doi: 10.24151/2409-1073-2023-1-132-139

Abstract. The author argues that human cognition, while having common conditions of generation,
also has a common underlying problematic around which the objects of all its specifi c areas
revolve, without exception. The historical evolution of the functional role of science in society is
considered. The connection between the problem of totality and the intense societal need for the
individual to refl ect on his or her freedom, which is expressed in a variety of political concepts,
is demonstrated. The gnosiological roots of the concept of totalitarianism are revealed, the we/I
ratio is analyzed and its connection with the contradiction of continuous and discrete, which goes
back to the dialectic of the One and the Many, is shown. The author makes it clear that individual
Self, stripped of its own defi nitions in a society of advanced commodity production, is found to
be fragmented, despite the increasing continuity of the chains of material production in which it is
included as an agent. This fragmentation serves as the basis for the self-awareness of the Self as an
abstract One (das Eins). A solution to the problem of totality in the form of a dialectical project of
a unifi ed concept of fractality, conceptualized as a logical category, has been proposed.

Keywords: dialectics, Marx, fractality, Hegel, totality, personality, human and society

For citation: Morozov M. Yu. “Human and Society through the Prism of the Concept of
Fractality”. Economic and Social Research 1 (37) (2023): 132—139. (In Russian). https://doi.
org/10.24151/2409-1073-2023-1-132-139

References
1. Baudrillard J. La Transparence du Mal, essai sur
les phénomènes extrêmes. Paris : Galilé e, 1990.
208 p. (In French.)
2. Burik M. L. Man and Economy in a Virtualized
World. Moscow: Agrar Media Grup, 2016.
268 p. (In Russian).
3. Jameson F. Postmodernism, or, the Cultural Logic
of Late Capitalism. N. p.: Duke University Press,
1991. 461 p.
4. Dzhokhadze I. “Mass Society and Democratic
Totalitarianism: Freedom without Choice”. Logos
5 (50) (2005): 165—178. (In Russian).
5. Ilyenkov E. V. “Dialectics of the Ideal”. Logos
1 (69) (2009): 6—62. (In Russian).
6. Morozov M. Yu. “The Concept of ‘Fractality’
as a Logical Category”. Problemy onto-gnoseologicheskogo
obosnovaniya matematicheskikh i yestestvennykh
nauk: collection of scientifi c works.
Chief ed. E. I. Arepiev. Kursk State University.
Iss. 11. Kursk, 2020. 65—75. (In Russian).

7. Morozov M. Yu. “The Contradiction of Continuity
and Discreteness as the Essential Defi -
nition of the Fractal”. Problemy sovremennogo
obrazovaniya = Problems of Modern Education
5 (2021): 9—22. (In Russian).
8. Jaspers K. Die geistige Situation der Zeit. Vierte
Aufl age. Berlin, Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter &
Co., 1932. 191 S. (In German).
9. Siemek M. „Poznanie jako praktyka (Prolegomena
do przyszłej epistemologii)“ . Marksizm
w kulturze fi lozofi cznej XX wieku. Red. M. J. Siemek.
Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe,
1988. 9—24. (In Polish).
10. Sobotka M. Člověk a práce v německé klasické
fi losofi i. Praha: Nakl. polit. lit., 1964. 152 s. (In
Czech).