Номадичні практики «варіювання меж» людини: Номо Моrtido vs Ноmo Mobilis

Abstract

The article has reviewed nomadic practices of a person’s “varying boundaries”: in order to survive in the hyphspace, a person has to determine which condition to adopt: Homo Mortido (by Paul Federn) or Homo Mobilis (by John Urry). It has been found out that nomadic practices of a person’s “boundary extension” contribute to their progress, aspiration to life and to the achievement of Homo Mobilis condition. It is stated that in the “web of life” (Fritjof Capra) a person acquires the “life instinct” (Ilya Mechnikov) and the “reflex of life” (Ivan Pavlov), which do not equally manifest themselves in different periods of human life. It has been proved that the introduction of nomadic practices of “varying boundaries” of a person, striving to live and reach the condition of Homo Mobilis, results in the “extension of their boundaries” and “going beyond” their own body. The author has studied the definitions of “mortido”, “libido”, “cathexis”, “thanatos” and “destrudo”. The author supposes that the introduction of nomadic practices of “varying boundaries” of a person who seeks to die by achieving the condition of Homo Mortido is fraught with “narrowing of their boundaries”, degradation and even death. In addition to the abovementioned, the person still has an opportunity and freedom to choose (perhaps not final) the acquisition of the following conditions: to be / remain themselves, to degrade, to “run on the blade”, as well as to strive for life or death. It has been assumed that both Homo Mortido and Homo Mobilis must exist in society. It has been proven that due to using nomadic practices that stimulate the instinct for self-preservation and libido, Homo Mortido will be able to refocus their potential and life chances similar to Homo Mobilis.