FÜTÜRİST SOSYOLOJİYE DOĞRU: DİJİTALLEŞEN DÜNYADA GİDEREK YALNIZLAŞAN İNSAN

Öz

Bu çalışma, dijitalleşmenin hızlanmasıyla birlikte modern bireylerde belirginleşen yalnızlık olgusunu sosyolojik bir perspektiften incelemektedir. Dijital teknolojilerin yaygınlaşması, bireyler arasında sanal bağlantıların artmasına karşın anlamlı sosyal ilişkilerin zayıflaması şeklinde paradoksal bir durum yaratmaktadır. Bu bağlamda araştırma, dijitalleşmenin birey–toplum ilişkilerinde yol açtığı dönüşümü analiz ederek dijital çağda ortaya çıkan ‘dijital yalnızlık’ fenomenini fütürist sosyoloji yaklaşımıyla ele almaktadır. Çalışmada, 2010–2025 yılları arasında yayımlanan 38 akademik eser betimsel içerik analiziyle incelenmiş; sosyal medya kullanımı, tek kişilik hane oranlarındaki artış ve boş zamanın dijitalleşmesi gibi göstergelerin sosyal izolasyonu güçlendirdiği bulgulanmıştır. Nitel tematik kodlama ve destekleyici nicel göstergeler, dijital bağlantılılığın artışıyla derin sosyal bağların zayıflaması arasında negatif yönlü örüntüler olduğunu göstermektedir. Çalışma, bu eğilimin gelecekte daha bireyci ve duygusal açıdan daha izole toplum yapılarına yol açabileceğini öngörmektedir. Bu nedenle teknolojinin sosyal ilişkileri destekleyecek biçimde tasarlanmasını amaçlayan ‘dijital sosyal sözleşme’ ilkeleri önerilmektedir. Sonuç olarak çalışma, dijital çağın sosyal patolojilerini anlamayı ve gelecekteki toplumsal yapılar için çözüm odaklı bir çerçeve sunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijital sosyoloji
• Yalnızlık
• Boş zaman sosyolojisi
• Fütürist sosyoloji
• Teknoloji ve toplum

Etik Beyan

Tüm etik kurallara uyulmuştur.

TOWARDS A FUTURIST SOCIOLOGY: THE INCREASINGLY LONELY HUMAN IN A DIGITALIZING WORLD

Öz

This study examines the phenomenon of loneliness, which has become increasingly apparent among modern individuals as digitalisation accelerates, through a sociological perspective. The widespread use of digital technologies creates a paradox in which virtual connections intensify while meaningful social relationships weaken. In this context, the research analyses the transformation of individual–society relations shaped by digitalisation and addresses the emerging phenomenon of ‘digital loneliness’ through the lens of futurist sociology. The study conducts a descriptive content analysis of 38 academic works published between 2010 and 2025, revealing that indicators such as increased social media use, rising rates of single-person households, and the digitalisation of leisure time strengthen social isolation. Qualitative thematic coding supported by quantitative indicators demonstrates negative patterns between the rise in digital connectedness and the decline in deep social bonds. The findings suggest that this trend may lead to future societies that are more individualistic and emotionally isolated. Therefore, the study proposes the principles of a ‘digital social contract,’ aimed at designing technologies that support and reinforce social relationships. Overall, the study seeks to understand the social pathologies of the digital age and to offer a solution-oriented framework for future social structures.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digital sociology
• Loneliness
• Sociology of leisure
• Futurist sociology
• Technology and society

Etik Beyan

All ethical rules have been complied with.

Kaynakça

1. Abbott, A. (2000). Reflections on the future of sociology. Contemporary Sociology, 29(2), 296–300. https://doi.org/10.2307/2654383
2. Amin, Z. ve Zinaida, R. S. (2024). Digital loneliness in social media: The epoch of our connected and distraction world. N. Mansour ve L. Bujosa (Ed.), Contributions to management science (s. 807–827) içinde. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48770-5_65
3. Association of Professional Futurists. (2018). Most significant futures work. https://www.apf.org/association/if-awards adresinden 14 Ekim 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
4. Baeshen, L. M. S. (1986). Robinson Crusoe and Hayy bin Yaqzan: A comparative study [Yüksek lisans tezi, University of Arizona]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
5. Bahari Jouibari, M., Sattari, A., Banahan Ghomi, M. ve Naraghizadeh, A. (2023). A comparative comparison of the philosophical contexts of the two stories of "Hayy Ibn Yaqzan" and "Robinson Crusoe". Journal of Philosophical Investigations, 17(43), 674-694. https://doi.org/10.22034/jpiut.2022.51746.3221
6. Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Polity Press.
7. Bell, W. (1996). The sociology of the future and the future of sociology. Sociological Perspectives, 39(1), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/1389342
8. Blum, C. (1990). Rhetorical strategies and gender in Marinetti’s Futurist Manifesto. Italica, 67(2), 196–211.

9. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste (R. Nice, Çev.). Harvard University Press. (Orjinal eserin yayın tarihi 1979).
10. Brassett, J. ve O’Reilly, J. (Eds.). (2021). A creative philosophy of anticipation. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367234591
11. Cacioppo, J. T. ve Patrick, W. (2008). Loneliness: Human nature and the need for social connection. W. W. Norton and Company.
12. Carrel, A. (2017). L’homme, cet inconnu. FV Éditions.
13. Cavanagh, A. (2007). Sociology in the Age of the Internet. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
14. Chivers, T. (2010, December 21). Internet pornography block plans: Other attempts to control the internet. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/8215030/Internet-pornography-block-plans-other-attempts-to-control-the-internet.html adresinden 20 Ocak 2026 tarihinde alınmıştır.
15. Cigna. (2020, January). Loneliness and the workplace: 2020 U.S. report (Version 1.0). https://www.cigna.com/static/www-cigna-com/docs/cigna-2020-loneliness-factsheet.pdf adresinden 20 Ocak 2026 tarihinde alınmıştır.
16. D’Ambrosio, M. (2009). From words-in-freedom to electronic literature: Futurism and the neo-avantgarde. G. Berghaus (Ed.), Futurism and the technological imagination (s. 263–286) içinde. Brill.
17. Dadswell, S. J. (2005). The spectacle of Russian futurism: The emergence and development of Russian futurist performance, 1910–1914 [Doktora tezi, University of Sheffield].
18. Daniels, J., Gregory, K. ve Cottom, T. M. (2015). Digital Sociology MiniConference, organized in conjunction with the Eastern Sociological Society meetings. http://digsoc.commons.gc.cuny.edu/conference-papers-2015 adresinden 14 Ocak 2026 tarihinde alınmıştır.
19. Darnton, R. (2008, June 12). The library in the new age. The New York Review of Books, 55(10), 72-74.
20. Dikötter, F. (1992). The limits of benevolence: Wang Shiduo (1802–1889) and population control. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 55(1), 110–115. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X0000269X
21. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, R. W. ve Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307–336. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.307
22. Doğan, S. (2012). Comparison of the works of Hay bin Yakzan and Robinson Crusoe with respect to philosophy of educational. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 3(2), 2139–2146.
23. European Commission. (2022). The EU loneliness survey. https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/projects-and-activities/survey-methods-and-analysis-centre/loneliness/eu-loneliness-survey_en adresinden 15 Ekim 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
24. European Commission, Joint Research Centre. (2022). Loneliness prevalence in the EU. https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/projects-and-activities/survey-methods-and-analysis-centre/loneliness/loneliness-prevalence-eu_en adresinden 20 Aralık 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
25. Franklin, A. S. (2009). On loneliness. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 91(4), 343–354.
26. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford University Press.
27. Gidley, J. (2017). The future: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
28. Gorman, J. R., Kim, H., Sakuma, K.-L. K., Koneru, G., Aslam, M., Arredondo-Abreu, C. ve Primack, B. A. (2025). Time and frequency of social media use and loneliness among U.S. adults. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(10), 1510. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22101510
29. Hall, J. A. ve Liu, D. (2022). Social media use, social displacement and well-being. Current Opinion in Psychology, 46, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101339
30. Harkins, A. M. (1972). Futurism in man: Humanism, social technology and survival. Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, University of Minnesota.
31. Hartijasti, Y. (2016). Is serious internet deviance a problem in Indonesian workplace? Asian Journal of Information and Communications, 8(2), 96–107.
32. Hecht, J. (1958). Le bicentenaire du Tableau économique: François Quesnay et la physiocratie. Population (French Edition), 13(2), 287–292. https://doi.org/10.2307/1524823
33. Hester, R. (2018). Historical research: Theory and methods. Ed - Tech Press.
34. Hines, A. (2004). The history and development of the Association of Professional Futurists. R. A. Slaughter (Ed.), The knowledge base of futures studies: Professional edition (s 1-54) içinde. Indooroopilly, Australia: Foresight International.
35. Hines, A. ve Bishop, P. (2007). Thinking about the future: Guidelines for strategic foresight. Social Technologies.
36. Hines, A. ve Gold, J. (2013). Professionalizing foresight: Why do it, where it stands and what needs to be done. Journal of Futures Studies, 17(4), 35–54.
37. Huber, B. J. ve Bell, W. (1971). Sociology and the emergent study of the future. The American Sociologist, 6(4), 287–295.
38. Inayatullah, S. (2002). Comparing Sarkar: The view from all around. S. Inayatullah (Ed.), Understanding Sarkar (s. 167–285) içinde. Brill.
39. Jacobs, K. A. (2024). Digital loneliness—changes of social recognition through AI companions. Frontiers in Digital Health, 6, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1281037
40. Kalkan, M. (2025). Dijitalleşme sürecinde sosyal politikada güncel gelişmeler. Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletişim Dergisi, 3(1), 143-151.
41. Kelly, J. R. ve Godbey, G. (1992). The sociology of leisure. Venture Publishing Inc.
42. Lamont, T. (2002). Mutual abuse: The meeting of Robinson Crusoe and Hayy Ibn Yaqzân. Edebiyat: Journal of M. E. Literatures, 13(2), 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/0364650032000143229
43. Liu, L. (2024). Research on the relationship between virtual social interaction and the degree of loneliness based on algorithm matching technologies. PLOS ONE, 19(12), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312522
44. Lupton, D. (2012). Digital Sociology: An introduction. https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/handle/2123/8621/Digital%20Sociology.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y adresinden 9 Ocak 2026 tarihinde alınmıştır.
