THE IMAGE OF THE BODY AND CORPOREALITY IN DIGITAL VISUAL CULTURE: A PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVE


DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2415-881x.2026.100.1.79-88

Anastasiia Tormakhova, Dmytro Tovmash

Abstract


This article presents a comprehensive philosophical analysis of the relationship between the image of the body and corporeality within the context of digital visual culture. The study examines theoretical approaches to understanding visuality as a cultural environment in which corporeality takes on a secondary significance. It is revealed that contemporary visual culture functions as a system of meaning production, within which the body appears not as a primary given, but as the result of an interpretation determined by visual practices, social norms and technological conditions. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of digital platforms as environments for the formation of virtualised corporeality. It is demonstrated that algorithmic mechanisms, the logic of visibility and networked forms of communication determine the modes of representation of the body, contributing to the transformation and standardisation of its images. It has been established that gender acts as a key mechanism for interpreting corporeality, through which notions of normative body image models are formed. The specifics of self-representation in the digital environment have been investigated, where the body functions as a dynamic construct formed in the process of image circulation and interaction with digital interfaces. It has been demonstrated that, in the context of digitalisation, the body image ceases to be a reflection of corporeality and instead acts as a medium for its virtualisation. It has been argued that contemporary corporeality is the result of the interaction of visual, discursive and technological factors.

Keywords


image; body image; visual culture; gender; philosophy; digitalisation; corporeality; digital corporeality

References


Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. Penguin Books.

Mirzoeff, N. (1999). An introduction to visual culture. Psychology Press.

Sturken, M., & Cartwright, L. (2009). Practices of looking: An introduction to visual culture (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Stadnik, O. (2024). The body as a social construct: from proto-sociology to classical theories of social interaction. Grani, 27 (6), 29-34. https://doi.org/10.15421/1724109

Valensa, G.A. (2009).‘The Body’ and ‘Corporality’ in a Socio-Philosophical Context: Terminological Studies. Philosophical Issues in the Humanities. http://www.info-library.com.ua/books-text-11478.html

van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press.

boyd, d. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press.

Manovich, L., & Arielli, E. (2024). Artificial aesthetics. https://manovich.net/index.php/projects/artificial-aesthetics

Herman, L. (2023). For you page? TikTok creators’ algorithmic dependencies. IASDR 2023: Life-Changing Design. https://doi.org/10.21606/iasdr.2023.576

Rettberg, J. W. (2014). Seeing ourselves through technology: How we use selfies, blogs and wearable devices to see and shape ourselves. Palgrave Macmillan.

Senft, T. M., & Baym, N. K. (2015). What does the selfie say? Investigating a global phenomenon. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1588–1606.

Castells, M. (2010). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Blackwell.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The editorial board does not always share the position of the authors. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the material presented.
All rights reserved.
© Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2026