UDC

1:124.5

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V245

Authors

Vladimir S. Erokhin
Saratov State Law Academy; ul. Chernyshevskogo 104, Saratov, 410056, Russian Federation;
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4257-5529 e-mail: v.s.erohin@mail.ru

Abstract

The relevance of studying the problem of self-dentification is associated with the development of society’s man-made environment, computer technologies and means of communication. The development of cyber and virtual space has gained significance and, as a result, the established stereotypes of relating oneself to the models have been changing. In addition, globalization changes in modern society, which determine the possibility of unification of norms and universalization of the values of human existence, are viewed as important. On this basis, it seems necessary to identify other, modern ways to establish personal identity. It appears relevant to study this process from the position of normativity, but not just from the point of view of whether a person has properties that define his/her self. The search for normative bases for forms and practices of self-identification seems problematic. It is important to find criteria and principles of acceptability of establishing personal identity. This paper aimed to determine the normative nature of self-identification. As research methods, the author used the logical method, which allows to analyse the concepts of social normativity and self-identification in detail, as well as the critical method, which makes it possible to relate these concepts to each other. As a result, the normative nature of self-identification is manifested in a set of ascriptive and descriptive requirements for creating personal identity. The unity of such norms is interpreted by the author as a criterion for the acceptability and permissibility of forms and practices of self-identification, which makes it possible to influence the ways of social interaction and, as a consequence, regulation of social ties and relations. Such norms are subject to the evolutionary principle implying a reduction in the number of coercive norms and expansion of the scope of descriptive norms. The various practices of selfidentification are implemented based on its normative nature. Using the example of gender-related practices of self-identification, the author demonstrates the acceptability and effectiveness of the ideas proposed by him.

Keywords

self-identification, norm, practices of self-identification, normative nature, ascriptive norms, descriptive norms

References

1. Erokhin V.S. The Problem of Personal Identity: Relativism. News Saratov Univ. Ser. Philos. Psychol. Pedagogy, 2018, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 27–31 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.18500/1819-7671-2018-18-1-27-31

2. Erokhin V.S. Podkhody k traktovke lichnostnoy identifikatsii: substantsializm, konstruktivizm i sotsial’nyy interaktsionizm [Approaches to the Interpretation of Personal Identification: Substantialism, Constructivism and Social Interactionism]. Vestnik razvitiya nauki i obrazovaniya, 2019, no. 1, pp. 92–99.

3. Borowski E.J. Identity and Personal Identity. Mind, 1976, vol. 85, no. 340, pp. 481–502.

4. Atkins K. Narrative Identity and Moral Identity: A Practical Perspective. New York, 2008. 175 p.

5. Nebel J.M. Normative Reasons as Reasons Why We Ought. Mind, 2019, vol. 128, no. 510, pp. 459–484. DOI: 10.1093/mind/fzy013

6. Efanova L.G. Norma kak filosofskaya i semanticheskaya kategoriya [The Norm as a Philosophical and Semantic Category]. Vestnik nauki Sibiri, 2015, no. 1, pp. 70–78.

7. Dobrin K.Yu. Sotsial’naya norma v traditsionnom i sovremennom obshchestve [Social Norm in Traditional and Modern Society]. Vestnik PAGS, 2011, no. 1, pp. 116–121.

8. Zav’yalova N.Yu., Rudenko A.N. K voprosu o ponyatii sotsial’noy normy [To a Question of Concept of Social Norm]. Gumanitarnye, sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie i obshchestvennye nauki, 2014, no. 10-1, pp. 213–216.

9. Atkins K. Narrative Identity, Practical Identity and Ethical Subjectivity. Cont. Philos. Rev., 2004, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 341–366.

10. Christman J. Narrative Unity as a Condition of Personhood. Metaphilosophy, 2004, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 695–713.

11. Dryaeva E.D., Kanaev I.A. Individual and Social Determinants for the Formation of Identity: A Comparative Analysis of Research Strategies. Vestnik St. Petersb. Univ. Philos. Confl. Stud., 2020, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 621–633. DOI: 10.21638/spbu17.2020.402

12. Kalachikova O.N., Gruzdeva M.A. Gendernye stereotipy v sovremennoy sem’e: zhenshchiny i muzhchiny (na materialakh sotsiologicheskogo issledovaniya) [Gender Stereotypes in the Modern Family: Women and Men (on the Basis of a Sociological Research)]. Zhenshchina v rossiyskom obshchestve, 2019, no. 1, pp. 64–76. DOI: 10.21064/WinRS.2019.1.6

13. Maynard M. Beyond the “Big Three”: The Development of Feminist Theory into the 1990s. Women’s Hist. Rev., 1995, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 259–281.

14. Sillaste G.G. Sotsial’naya sub”ektnost’ sem’i v protsesse formirovaniya novogo gendernogo poryadka [Transitivity of the Family and Its Subjectivity in the Process of Forming a New Gender Order]. Zhenshchina v rossiyskom obshchestve, 2020, no. 4, pp. 14–26. DOI: 10.21064/WinRS.2020.4.2

15. Blinova T.V., Vyal’shina A.A. Sotsial’noe samochuvstvie rabotayushchikh materey: sovremennye problemy [Working Mothers’ Social Well-Being: Present-Day Problems]. Zhenshchina v rossiyskom obshchestve, 2020, no. 3, pp. 103–114. DOI: 10.21064/WinRS.2020.3.9

16. Sillaste G.G. Sotsial’nye tranzitsii i formirovanie novogo gendernogo poryadka [Social Transitions and the Formation of a New Gender Order]. Zhenshchina v rossiyskom obshchestve, 2019, no. 2, pp. 3–16. DOI: 10.21064/WinRS.2019.2.1

17. Offen K. Sur l’origine des mots “féminisme” et “féministe”. RHMC, 1987, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 492–496.