Abstract
Urgency of the research. Contemporary transformations in society require a reconsideration of life space beyond its functional and technological modernization. In the context of digitalization, it becomes necessary to interpret virtual environments not merely as technical or aesthetic solutions, but as anthropologically significant factors influencing the formation of human subjectivity and life-creative experience.
Target setting. A contradiction arises between the rapid implementation of innovative digital solutions and the insufficient philosophical reflection on their impact. The influence of architectural, technological, and symbolic components of virtual reality on autonomy, communication, and embodied-sensory experience remains insufficiently conceptualized.
Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. The theoretical framework draws upon the phenomenological understanding of lived space developed by M. Merleau-Ponty, the symbolic interpretation of culture by E. Cassirer, and the critical analysis of institutional space by M. Foucault. However, an integrative model that synthesizes these perspectives in relation to the virtual subjectivity of Homo Ludens is still lacking.
The research objective. The aim of the article is to substantiate a concept of virtual space as a multidimensional environment that supports life-creative activity and human subjectivity, integrating physical, symbolic, and digital dimensions.
Main material presentation . The article argues that virtual space should be understood as an active factor in shaping human experience. The principles of flexibility and transformability of gaming environments are justified. Embodied and sensory experience, as well as communicative openness, are shown to be prerequisites for fostering autonomy and creativity. The risks of digital fragmentation are outlined, emphasizing the need for balance between virtual and direct interaction.
Conclusions. Virtual space is interpreted as an existentially significant dimension of human development. Its design should be grounded in anthropological and phenomenological principles that promote subjectivity, social responsibility, and creative potential.
Keywords
References
Brooks, JP & Normore, AH (ed.) 2009, Designs for Learning: Prospects and Possibilities , Charlotte : Information Age Publishing , 284 р.
Cassirer, E 1944, An Essay on Man: An Introduction to a Philosophy of Human Culture , New Haven : Yale University Press , 237 р.
Dewey, J 1938, Experience and Education , New York : Macmillan , 116 р.
Dewey, J 2005, Art as Experience , New York : Perigee Books , 371 р.
Foskett, D 2007, Spaces for Learning: A Review of Learning Environment Research , London : National Union of Students , 142 р.
Foucault, M 1995, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison , New York : Vintage Books , 333 р.
Gabennesch, H 1993, Social Space and Symbolic Space , Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press , 215 р.
Habermas, J 1984, The Theory of Communicative Action , Boston : Beacon Press , 465 р.
Lefebvre, H 1991, The Production of Space , Oxford : Blackwell , 454 р.
Merleau-Ponty, M 2012, Phenomenology of Perception , London : Routledge , 517 р.
Oblinger, DG (ed.) 2006, Learning Spaces , Boulder : EDUCAUSE , 320 р.
Turkle, S 2011, Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other , New York : Basic Books , 384 р.
Бодрійяр, Ж 2004, Симулякри і симуляція, пер. з фр. Київ : Основи , 230 с.
Гейзінга, Й 1994, Homo Ludens , пер. з нід. Київ : Основи , 250 с.