Philosophical Anthropology as a Space for the Evolution of Biopolitical Knowledge: From Ancient Natural Philosophy to Modern Microbiopolitics




philosophical anthropology, humanocentrism, socio-cultural reality, biopolitics, COVID-19 pandemic, human nature, microbiopolitics


Purpose. The study aims to substantiate philosophical anthropology as a space for the development of biopolitics, which is a relatively new synthetic scientific knowledge of the political in the biological and the biological in the political, which, however, has its roots in the era of antiquity. The analysis of biopolitics in the context of contemporary global challenges, in particular the COVID-19 pandemic, is carried out, which allows to actualize a new direction of biopolitics – microbiopolitics. Theoretical basis. The study is based on an understanding of the initial, in relation to biopolitics, the nature of philosophical anthropology. While philosophical anthropology seeks an answer to the question – who is Homo sapiens, given the biosocial nature of man, biopolitics specifies the question in the form – who is homo politicus in modern socio-political space with a focus on the imperative of a human-centred approach in the social sciences. The study is based on scientific works by specialists in philosophical anthropology and biopolitics. Originality. The authors substantiate the expediency and relevance of considering philosophical anthropology as a contextual space for the evolution of biopolitical knowledge from the natural philosophy of Antiquity to modern microbiopolitics. Conclusions. Philosophical anthropology is seen as a specific epistemological landscape in which fields of scientific knowledge are formed and developed that are in one way or another involved in the philosophical problems of man: philosophical psychology, social anthropology, philosophy of medicine, humanology, philosophy of education, ethics, as well as biophilosophy, bioethics, and, in particular, biopolitics.


Agamben, G. (2011). Homo sacer. Il potere sovrano e la nuda vita. Moscow: Yevropa. (in Russian)

Aristotle. (1996). The Politics and Тhe Constitution of Athens (S. Everson, Ed.). Cambridge University Press. (in English)

Canetti, Е. (1980). Masse und Macht. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer. (in German)

Cavanagh, C. J. (2014). Biopolitics, Environmental Change, and Development Studies. Forum for Development Studies, 41(2), 273-294. DOI: (in English)

Cruzada, S. M. (2020). The microbiopolitics of a 'total trans species' social institution. Social Anthropology/Anthropologie sociale, 28(2), 246-247. DOI: (in English)

Foucault, M. (2006). Intellektualy i vlast: Izbrannye politicheskie stati, vystupleniya i intervyu (B. M. Skuratov, Trans., Vol. 3). Moscow: Praksis. (in Russian)

Heidegger, M. (1991). Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann. (in German)

Hobbes, T. (2000). Leviafan, abo Sut, budova i povnovazhennia derzhavy tserkovnoi ta tsyvilnoi. Kyiv: Dukh i Litera. (in Ukrainian)

Husserl, E. (1989). Phänomenologie und Anthropologie (Vortrag in den Kantgesellschaften von Frankfurt, Berlin und Halle 1931). In Aufsätze und Vorträge (1922-1937) (рр. 164-181). Kluwer Academic Publishers. (in German)

Ironstone, P. (2019). Me, my self, and the multitude: Microbiopolitics of the human microbiome. European Journal of Social Theory, 22(3), 325-341. DOI: (in English)

Khamitov, N. V. (2021). Philosophical anthropology: world and domestic contexts. Visnyk of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, (5), 81-94. DOI: (in Ukrainian)

Kostiuchkov, S. K. (2015). Biopolitychne pidgruntia filosofsko-osvitnoi kontseptsii v umovakh hromadianskoho suspilstva: Monohrafiia. Kherson: Ailant. (in Ukrainian)

Коstyuchkov, S. К. (2018). Different Human Images and Anthropological Colissions of Post-Modernism Epoсh: Biophilosophical Interpretation. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (13), 100-111. DOI: (in English)

Kravets, A. Y. (2019). Biopolitychna paradyhma politychnoi nauky: vytoky, problemy, perspektyvy. Dnipro: Aktsent PP. (in Ukrainian)

Kremen, V. H., & Ilin, V. V. (2021). Transformation of the Human Image in the Paradigm of Knowledge Evolution. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (19), 5-14. DOI: (in English)

Marchezini, V. (2015). The Biopolitics of Disaster: Power, Discourses, and Practices. Human Organization, 74(4), 362-371. DOI: (in English)

Marquard, O. (2008). Glück im Unglück. Philosophische Überlegungen. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag. (in German)

Masters, R. D. (1989). The Nature of Politics. New Haven: Yale University Press. (in English)

Peterson, S. A., & Somit, A. (Eds.). (2011). Biology and Politics: The Cutting Edge. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. (in English)

Pyrozhkov, S., & Khamitov, N. (2020). Ukraine as a civilizational subject: from potencies to a new worldview and human existence. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka. (in Ukrainian)

Scheler, M. (1988). Die Stellung des Menschen im Kosmos (A. Filippov, Trans.). In Problema cheloveka v zapadnoy philosophii (pp. 31-95). Moscow: Progress. (in Russian)

Schuller, К. (2018). The Biopolitics of Feeling: Race, Sex, and Science in the Nineteenth Century. Duke University Press. (in English)

Tate, W. (2020). Anthropology of Policy: Tensions, Temporalities, Possibilities. Annual Review of Anthropology, 49, 83-99. DOI: (in English)

Valverde, C. (2013). Antropología filosófica. Valencia: EDICEP. (in Spanish)




How to Cite

Kostiuchkov, S. K., & Kartashova, I. I. (2022). Philosophical Anthropology as a Space for the Evolution of Biopolitical Knowledge: From Ancient Natural Philosophy to Modern Microbiopolitics. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (21), 15–27.