Fukuyama: from Weber to Berk

The inheritance of scientists of past is being reevaluated on modern stage of science development, especially it’s well seen in the sphere of social science. Two works of American scientist F.Fukuyama - The end of History and The Trust - are a landmark of this transition. The transition is a way from categorical defense of universal rationality which is resisted by local traditions to rational estimation of the whole variety of elements and mechanisms. The way is figural named as the way between Weber to Berk. These thinkers are usually opposed to each other, the first one is as a proponent of rationality in the spirit of the Enlightenment and the second one is as a defender traditional values. But our paper brought to light their common position in this sphere.It can be possible due to deeper exploring of definition “tradition”, which is allow to look from a different perspective at thinkers positions. According our position, tradition is not a kind of a solidify ritual but is a special symbol system of information handling which realizes functions of storage and transfer of data and knowledge, legitimating of activity, creating the intention of social field building. In our view the difference of the thinkers’ biased attitude is in their different attitude towards the society as a system. Berk’s stance reflects opposition of the tradition and tradition of the Enlightenment, but Weber divides the tradition and tradition of Reformed Faith, so it’s obvious their points of view are distinct ideologically not functionally. Dictatorship is inappropriate for both of them, but Berk says about the necessity of conserving of different nature mechanisms to keep freedom, Weber, in the spirit of the Enlightenment, insists on the only one way for development. According to author’s view Fukuyama’s The Trust is marks a methodological turn which allows to widespread the notion of rationality to incorporate a wide range of factors in researching models with the aim to reflect reality in better way.Postmodern philosophers criticized the Enlightenment for its categorical orientation, ironically it is a characteristic any tradition. Every tradition creates its own social field, but social space consists of abundance of social fields. Coexisting, superimposing on one another the fields let each other develop. Substitutions which are born in common areas and borders between traditions’ fields, is an accelerator of this process.

Keywords

Authors

References