Existential foundations of social responsibility

Cover Page

Cite item


Issues of vicarious, collective and other types of responsibility become more urgent under the growing global interconnectedness and interdependence. Since most actors are collective ones, we need a theoretical study of the grounds for social responsibility and its essential features as represented in diverse manifestations. The article considers social responsibility in terms of the existential-phenomenological approach developed by M.M. Bakhtin, J.-P. Sartre, M.K. Mamardashvili, H. Arendt, H. Blumer, etc. Social responsibility is a type of responsibility; therefore, the author searches for the most fundamental grounds of this phenomenon. This search allows to reveal the paradox of responsibility and to highlight the spatial-temporal boundariness as its most important structure that provides co-being (joint existence) with others. Everyone interplays the ‘inner sociality’ when interpreting acts (deeds) are always performed in front of the Other (including I as the Other for oneself). Thus, the Other plays the key role in making responsible choices. In the existential perspective, individual responsibility serves as a necessary basis for all other forms of responsibility including vicarious, collective and social. The author presents examples of different life situations to explain the choice of such criteria as the internal unity of the group focused on the ‘common purpose’ shared by all participants, and the strive for completeness for the sake of the Other without infringing the being of ‘external’ others.

About the authors

E. V. Biricheva

Institute for Philosophy and Law of the Ural Branch of the RAS

Author for correspondence.
Email: e.v.biricheva@mail.ru

кандидат философских наук, научный сотрудник сектора истории и философии науки

S. Kowalevskoj St., Yekaterinburg, 620219, Russia


  1. Abbagnano N. Mudrost filosofii i problemy nashej zhizni [Wisdom of Philosophy and Issues Our Lives]. Saint Petersburg; 1998 (In Russ.).
  2. Arendt H. Otvetstvennost i suzhdenie [Responsibility and Judgement]. Moscow; 2013 (In Russ.).
  3. Babaev A.M., Shemjakina M.A. Otvetstvennost uchjonyh za sozdanie iskusstvennogo intellekta [Responsibility of scientists for the artificial intelligence]. Concept. 2016; 11 (In Russ.).
  4. Bakhtin M. Sobranie sochinenij v 7 tomah. [Collected Works in 7 vols.]. Vol. 1. Moscow; 2003 (In Russ.).
  5. Bibikhin V.V. Detsky lepet [Baby talk]. Word and Event. Writer and Literature. Moscow; 2010 (In Russ.).
  6. Bibikhin V.V. Les [Forest]. Saint Petersburg; 2011 (In Russ.).
  7. Bibikhin V.V. Pora (vremja-bytie) [It’s Time (Time-Being)]. Saint Petersburg; 2015 (In Russ.).
  8. Blumer H. Obshhestvo kak simvolicheskaja interaktsija [Society as a symbolic interaction]. Contemporary Social Psychology. Moscow; 1984 (In Russ.).
  9. Gavrilov K.A. Risk i moral'naja otvetstvennost': rekonstrukcija normativnogo izmerenija riskovannogo povedenija. [Risks and Moral Responsibility: Reconstruction of the Normative Dimension of Risk Behavior]. Norms and Morality in Social Theory: From Classical Conceptions to New Ideas. Moscow; 2017: 135-156. (In Russ.)
  10. Gadjikurbanova P. Strah i otvetstvennost: etika tehnologicheskoj tsivilizatsii Hansa Johnasa [Fear and responsibility: Ethics of technological civilization by Hans Johnas]. Ethical Thought. 2003; 4 (In Russ.).
  11. Deleuze G. Michel Tournier i mir bez drugogo [Michel Tournier and the world without others]. Logic of Sense. Moscow; 2011 (In Russ.).
  12. Deleuze G. Skladka. Leibniz i barokko [The Fold. Leibniz and Baroque]. Moscow; 1997 (In Russ.).
  13. Ivleva M.L., Ivlev V.Yu., Kurilov S.N. Problema formirovanija socialnoj paradigmy ekotsentrizma: opyt filosofskogo osmyslenija sociologicheskogo issledovanija v vuze [The development of the social paradigm of ecocentrism: A philosophical interpretation of the sociological research in university]. RUDN Journal of Sociology. 2019; 19 (4) (In Russ.).
  14. Jonas H. Printsip otvetstvennosti. Opyt etiki dlja tehnologicheskoj tsivilizatsii [Imperative of Responsibility: In Search for Ethics for the Technological Age]. Moscow; 2004 (In Russ.).
  15. Kant I. Osnovanie metafiziki nravov [Basis of moral metaphysics]. Lections on Ethics. Moscow; 2000 (In Russ.).
  16. Lenk H. Otvetstvennost v tehnike, za tehniku, s pomoshju tehniki [Responsibility in technology, for technology, using technology]. Filosofija tehniki v FRG Moscow; 1989 (In Russ.).
