A MAN IN A HYBRID WORLD. BORDERS AFTER POSTMODERN

The article discusses philosophical conditions for understanding the cultural situation taking shape with the end of postmodernity. The methodological basis of the discussion is an ontological interpretation of transcendental phenomenology, where the problem of human subjectivity comes to a foreground. Depending on the conceptualized in different manners of reflection (poststructuralist, transcendentalist, etc.) image of subjectivity, different images of cultural and political reality are being built. By now, the border of subjectivity has not yet taken shape in a way to define cultural meanings of the present as open to the future. The existing cultural situation is an equal co-presence of logocentrism and deconstructionism that constitute the hybrid nature of culture. In a hybrid world the intention to insist on the priority of the postmodern or logocentric image of the world (associated with archaic, pre-modern or globalism) is equally unreasonable and destructive. This equal coexistence became paradoxical - transcendental philosophy (for example, through Husserl and Heidegger) and postmodern offers different ways of constructing the borders of subjectivity that find their set in culture, but none of the paradigms can produce the integrity of subjectivity. The reason is in the way “philosophical modernist thought” constructs the relation between the thought and the out-of-thought - in the claim of the thought’s complete authorship in relation to the other. Postmodern acted as the modernity self-criticism, however the offer for ecological solution to the problem of subjectivity and positive definitions of culture after postmodern is affair of transcendental philosophy. Namely the completion of postmodernism suggests that conditions for the resumption of transcendental philosophy emerge in its phenomenological and ontological sense, bearing in mind the lessons of poststructuralist criticism. The state of culture, in which the border of subjectivity can be synthesized within the framework of an ontological interpretation of transcendental phenomenology and after postmodernist criticism of culture, previously can be defined as “neo-modern”. Such a preliminary definition requires a concrete grounding, but even now one can find the necessity to debate the forms of the possible presence of the sacred horizon of transcendence in a radically non-transcendent world. If philosophy finds an ecological relation between the transcendent and non-transcendent in the structure of subjectivity border then other culture borders will be harmonized