45. Lupton, D. (2014). Digital Sociology. Routledge.
46. Lupton, D. (2015) Digital Sociology. Routledge.
47. Marinetti, F. T. (2008). The manifesto of Futurism. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/nov/13/first-world-war-futurism adresinden 10 Ocak 2026 tarihinde alınmıştır.
48. Marinetti, F. T. (2016). The manifesto of Futurism. Passerino Editore.
49. Marres, N. (2017). Digital Sociology: The reinvention of social research. John Wiley and Sons.
50. McAuley, J., Duberley, J. ve Johnson, P. (2007). Organization theory: Challenges and perspectives. Prentice Hall/Financial Times.
51. More, T. (1904). Sir Thomas More’s utopia. Clarendon Press.
52. Neal, R. (2010). Expanding sentience: Introducing digital sociology for moving beyond buzz metrics in a world of growing online socialization. Temetic Research.
53. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2024). Society at a glance 2024: OECD social indicators. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/society-at-a-glance-2024_918d8db3-en.html adresinden 15 Ekim 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
54. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025). Better life index. https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org adresinden 15 Ekim 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
55. Orton-Johnson, K. ve Prior, N. (Eds.). (2013). Digital sociology: Critical perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. Parker, S. (2022). The sociology of leisure. Routledge.
56. Paul, H. (Ed.). (2019). Critical terms in futures studies. Palgrave Macmillan-Springer International Publishing.
57. Pęciak, R. (2016). Megatrends and their implications in the globalised world. Horyzonty Polityki, 7(21), 167–184.
58. Poggi, C. (2009). Inventing futurism: The art and politics of artificial optimism. Princeton University Press.
59. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster.
60. Roberts, J. A., Young, P. D. ve David, M. E. (2024). The epidemic of loneliness: A 9-year longitudinal study of the impact of passive and active social media use on loneliness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241295870
61. Rosa, H. (2013). Social acceleration: A new theory of modernity. Columbia University Press.
62. Seki, T. ve Kurnaz, M. F. (2022). Bireylerin dijital bağımlılıkları ile yalnızlık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi: Bir meta-analiz çalışması. Educational Academic Research, (45), 24-34. https://doi.org/10.54614/AUJKKEF.2022.991723.
63. Selwyn, N. (2019). What is digital sociology?. Polity Press.
64. Stebbins, R. A. (2007). Serious leisure: A perspective for our time. Transaction Publishers.
65. Süleymanlı, E., Kalkandeler, N., Çakmak, B. ve Dağ, B. (Eds.). (2022). Dijitalleşme ve yalnızlık: III. Uluslararası Yalnızlık Sempozyumu bildiriler kitabı. Üsküdar Üniversitesi Yayınları.
66. Şeker, C., Kaya, A. ve Karadayı, D. (2024). Dijitalleşme ve sosyal medyanın toplum üzerindeki etkileri. M. Avcı ve M. B. Bulut (Ed.), Sosyal psikoloji alanında uluslararası araştırmalar I (s. 65-79) içinde. Eğitim Yayınevi.
67. Taylor, H. O., Cudjoe, T. K. M., Bu, F. ve Lim, M. H. (2023). The state of loneliness and social isolation research: Current knowledge and future directions. BMC Public Health, 23, 1049-1052. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15967-3
68. Tufeyl İbn-i. (2009). Hayy ibn Yaqzan: A philosophical tale (Güncellenmiş baskı, giriş ve notlarla birlikte). (L. E. Goodman, Çev.). Gee Tee Bee/ University of Chicago Press. https://archive.org/details/ibntufaylshayyib0000ibnt (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 2003).
69. Tufeyl İbn-i. (2021). Hayy Bin Yakzân. (O. Özatağ, Çev.). İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları. (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 1952).
70. Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Books.
71. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2023). Hanehalkı bilişim teknolojileri (BT) kullanım araştırması, 2023. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2023-49407 adresinden 10 Eylül 2024 tarihinde alınmıştır.
72. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2024). Hanehalkı bilişim teknolojileri (BT) kullanım araştırması, 2024. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2024-53492 adresinden 25 Mayıs 2024 tarihinde alınmıştır.
73. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2025). Hanehalkı bilişim teknolojileri (BT) kullanım araştırması, 2025. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-%28BT%29-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2025-53925 adresinden 14 Ekim 2025 tarihinde alınmıştır.
74. Usta, S. (2022). Türk ütopyaları Osmanlı’dan Cumhuriyet Dönemi’ne özgürlüğü düşlemek. Kafka Kitap.
75. Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press.
76. Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class: An economic study of institutions. Macmillan.
77. Zerle-Elsäßer, C., Langmeyer, A. N., Naab, T. ve Heuberger, S. (2023). Doing family in the digital age. J. Skopek (Ed.), Research handbook on digital sociology (s. 365–378) içinde. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789906769.00030
78. Zheng, L., Brady, B. ve Anstey, K. J. (2025). Social technology use and loneliness: Exploring online and offline patterns and preferences in young, middle-aged, and older adults. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2543994
79. Wellman, B. (2001). Physical place and cyberplace: The rise of personalized networking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(2), 227-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00309
80. Wilson, J. (1980). Sociology of leisure. Annual Review of Sociology, 6(1), 21–40.
81. Winthrop, H. (1968). The Sociologist and the Study of the Future. The American Sociologist, 3(2), 136-145.
82. Wood, M. M. (1953). Paths of loneliness: The individual isolated in modern society. Columbia University Press.
83. Wynn, J. (2009). Digital Sociology: Emergent technologies in the field and the classroom. Sociological Forum, 24(2), 448-456. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2009.01109.x