Here is another example of criticism of the concept of Homo economicus. A Swiss economist Bruno Frey notes that economics tends to become a branch of applied mathematics; the majority

114 Future Human Image. Volume 7, 2017

Homo Economicus as the Basis of "Asgardia" Nation State in Space: Perspective of Educational Technologies by Roman Oleksenko and Lidiia Fedorova

of all publications in professional journals and books are full of axioms, lemmas and proofs, and they are much concerned with purely formal deductions. However, Frey defends another point of view and believes that economics is a social science. Therefore, economics as a social science has every right to offer its concept of man or a model of human behavior. This model is slightly relevant to the concept of Homo economicus as consistently rational and narrowly self-interested agents, because this interpretation of the concept of Homo economicus are excessively formalized and torn away from real human behavior. Therefore, in his interpretation of the concept of economic man, Frey considers man not as an object-agent of theory, but as a subject of research and as a key structural element of social relations [Frey, 1992].

The interpretation of Homo economicus was criticized a lot, and deservedly. We wrote about this in our studies (e.g. Oleksenko"s studies [Oleksenko, 2013]). A comment about the concept of Homo economicus is presented, for example, in the studies of Bruno Frey [Frey, 1992], Carlos Rodriguez-Sickert [Rodriguez-Sickert, 2009], etc.

Analyzing the constructive criticism of the interpretation of Homo economicus, we come to the conclusion that, in fact, the criticism of Homo economicus not only refutes and denies the use of the concept, but gives new interpretations to it and expands the scope of application.

This applies, above all, to the expansion of the interpretation of the concept of Homo economicus due to achievements in the field of cognitive psychology and neurophilosophy. In this case, Homo economicus moves from the formal mathematical term to the domain model, projected and managed by educational practices. It becomes possible to apply to Homo economicus the formative forces, which, according to Protagoras, are the act of shaping the soul [Jaeger, 1946].

New interpretation in the concept of Homo economicus

In modern economic theories and game theory, Homo economicus is considered as consistently rational and narrowly self-interested agents who usually pursue their subjectively-defined ends optimally. Generally, homo economicus attempts to maximize utility as a consumer and profit as a producer. The modern interpretations of the concept of Homo economicus are considered, for example, in the works of Bruno Frey [Frey, 1992], Wolfgang Stroebe [Stroebe& Frey, 1980], Peter Weise [Weise, 1989], Richard H. Thaler [Thaler, 2000].

The basis for the modern interpretation of Homo economicus was formed in the paper "In Defense of Economic Man: Towards an Integration of Economics and Psychology" by Wolfgang Stroebe (Professor of Psychology) and Bruno S. Frey (Professor of Economics). Analyzing previous interpretation of Homo economicus in economic sciences, the authors came to an understanding that consideration of Homo economicus outside of psychology and its achievements in modern realities is incorrect. The main idea of the paper is "psychological man" who is a close relative of "Homo economicus" [Stroebe& Frey, 1980: 120].

Further developing the main ideas of his predecessors, in his paper "From Homo Economicus to Homo Sapiens" Richard Thaler argues that, for objective reasons, Homo economicus will become a slower learner [Thaler, 2000: 135-136].That is, unlike the classical interpretations which represent Homo economicus as a formal concept in economic theories, the modern interpretation of Homo economicus has changed qualitatively. We are talking about the possibility of learning Homo economicus and, accordingly, about the distinction of psychological properties in Homo economicus corresponding to Homo Sapiens [Thaler, 2000] or Homo Sociologicus [Weise, 1989].

Future Human Image. Volume 7, 2017 115

Homo Economicus as the Basis of "Asgardia" Nation State in Space: Perspective of Educational Technologies by Roman Oleksenko and Lidiia Fedorova

Considering modern interpretation of Homo economicus, Thaler comes to an important conclusion that the models of quasi-rational emotional humans and the interpretation of Homo economicus changes significantly due to the fact that the models of rational, unemotional agents, within the boundaries of which Homo economicus is traditionally considered, move to a more complex level [Thaler, 2000]. It is important for our study. In turn, Denys Svyrydenko talks about complex changes of anthropological nature, which was initiated by the "mobility turn" in the life of modern society: "Contemporary society lives at "the coordinates" of mobility and modern individual needs to transform one"s own everyday practices to stay at the advance-guard of the social development, to perform successful carrier steps etc...

According to "mobility turn" at the modern humanities and social sciences, mobility starts being comprehended as part of individual, information, idea, value attribute" [Svyrydenko, 2016: 103]. We think that it is necessary to take this trend into account when we consider the image of Homo economicus in modern education.

Expanding Homo economicus of interpretations from cognitive psychology and neurophilosophy allows us to find classical interpretations originating from the Greek paideia, which Plato was perhaps the first to use the word mold, πλάττειν, for the act [Jaeger, 1946: 314], and not those classical interpretations of this concept, which were given by John Kells Ingram or Peter Weise [Ingram, 1888; Weise, 1989]. It is these interpretations, which later the Romans accumulated in the concept of "humanitas", to transform Homo economicus into a cultural ideal. Therefore, a variety of educational practices, which are written by Werner Jaeger [Jaeger, 1946], Oleg Bazaluk [Bazaluk, 2014], Olga Gomilko [Gomilko et al, 2016], Denys Svyrydenko [Gomilko et al, 2016], are intended to achieve this cultural ideal.

We can cite the scientific study by Daniel Kahneman (the 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences) and Amos Tversky [Choices, 2000] as an example of new interpretations of Homo economicus from the field of cognitive psychology. In this study, the authors discuss the cognitive and the psychophysical determinants of choice in risky and riskless contexts. Furthermore, they propose prospect the theory. Extensions and applications to diverse economic phenomena and to studies of consumer behavior are discussed [Choices, 2000].

We will consider the expansion of the interpretation of Homo economicus by studies from neurosciences using the example of the research paper "Neurophilosophy in the Formation of Planetary-Cosmic Personality" by Oleg Bazaluk [Bazaluk, 2014]. In this paper, the author considers the spectrum of neurophilosophy possibilities in the formation of planetary-cosmic personality. The author considers a human development strategy from neural ensembles to moving forward. He also introduces new concepts and interpretations which are used in neuroscience. These are such concepts as "neural ensembles of subconsciousness and consciousness", "neuroevolution", "Intelligent Matter", "mentality", etc. [Bazaluk, 2014].