"Virtual reality" as a tool for global manipulation of socio-cultural identity

Bylevskiy Pavel Gennadievich ORCID: 0000-0002-0453-526X PhD in Philosophy Associate Professor, Department of Information Culture of Digital Transformation, Department of International Information Security, Moscow State Linguistic University 119034, Russia, Ostozhenka str., 36, office 106 pr-911@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

The relevance of the topic of the article is due to the intensive development of digital technologies of "virtual reality" in recent years, overestimated expectations regarding their capabilities and not always correct concerns about security, influence on manipulation of public consciousness and cultural identity. The failure of the largest project to create a digital "virtual reality" Metaverse by the global information platform Meta (recognized by a Russian court as an extremist organization on March 21, 2022, its activities are limited in the territory of the Russian Federation) is not only technological, but also socio-cultural in nature. In the third quarter of 2022, losses reached $3.7 billion, in total since the beginning of 2022 — $9.4 billion ^[1], the publication of the report caused a 24% drop in shares at auction ^[2]; further forecasts also turned out to be disappointing. A similar disappointment caused by the lack of noticeable success is observed in other high—tech virtual reality developments - Cave, AlloSphere, Teslasuit, VRealizer, Microsoft Haptic Links, etc. Unfulfilled forecasts of experts and promises of developers of "virtual reality" were initially critically vulnerable due to a number of methodological limitations regarding the possibilities of influencing consciousness by technical means, the nature of which not mechanical or even biological, but socio-cultural. 

The purpose of the research is a critical philosophical and cultural analysis of the possibilities and risks of creating and using computer "virtual reality", dividing them into real, illusory and false. The application of a cultural-historical, subject-activity approach to the formation of human sensuality makes it possible to define "virtual reality" as a digital technical means of creating and broadcasting cultural content. In this way, the tasks of critical analysis and forecasting of both destructive threats and constructive prospects of computer "virtual reality" are solved. The dualism of the possibilities of using the phenomenon under consideration is revealed: both for cultural development, ensuring the security of national identity, and for manipulating consciousness in global and corporate destructive interests. 

Computer simulations of reality can be compared with traditional technical means used to influence consciousness by the press, in culture and games, during mass events, etc., as well as with psychotropic substances that cause destructive addictions. Socio-cultural limitations are not only the dubious possibilities of a full-fledged complex sensory simulation of digital "virtual reality", but also the risks of abuse of such technologies in corporate interests, including to mask the deterioration of the real situation of users. The analysis is aimed at determining measures to minimize the risks of "virtual reality" to ensure information security, preserve and develop the cultural identity of citizens and society. 

Philosophical and cultural analysis of digital "virtual reality" in the context of NBIC[S]-convergence

The research material is the latest developments of "virtual reality" by a number of global digital platforms that meet the concept of NBIC[S]-convergence — the proposed solution "in one fell swoop" of modern fundamental problems of mankind through the fusion of high technologies (nano-, bio-, information, cognitive and social) ^[3]. The creation of a computer virtual reality and the "resettlement" of humanity into it as users can be regarded as an analogue of creating an illusory "better world", an imitation of "paradise on earth". Virtual reality is designed to be constructed and presented in an attractive sensually perceived imitation of worlds, other people, as well as the personality of the interactive user himself. 

The failure of developers to achieve the declared parameters of Metaverse, the leading development of "virtual reality", is an important symptom of the critical vulnerabilities of the NBIC[S] concept-convergence in general. In the situation with "virtual reality", the unproductiveness of attempts to solve the problems of the development of modern society and man is manifested, placing the main emphasis on high, knowledge-intensive technologies, but ignoring the primacy of socio-cultural factors ^[4]. It is possible to note important obstacles on the way to success that turned out to be insurmountable, from the point of view of the philosophy of culture and cultural studies — predictably, but ignored by the developers of Metaverse.

