The author studies the problem of legitimating social order in the context of the human situation. The human situation is primarily defined as the necessity to communicate with those who have no preconception (Vorverständnis by H.-G. Gadamer) of legitimation. The lack of motivation for moral and political communication constitutes a marginal person. This article describes the differences between a bourgeois and a marginal person within historical time and communicational space (centre — periphery). Special attention is paid to these differences in Ukraine. The author shows that under conditions of globalization the work ethos has become a crucial legitimating factor. Contradictions between work and interaction, between strategic and value-oriented rationalities may be partly reconciled due to the value of an individual's work as the basis of his/her welfare. Global mass media constantly change welfare standards. Therefore, the intensity of work keeps growing, which becomes common to all social groups who legitimate social order. Marginal individuals, on the contrary, reject the ethos of work and aspire to gain wealth illegally. At the age of globalization, the survival of mankind is jeopardized since whole nations are marginalized. They have lost the values of traditional communication and delegitimated social order. Now, the so-called «paradox of rationalization» is characteristic of those peripheral nations rather than the Protestant bourgeoisie (as M. Weber thought).
Постійна адреса матеріалу
Богачов Андрій(2009).Леґітимація і людська ситуація. Філософська думка, №5.с. 34-48.