The present paper discusses perspectives of Activity Theory (AT) in the context of contemporary globalizing world, describing which we refer to the notion “De-structuralized modernity” (Sorokin and Froumin 2020). Radical changes in everyday life challenge social sciences and humanities. Approaches are in demand, which have the potential to comprehend the changing human étant and éntre. We argue that Activity Theory has the potential to face these challenges. Leontiev’s AT grounds on the idea of qualitatively new mental features arising to deal with novel environmental challenges, which is much in line with J.M. Baldwin reasoning on evolution. AT also offers a method to prognosis the upcoming neoplasms. In the same time, applying classics of AT to the current reality, “De-structuralized modernity”, entails the need for new theoretical elaborations of the latter, stemming from the radical transformation of the relations between individual and socio-cultural environments. A unique societal context emerges on the global level, which, on the one hand, requires individual to adapt constantly to changing socio-cultural reality, and, on the other hand, dramatically expands his/her potential for proactive actorhood transforming surrounding structures. We argue that the major and novel challenge for the individual is that maintaining the integrity and coherence of the a) Self-identity and b) system of links with the socio-cultural environment - in their dynamics and unity, has become a qualitatively different issue, much more complicated and problematic than ever before. The notion of “culture” has particular relevance and importance in this context because it allows grasping simultaneously two dimensions in their dynamic dialectical interrelations. First, the “internal” (“subjective”, “in the minds”) and “external” (“objective”, material and institutional environment) realities. Second, individual (“micro”) and societal (“macro”) scales of human activities. Discussing the ways to understand these dynamics, we dispute the popular “constitutive view” on personality and refer to the concept of the “ontological shift” (Mironenko and Sorokin 2018). We also highlight how technological advancements change and “expand” human nature making it capable to deal with the outlined new tasks.

本文讨论了当代全球化世界背景下的活动理论（AT）的观点，并描述了“去结构化的现代性”的概念（索罗金和弗鲁明，2020）。日常生活的根本变化对社会科学和人文学科提出了挑战。人们需要能够理解不断变化的人类发展趋势的方法。我们认为活动理论有潜力应对这些挑战。 Leontiev 的 AT 的基础是为了应对新的环境挑战而产生的新的心理特征，这与 JM Baldwin 的进化论非常一致。 AT 还提供了一种预测即将发生的肿瘤的方法。与此同时，将AT的经典应用于当前的现实“去结构化的现代性”，需要对后者进行新的理论阐述，源于个人与社会文化环境之间关系的根本转变。全球范围内出现了独特的社会背景，一方面要求个人不断适应不断变化的社会文化现实，另一方面极大地扩展了他/她主动改变周围结构的潜力。我们认为，个人面临的主要且新颖的挑战是，保持a）自我认同和b）与社会文化环境的联系体系的完整性和连贯性——在其动态性和统一性方面，已成为一个性质不同的问题，比以往任何时候都更加复杂和有问题。 “文化”的概念在这种情况下具有特别的相关性和重要性，因为它允许同时把握动态辩证相互关系中的两个维度。 首先，“内部”（“主观”、“头脑中”）和“外部”（“客观”、物质和制度环境）现实。其次，人类活动的个人（“微观”）和社会（“宏观”）规模。在讨论理解这些动态的方法时，我们对流行的人格“本构论”提出了质疑，并提到了“本体论转变”的概念（Mironenko 和 Sorokin 2018）。我们还强调技术进步如何改变和“扩展”人性，使其能够处理概述的新任务。