The very first obstacle is practically insurmountable — it is the methodological impossibility to fully, not "point-by-point", not laboratory imitate by technical means "contact" "external" feelings and even more so internal bodily "self-perceptions", especially proprioception ("muscular feeling). The second cultural obstacle is the technical and financial uncompetitiveness of imitation of reality through hardware and software solutions in relation to such "traditional" means of consciousness formation as culture, religion, art, law, morality and morality, mass communications and interpersonal communication. The third obstacle, social, is the excessive orientation of virtual reality digital content towards the corporate interests of the creators and owners of the service ^[5], which for users turns into an illusory compensation for the deterioration of their situation with elements of increased exploitation. 

The fundamental initial vulnerability of Metaverse can be considered an approach to objective reality, living organisms, society and man as mechanisms (machines). Such a worldview allowed for the possibility of creating analogues at first, then indistinguishable copies, and subsequently devices that surpass the "originals" in everything. Historically, the philosophical precursors of this approach, which can be characterized as mechanistic idealism, are the concepts of I. Newton and R. Descartes, J. Berkeley and empirio-criticism of the turn of the XIX — XX centuries. 

In the 1950s, with the development of electronic computing and robotics, automation of technical, business and social processes, against the background of the aggravation of contradictions in social development, the "philosophy of artificial intelligence" appeared. For this philosophical school and related scientific and technical research and development, the fundamental question was whether a machine could think. The criterion for a positive answer to this question was declared the "Turing test", the essence of which was the inability of the "examiner" to distinguish a person from a computer based on the text answers to the questions asked. 

Modifications of the "Turing test" can extend, in addition to textual answers to questions, to other human abilities related to intellectual and sensory perceptions. Hardware and software "recognition" and imitation of sensually perceived characteristics of objects, as well as manifestations of human feelings and emotions, have become areas of development of "sensory technologies" and "emotional artificial intelligence". The "Turing Test" allows modifications to assess the quality of simulation by means of hardware and software modeling not only of a person, but also of various objects, their complexes, systems, creation of specified laboratory conditions, artificial environment. The reliability, completeness and persuasiveness of computer "virtual reality" can also be assessed based on the methodology of the "Turing test" ^[6].

However, the developers of Metaverse, like their predecessors, the "philosophers of artificial intelligence", did not take into account the ambivalent key feature of the "Turing test". His positive results indicate not the genuine similarity of the imitation to the original, but the inability of the "examiner" to distinguish them. The criterion is the opinion of a person, even an expert, which may be erroneous or insincere due to interest. Taking the examiner's opinion as the ultimate criterion of truth, the developers themselves fall victim to illusions of the possibility of similarity and superiority of the created models, imitations over the originals. The creation of automated software and hardware complexes for processing, structuring, forming and managing data systems obtained through sensors began to be classified as "artificial intelligence" ^[7].

The acquisition and processing of many sound, optical and contact data received began to be called, by analogy with external human senses, computer "vision", "hearing", "touch", "taste" and "smell".  The boundaries of "humanoid" analogies are the impossibility of completely imitating a number of phenomena of direct sensory (or imaginary by analogy) perception of a person. Computer "senses" do not include working with data on parameters accessible to humans only after transformations, such as radio emissions, invisible zones of the optical spectrum, inaudible infra— and ultrasonic vibrations, etc.

Computer "virtual reality" involves software and hardware imitation of sensually perceived characteristics of the surrounding world for all five external human senses: sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch ^[8]. The best and simplest designation for such solutions is "deception of the senses", which in the language of computer science is formulated as an "imitation" of sensory reality. Notable successes in this area have been achieved only for the "remote" external senses: sight and hearing. Glasses-monitors and stereoscopic digital videos of "virtual reality", headphones with surround sound (stereo, quad, etc.) have been created.

But even here, the invisible, often unconscious limitation of the developers is the socio-cultural specification of the audience, and, most importantly, its predisposition to perceive artificial, simulated sensory reality as authentic or even better than the real one. Unusual, incomprehensible, virtual images rejected by this audience are simply not perceived, before reaching verification by the user. 

