Socio-Phenomenological Reflections on What Digital Death Brings and Denies in Terms of Relational Experiences to Orthodox Romanians

IF 1.7 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Social Sciences Pub Date : 2023-12-13 DOI:10.3390/socsci12120686
Adela Toplean
{"title":"Socio-Phenomenological Reflections on What Digital Death Brings and Denies in Terms of Relational Experiences to Orthodox Romanians","authors":"Adela Toplean","doi":"10.3390/socsci12120686","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Informed by Alfred Schütz’s phenomenology of social relations and its recent developments addressing online relationality, this essay reflects on the differences between online and offline death-related experiences in contemporary Romania. In Orthodox death cultures, religious, social, and familial bonds overlap. Orthodox Christianity is sceptical about body–mind separation and values unmediated liturgical communities. It is, thus, pertinent to ask what death online brings and denies in terms of experience to Romanian internet users. Some preliminary findings from our fieldwork are discussed. So far, on Romanian Facebook, three clusters of experience emerged widely: 1. A realm of belief where faith, unchallenged by digital practices, “decodes” deadly events across life-worlds; 2. Experiences of resistance and ambivalence of those who are stuck “in-between“, that is, those less competent in their traditions, yet sceptical about digital change; 3. Death experiences seem less synchronised across life-worlds for those who value electronic proximity: digital death and real death obey different rules. Historical specificity, we shall conclude, sets typified combinations of motives for what Romanians do in the proximity of death and how they do it. Digital technologies modulate the “hows” and, less notably, the “whats”.","PeriodicalId":37714,"journal":{"name":"Social Sciences","volume":"268 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12120686","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Informed by Alfred Schütz’s phenomenology of social relations and its recent developments addressing online relationality, this essay reflects on the differences between online and offline death-related experiences in contemporary Romania. In Orthodox death cultures, religious, social, and familial bonds overlap. Orthodox Christianity is sceptical about body–mind separation and values unmediated liturgical communities. It is, thus, pertinent to ask what death online brings and denies in terms of experience to Romanian internet users. Some preliminary findings from our fieldwork are discussed. So far, on Romanian Facebook, three clusters of experience emerged widely: 1. A realm of belief where faith, unchallenged by digital practices, “decodes” deadly events across life-worlds; 2. Experiences of resistance and ambivalence of those who are stuck “in-between“, that is, those less competent in their traditions, yet sceptical about digital change; 3. Death experiences seem less synchronised across life-worlds for those who value electronic proximity: digital death and real death obey different rules. Historical specificity, we shall conclude, sets typified combinations of motives for what Romanians do in the proximity of death and how they do it. Digital technologies modulate the “hows” and, less notably, the “whats”.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从社会现象学角度反思数字死亡给罗马尼亚东正教徒带来和否认的关系体验
本文以阿尔弗雷德-舒兹的社会关系现象学及其最近针对在线关系性的发展为基础,反思了当代罗马尼亚在线和离线死亡相关体验之间的差异。在东正教死亡文化中,宗教、社会和家庭纽带相互重叠。东正教对身心分离持怀疑态度,重视无中介的礼仪团体。因此,我们有必要问一问,网上死亡给罗马尼亚网民带来了哪些体验,又否认了哪些体验。本文讨论了我们实地调查的一些初步发现。到目前为止,在罗马尼亚的 Facebook 上,广泛出现了三类体验:1.信仰领域,信仰不受数字实践的挑战,"解码 "生命世界中的死亡事件;2.那些被困在 "两者之间 "的人的抵制和矛盾体验,即那些在其传统中能力较弱但对数字变革持怀疑态度的人;3.对于那些重视电子接近性的人来说,死亡体验在生命世界中的同步性似乎较低:数字死亡和真实死亡遵循不同的规则。我们将得出结论:历史的特殊性为罗马尼亚人在临近死亡时的所作所为以及他们的行为方式提供了典型的动机组合。数字技术改变了 "怎么做",更重要的是改变了 "做什么"。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Sciences
Social Sciences Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
494
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Sciences (ISSN 2076-0760) is an international, peer-reviewed, quick-refereeing open access journal published online monthly by MDPI. The journal seeks to appeal to an interdisciplinary audience and authorship which focuses upon real world research. It attracts papers from a wide range of fields, including anthropology, criminology, geography, history, political science, psychology, social policy, social work, sociology, and more. With its efficient and qualified double-blind peer review process, Social Sciences aims to present the newest relevant and emerging scholarship in the field to both academia and the broader public alike, thereby maintaining its place as a dynamic platform for engaging in social sciences research and academic debate. Subject Areas: Anthropology, Criminology, Economics, Education, Geography, History, Law, Linguistics, Political science, Psychology, Social policy, Social work, Sociology, Other related areas.
期刊最新文献
Social Media, Newsworthiness, and Missing White Woman Syndrome: A Criminological Analysis Adversarial Growth among Refugees: A Scoping Review After Being Granted or Refused Asylum in Norway: Relational Migration Journeys among Afghan Unaccompanied Young Men The Role of Subjective Well-Being in Cuban Civil Protest against the Government: A Moderated Mediation Model Narratives of Symbolic Objects: Exploring Relational Wellbeing of Young Refugees Living in Scotland, Finland, and Norway
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1