in a post-truth context, reliable knowledge becomes difficult to distinguish amid a multitude of facts, ideas, and opinions – most of which are far removed from science. This condition contradicts the essence of modern techno-technological civilization, which is built on the application of scientific knowledge, projects, and achievements in educational theory and practice.
The primary condition for overcoming the negative influence of post-truth on the pursuit of genuine knowledge and the formation of individual identity in education is the enrichment of the learning process with creative technologies and reliable expert evaluations.
Downloads
References
Використані літературні джерела
1. Базилевич В. Д., Ільїн В. В. Економічне знання в рефлексіях сучасної епістемології. Економічний розвиток України: концептуальні засади та інституційний вимір: монографія. Київ: Ліра-К, 2023. С. 15–33.
2. Кремень В. Г. Інтелект працює краще, якщо він надійно захищений. Освіта: ідеї, роздуми, досвід. Статті, доповіді, виступи, інтерв’ю: зібрання творів у п’яти томах: Т. 2. Київ: Грамота, 2025. С. 146–156.
3. Кремень В. Г. Трансформації особистості в освітньому просторі. Освіта: ідеї, роздуми, досвід. Статті, доповіді, виступи, інтерв’ю: зібрання творів у п’яти томах: Т. 3. Київ: Грамота, 2025. С. 192–198.
4. Култаєва М. Амбівалентність евристичного потенціалу конструкту «суспільства знань»; резерви і перспективи оновлення змісту сучасної освіти. Філософія і методологія розвитку вищої освіти України в контексті євроінтеграційних процесів. Київ: Педагогічна думка, 2011. С. 227.
5. Култаєва М. Homo digitalis, дигітальна культура і дигітальна освіта: філософсько-антропологічні і філософсько-освітні розвідки. Філософія освіти. 2020. Т 26. № 1. С. 8–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2020-26-1-1.
6. Пролеєв С. В. Влада і суспільство: постмодерна перспектива: монографія. Київ: Дух і Літера, 2021. 360 с.
7. Харарі Ю. Н. 21 урок для 21 століття. Київ: Форс Україна, 2018. 416 с.
8. Cappuro R. Homo digitalis: Beiträge zur Ontologie, Antronologie und Ethik der digitalen Technik. Communicatio Socialis. 2018. 51(1). 97-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/0010-3497-2018-1-97.
9. Galbraith J. K. The New Industriale State. – Prinston: Prinston University Press. 2007.
10. Ilin W., Kremin V. The Image of the World and Humanin the Paradigm of Digital Culture: Psycholinquistic Analysis. Psycholinguistics. 2022. 31(2). P. 78–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31470/2309-1797-2022-31-2-78-94.
11. Fuller S. Post-Truth. Knowledge as a Power Came. London; New-York: Anthen Press, 2018, P. 13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.0000/9781783086955.
References
1. Bazylevych, V. D., & Ilin, V. V. (2023). Ekonomichne znannia v refleksiiakh suchasnoi epistemolohii [Economic knowledge in the reflections of modern epistemology]. Ekonomichnyi rozvytok Ukrainy: kontseptualni zasady ta instytutsinyi vymir – Economic development of Ukraine: conceptual principles and institutional dimension, 15-33. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
2. Kremen, V. H. (2025). Intelekt pratsiuie krashche, yakshcho vin nadiino zakhyshchenyi [The intellect works better when it is reliably protected]. Osvita: idei, rozdumy, dosvid. Statti, dopovidi, vystupy, interv’iu – Education: ideas, reflections, experience. Articles, reports, speeches, interviews. Kyiv. Vol. 2, 146-156. [in Ukrainian].
3. Kremen, V. H. (2025). Transformatsii osobystosti v osvitnomu prostori [Transformations of personality in the educational space]. Osvita: idei, rozdumy, dosvid. Statti, dopovidi, vystupy, interv’iu – Education: ideas, reflections, experience. Articles, reports, speeches, interviews. Kyiv. Vol. 3, 192-198. [in Ukrainian].
4. Kultaieva, M. (2011). Ambivalentnist evrystychnoho potentsialu konstruktu “suspilstva znan”; rezervy i perspektyvy onovlennia zmistu suchasnoi osvity [Ambivalence of the heuristic potential of the ‘knowledge society’ construct; reserves and prospects for updating the content of modern education]. Filosofiia i metodolohiia rozvytku vyshchoi osvity Ukrainy v konteksti yevrointehratsiinykh protsesiv – Philosophy and methodology of the development of higher education of Ukraine in the context of European integration processes, Kyiv. 227 p. [in Ukrainian].
5. Kultaieva, M. (2020). Homo digitalis, dyhitalna kultura i dyhitalna osvita: filosofsko-antropolohichni i filosofsko-osvitni rozvidky [Homo digitalis, digital culture and digital education: philosophical-anthropological and philosophical-educational studies]. Filosofiia osvity – Philosophy of Education, 26(1), 8-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2020-26-1-1 [in Ukrainian].
6. Proleiev, S. V. (2021). Vlada i suspilstvo: postmoderna perspektyva [Power and society: a postmodern perspective]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
7. Kharari, Yu. N. (2018). 21 urok dlia 21 stolittia [21 lessons for the 21st century]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
8. Cappuro, R. (2018). Homo digitalis: Beiträge zur Ontologie, Antronologie und Ethik der digitalen Technik. Communicatio Socialis. 51(1):97-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/0010-3497-2018-1-97.
9. Galbraith, J. K. (2007). The New Industrial State. Princeton.
10. Ilin, W., & Kremin, V. (2022). The image of the world and human in the paradigm of digital culture: Psycholinguistic analysis. Psycholinguistics, 31(2), 78-94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31470/2309-1797-2022-31-2-78-94.
11. Fuller, S. (2018). Post-Truth. Knowledge as a Power Game. London; New York. DOI: https://doi.org/10.0000/9781783086955