The prospects for simulating other remote, and even more so contact, external senses can be assessed even more critically ^[9]. Given the possibilities of "digitizing" the chemical composition, synthetic perfumes, flavors and flavorings, it is possible to assume the possibility of developing technical means to convincingly simulate odors and taste sensations. To simulate touch, surface skin sensations, special computerized input-output devices are being developed: "gloves" for the hands, and special "suits" for the whole body. However, a wide variety of types and possible combinations of tactile sensations, and, in particular, the need to match the user's actions ^[10] creates almost insurmountable difficulties for their full-fledged software and, especially, hardware imitation. 

The critical barrier of bodily socio-cultural identity

Promising and, perhaps, seriously hoping to create a convincing digital "virtual reality" that surpasses reality, the developers ignore the most important factor, which is the irreducible basis of sensory perceptions of the world through the organs of "external" senses. This factor is self—perception, inner feelings of one's own physicality, mental states and actions, without which there is no immediate certainty of one's own self. Internal bodily sensations can be localized or vaguely dispersed; be almost imperceptible or unbearable; neutral, painful or pleasant to varying degrees; they serve as the basis for a wide range of different emotions. 

Bodily sensitivity as a phenomenon inseparably inherent in consciousness is crucially not so much "biological" ^[11] as conditioned by the socio-cultural development of a personality, an integral component of its identity. To an even greater extent, these are mental self-perceptions (including emotions, thoughts, etc.), resembling an indeterminately localized, dispersed bodily active sensitivity. The reliability of one's own self is determined by an endless list of parameters of internal sensations, their dynamically changing various combinations, that is, by the personality itself, its actions, movements and experiences. The hypothetical possibility of such imitation by computer means is devalued by the impossibility of its "translation" "from within" the human body, moreover, with a dynamic change of "points" and "zones".

The main and almost insurmountable obstacle to the creation of a "virtual reality" similar to the real one to any significant extent is the basic inner sense of proprioception, called by I.M. Sechenov "dark muscle feeling". The fundamental difference between proprioception and other external and internal senses lies in its subjective and practical nature, inextricably linked with conscious human actions ^[12]. The crucial role of proprioception is proved by studies of the role in visual sensations and perceptions of several muscle groups that control eye movements and concomitant bodily movements. "Remote" visual perception of objects and the "spatial field" is impossible without background non-stop saccadian micro-movements of the eyes along the contour and characteristic points of visual targets, also accompanied by subtle "groping" actions of the entire body of the viewer.

Visual perceptions inextricably include, in addition to optical images, "casts" of contact actions with objects stored in "muscle memory". Similarly, the auditory perception of objects and processes, as well as one's own actions, including sound, speech, is formed ^[13]. The basic and leading role of proprioceptive sensitivity for the development of reality is the basis of the national correctional pedagogy of I. A. Sokolyansky — A. I. Meshcheryakov, which allows without "remote" feelings to fully form and develop the personalities of deaf children. The basis of proprioception, muscle feeling, on the one hand, are the parameters of a person's own efforts. On the other hand, proprioceptive sensations are determined by the nature and measure of the resistance of the object of influence, whether it is external objects or parts of one's own body. Subjective internal proprioceptive active sensitivity is a necessary and irreducible basis for a person's separation of reality into himself and the outside world. Proprioception is the practical basis of other sensitivity, internal and external, contact and distance, the basis for building perceptions and images of oneself, primarily one's physicality, and the environment ^[14].

The above—mentioned fundamental impossibility of imitating internal sensitivity by technical means applies even more to proprioception, to the sensations of one's own muscular efforts, commensurate with the nature of the objects to which they are applied. The inextricable connection of action and its sensation, characteristic of proprioception, does not allow for imitating mediation, leaving the impossible option of "creating matter", "parallel" objective reality. This option no longer implies a convincing imitation, but claims to "create a world", moreover, "better" than the existing one.

"Virtual reality" correlates with activities aimed at the formation of consciousness, and with the technical means used for this purpose. From the point of view of philosophical cultural studies, all socio-cultural activities in a figurative sense can be called creating a "virtual reality". The world of culture, including the material and the very physical appearance of man, is "artificial", man-made in relation to the previous and as yet inaccessible human alteration of nature. Natural objects and processes involved in the world of culture acquire new forms and functions, historical and cultural meanings. Practical conscious use of socio-cultural, semantic characteristics of objects is available only to a person, and taking into account the specific historical characteristics of a given society, the place and role of a person in it (for example, her individual experience, including professional). 