  17. Mazin V. Stadija zerkala Jacqua Lacana [J. Lacan’s Mirror Stage]. Saint Petersburg; 2005 (In Russ.).
  18. Mamardashvili M.K. Psihologicheskaja topologija puti. M. Prust “V poiskah utrachennogo vremeni” [Psychological topology of the path. M. Proust “In Search of Lost Time”]. Saint Petersburg; 1997 (In Russ.).
  19. Neverov A.V., Davydenkova E.S. Socialnaja otvetstvennost' organizatsij malogo i srednego biznesa [Social responsibility of small and medium-sized business in Russia]. RUDN Journal of Sociology. 2016; 16 (1) (In Russ.).
  20. Platonova A.V. Zamestitelnaja kontseptsija otvetstvennosti: socialno-filosofsky analiz [The notion of vicarious moral responsibility: Social and philosophical analysis]. TSPU Bulletin. 2015; 5 (In Russ.).
  21. Podvoysky D.G., Soleimani S. Ponjatie socialnoj identichnosti: osnovnye issledovatelskie podhody [The concept of social identity: Basic research approaches]. RUDN Journal of Sociology. 2019; 19 (4) (In Russ.).
  22. Sartre J.-P. Ekzistentsializm — eto gumanizm [Existentialism is a humanism]. URL: http://scepsis.net/library/id_545.html (In Russ.).
  23. Trotsuk I. Spravedlivost v sociologicheskom diskurse: semanticheskie, empiricheskie, istoricheskie i konceptualnye poiski [Justice in sociological discourse: Semantic, empirical, historical, and conceptual challenges]. Russian Sociological Review. 2019; 18 (1) (In Russ.).
  24. Halbwachs M. Kollektivnaja i istoricheskaja pamjat [Collective and historical memory]. URL: http://magazines.russ.ru/nz/2005/2/ha2.html (In Russ.).
  25. Tsvyk A.V. Etika politicheskoj otvetstvennosti v mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenijah [Ethics of political responsibility in international relations]. RUND Journal of International Relations. 2017; 17 (2) (In Russ.)
  26. Bakeeva E.V. The ontological sense of the concept of ‘measure’. Rivista di Filosofia Neo-Scolastica. 2017; 2.
  27. Biricheva E.V. The nature of conflict: Ontological paradox and existential effort of acceptance. Bulletin of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies. 2019; 35 (4).
  28. Bivins T. Responsibility and accountability. Ethics in Public Relations. Responsible Advocacy. Thousand Oaks; 2006.
  29. Bratman M.E. Responsibility and planning. Journal of Ethics. 1997; 1 (1).
  30. Ceva E., Radoilska L. Dimensions of responsibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2018; 21 (4).
  31. Fischer J.M. Responsibility and self-expression. Journal of Ethics. 1999; 3 (4).
  32. Gorgoni G. Responsible research and innovation and the governance of human enhancement. NanoEthics. 2018; 12 (3).
  33. Hahn H. The global consequence of participatory responsibility. Journal of Global Ethics. 2009; 5 (1).
  34. Held V. Group responsibility for ethnic conflict. Journal of Ethics. 2002; 6 (2).
  35. Herrera-Romero W. Citizens’ political responsibility and collective identity: A Spinozistic answer to Jaspers’s question on guilt. Journal of Ethics. 2019; 23.
  36. Himmelreich J. Responsibility for killer robots. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-019-10007-9.
  37. Hormio S. Can corporations have (moral) responsibility regarding climate change mitigation? Ethics, Policy & Environment. 2017; 20 (3).
  38. Lippert-Rasmussen K. Identification and responsibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2003; 6 (4).
  39. McGrath S.K., Whitty S.J. Accountability and responsibility defined. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. 2018; 11 (3).
  40. McLeod C., Nerlich B. Synthetic biology, metaphors and responsibility. Life Sciences, Society and Policy. 2017; 13.
  41. Strawson G. The impossibility of moral responsibility. Philosophical Studies. 1994; 75.
  42. Tomiltseva D. Historical responsibility, historical perspective. Changing Societies & Personalities. 2017; 1 (2).
  43. Tsvyk V.A., Tsvyk I.V. Moral values of professional activity in information society. RUDN Journal of Sociology. 2019; 19 (3).
  44. Véliz C. Not the doctor’s business: Privacy, personal responsibility and data rights in medical settings. Bioethics. 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12711.
  45. Voegtlin C. What does it mean to be responsible? Addressing the missing responsibility dimension in ethical leadership research. Leadership. 2016; 12 (5).

Copyright (c) 2020 Biricheva E.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies