The normativity of multiple social identity: from motivation to legitimacy
Keywords:Man, personality, multiple social identity, motivation, legitimacy
Purpose. The authors of this article aim to reveal how motivation and legitimacy ensure the normativity of the structuring and genesis of multiple social identity. Theoretical basis. Social constructivism was chosen as a research methodology. It reveals social identity as an identity constructed by its bearer on the basis of ready-made versions of social identity proposed by social groups and society. Social circles, identified by Georg Simmel, unite representatives of different social groups into a wider oneness, which can be interpreted as a multiple social identity, and the motivation for its formation can be identified on the basis of Weber’s concept of legitimacy. Originality. Identifying the structure and genesis of a multiple social identity creates prerequisites for establishing its normative foundations, as well as for a specific analysis of the procedures for achieving its motivation and legitimacy. Georg Simmel’s concept of social virtues promotes consideration of the basic virtues of an individual as those that enable one’s to be a member of various social groups in which these virtues are manifested. Conclusions. The social virtues present in the social identities that are part of a multiple social identity determine not only the social status of these individuals in these social groups but also the ranking and normative significance of these groups for this individual. If the observance of virtues in a certain social group causes a higher motivation of an individual’s behavior, then this group acquires a higher legitimacy for her/him. Using the example of virtues, it is possible to search for other possible grounds for the formation of multiple social identity. Such grounds are primarily other characteristics of key social practices that support different social groups.
Arendt, H. (2002). Between Past and Future (V. Cherniak, Trans.). Kyiv: Dukh i Litera. (in Ukrainian)
Barvosa-Carter, E. (2005). Identity, Multiple: Overview. In M. C. Horowitz (Ed.), New Dictionary of the History of Ideas (pp. 1089-1094). Thomson Gale. (in English)
Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (M. Ritter, Trans.). London: Sage Publications. (in English)
Boichenko, M. (2022). Correction of the naming of things: the coercion of war in education and public life. Filosofiya Osvity. Philosophy of Education, 28(1), 11-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2022-28-1-1 (in Ukrainian)
Boichenko, N. M., & Shevchenko, Z. V. (2020). Incompatibility or Convergence: Human Life as Capital. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (17), 7-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15802/ampr.v0i17.206660 (in English)
Cybulska, E. M. (2019). Nietzsche: Bipolar Disorder and Creativity. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 19(1), 51-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20797222.2019.1641920 (in English)
Fialko, N. (2022). The significance of deliberation for the legitimation of social institutions. Philosophical Thought, (3), 185-197. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2022.03.185 (in Ukrainian)
Fromm, E. (2019). Escape from Freedom (M. Yakovliev, Trans.). Kharkiv: Family Leisure Club. (in Ukrainian)
Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns: Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung (Vol. 1). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. (in German)
Kant, I. (1784). Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? Berlinische Monatsschrift, 12, 481-494. (in German)
Loy, A. (2007). Ontolohichnyi pidtekst politychnoi filosofii Hanny Arendt. Philosophical Thought, (4), 3-16. (in Ukrainian)
Maffesoli, M. (2018). The Time of the Tribes: The Decline of Individualism in Mass Society (V. Pliushch, Trans.). Kyiv: VD "Kyiv-Mohyla Academy". (in Ukrainian)
Mouffe, C. (2005). On the Political. Routledge. (in English)
Olson, E. T. (2003). Personal Identity. In S. P. Stich & T. A. Warfield (Eds.), The Blackwell Guide to Philosophy of Mind (pp. 352-368). Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470998762.ch15 (in English)
Shevchenko, Z. V., & Fialko, N. A. (2021, November). Zahrozy rozshcheplennia sotsialnoi identychnosti v umovakh pandemii ta lehitymatsiia podolannia takoho rozshcheplennia. In Filosofiia v suchasnomu sviti: Materialy II Mizhnarodnoi naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii (pp. 224-225). Kharkiv: Drukarnia Madryd. (in Ukrainian)
Simmel, G. (1898). The Persistence of Social Groups. American Journal of Sociology, 3(5), 662-698. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/210744 (in English)
Weber, M. (2012). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie (M. Kushnir, Trans.). Kyiv: Vsesvit (in Ukrainian)
Yermolenko, A. (2022). Karl-Otto Apel’s ethics of discourse as the "first philosophy" of the third paradigm. Philosophical Thought, (2), 23-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/fd2022.02.023 (in Ukrainian)
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).