Nature, society, culture and personality are perceived as real only in specific socio-historical conditions through appropriate forms of cultural activity and perception. The reality of consciousness, feelings and perception, as well as perceived objects, is determined by the historical socio-cultural characteristics of human relations. The cultural object is created by the author as real and as such is perceived by the audience. The material of the embodiment and the "technical means" do not fundamentally change anything, whether it is speech or writing, intonation and music, facial expressions and gestures, theater, dance or rituals, sculpture or architecture, images or video, sound recordings ^[15], which is also true of digital, multimedia content.

Religion, rituals, norms of law, morality and morality, science, works of art and other cultural phenomena, for all their conventionality, are no less real within the framework of their respective cultures for their "bearers" than nature. Scientific knowledge, the realism of art and social norms are embodied in concepts, collective images and rules, perceived within the framework of the relevant culture as a reality more complete and authentic than the immediate sensory reality. On the contrary, beyond the boundaries of these conditions, the "cultural environment", the meaning and reality of perception are lost, culture turns into incomprehensible, meaningless conventions. 

Giving conditional, "virtual" meanings to natural and man-made objects and their own actions, including magical and religious ones, is characteristic of the most ancient, primitive cultures. "Artificial reality" can represent objective truth (scientific, artistic, etc.) of high levels of generalization. But also, with formal similarity, convincing imitation of the correct representation of reality, "virtual reality" can turn out to be erroneous or false, a delusion or deliberate deception ^[16]. The value of cultural objects, the depth of scientific truths and the power of artistic images are determined both by the richness and perfection of the embodied objective reality and by the creative abilities of the authors and the perceiving audience. The "conventionality", the "virtuality" of cultural values lies in their semantic relationship with much broader and more distant meanings, far beyond the immediate sensually perceived reality. 

Manipulation of consciousness as a destructive threat of computer simulations

Local socio-cultural phenomena that exist directly "here and now" are revealed as elements of extensive spatial relationships and long-term trends, witnesses of the ancient past and harbingers of the distant future. The culture of feelings of both the creator and the audience of cultural values allows them, based on their accumulated experience of sensory perceptions, to represent in single images the connections existing in reality, patterns of a high level of generalization. There is a certain relationship between the individual development of the skill of the creators of cultural values and the level of perception of the audience, including the "average" for a given society. 

By themselves, technical means and technologies, including computer simulation of video, audio, tactile and other sensory images, are unable to ensure the full authenticity of either scientific, artistic and social cognition, or the authenticity of "virtual reality" for the audience ^[17]. Technical means of cognition and creativity cannot replace the high individual culture of a scientist or artist, developed schools of scientific thought and art directions, as well as the presence of "taste" and understanding among the audience. 

The meaningless "naked technique" of the creator or performer of an artistic work, the scientific and formal logic of scientific works, the bureaucratic evidentiary value of legal documents do not provide complete convincing of the truth and reality of the presented content. Technical means, both traditional and the latest, high-tech, can only contribute to improving the skill of the creators, the cultural level of the audience and a more realistic perception of cultural objects. Or serve the success of mind manipulation, deception, misinformation, deception, fraud ^[18].

"Deception of the senses," including computer deception, can be an entertaining optical illusion, a variety act, but can also be used by intruders to mislead their victims. The interests of owners, developers, service providers, and their customers determine the content of computer "virtual reality", the nature and results of perception and actions of the audience and users in it. Virtual reality content can serve to form a culture of information security, cultural development of users, expand their knowledge, abilities and capabilities, and contribute to improving their personal lives and society as a whole. On the contrary, virtual content of a different orientation and content can be a means of manipulating consciousness, encouraging the audience to destructive actions for the benefit of others ^[19].

The systemic crisis of globalism, economics, politics and culture is accompanied by tendencies not only to limit development, but also to worsen the lives of many people. The reduction of family relations, the promotion of the LGBT agenda and the fall in the birth rate, the reduction of energy consumption and traditional natural nutrition by citizens, the transition from ownership to rental, "user" relationships require compensatory funds ^[20]. Digital "virtual reality" Metaverse and other similar products are capable of partially performing such functions, replacing "bread" with "spectacles" to a certain extent. 

For marketing purposes, the developers of "virtual reality" attribute to their product the prospects of achieving the complete illusion of a plausible "better world". The "utopian" prospects of creating a virtual existence without adversity, deprivation and disease, full only of hedonism, pleasures and entertainment, for which they still pay good money, are opening up. Remote services for personal desktop and mobile computers are adapting to digital "reality": games, educational and cultural events, entertainment and travel, specialized devices simulate the most intense sensual pleasures. 

"Virtual reality", regardless of the illusions and promises of its creators, is just a technical means of culture. Its main purpose and capabilities are the same: to form the audience's set parameters of perceptions, sensations, and emotional assessments of reality. The sincerity of the developers, who are partly conscientiously mistaken about the possibilities of "virtual reality", helps to better convince the audience (investors) and users, to have the perception of the service as a genuine reality ^[21]. The "declarations of intent" of the developers of "virtual reality", for all their controversy and vulnerability, are themselves a cultural phenomenon affecting scientific and technical research and development, financial markets, politics, and popular culture.

The "virtual reality" project can be described as a quasi-utopia or even a pseudo-utopia, and its developers can be accused of trying to surpass the creators, creators of worlds in religions. A virtual "better world" is comparable to a religious paradise or with projects to create a "paradise on earth", only for "resettlement" there you do not need either a righteous life or work, it is enough to purchase equipment and subscribe to the service. In this form, "virtual reality" looks like a dystopia and temptation, especially given the threat of bodily atrophy due to prolonged inactivity. 

An almost insurmountable obstacle on this path is the peculiarities of even the "contact" external senses (touch and taste), not to mention the internal ones, especially proprioception, "muscle feeling". The user is able to independently form such "virtual self-perceptions", but this requires his appropriate skills, including a developed imagination, predisposition, and, of course, meaningful, convincing cultural content that meets the deep interests of the audience. Insufficiently considering the importance of cultural factors, the developers of "virtual reality" give priority to unsuccessful attempts by technical means to completely imitate the sensory perception of a person (not only the outside world, but their own physicality). Therefore, in the persuasiveness of creating illusions, computer "virtual reality" loses to traditional technical means of changing consciousness, used, on the one hand, in culture, on the other hand, for the formation of destructive addictions (in gambling, totalitarian sects, etc.), psychotropic drugs, alcohol and drugs. 

Conclusion

The result of the conducted research is the conclusion that the task of ensuring the information security of Russian citizens (including the digital and scientific and technical sovereignty of the Russian Federation, the preservation and development of cultural identity) extends to the subject of computer "virtual reality". Since March 2022, the restriction in the Russian Federation of a number of basic services of the global Meta information platform (developed by Metaverse) raises the question of regulating domestic developments of solutions of this type. It should not be about "import substitution", but about an independent concept and development of a safe and effective computer "virtual reality" in the interests of countering external manipulation of consciousness, preserving and developing the cultural identity of citizens and society. 

The task of philosophical and cultural analysis of the methodology, concept and results of the development of digital "virtual reality" is facilitated by the increased fragmentation of the unipolar model of globalism, the prospects for the future synthesis of international scientific, technical and cultural cooperation on a new, multipolar platform. The priority is to improve nature, society and man (cognition, learning, cultural growth) through digital "virtual reality", rather than creating solutions that cover and compensate for the controlled deterioration of reality ^[22].

The goals of domestic technologies and products should have a key orientation not to maximize the profitability of service providers and not to simulate well-being against the background of a deterioration in the real situation of users, but to achieve the goals of ensuring security, socio-cultural development of society and citizens. Attempts to develop technical means of simulating contact feelings and well-being, which are obviously doomed to failure, should be preferred to raising the cultural level of computer "virtual reality". High-tech tools can increase the automation of information security and the corresponding culture of citizens, significantly improve the accessibility and attractiveness of masterpieces of national and world culture, serve as effective platforms for mass socio-cultural creativity, including remote.