HUMAN VULNERABILITY IN THE CONTEXT OF CONTEMPORARY WAR AND THE CRISIS OF NORMATIVE ORDER
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.1.21240Keywords:
vulnerability, war, insecurity, precarization, normative order, social philosophy, international law, human rights, neoliberalism, crisis of protectionAbstract
Introduction. The article examines human vulnerability in the context of contemporary war and the crisis of normative order from a socio-philosophical perspective. Particular attention is given to how war not only produces new threats but also intensifies pre-existing forms of socially conditioned insecurity. The aim and tasks. The aim of the study is to clarify the socio-philosophical meaning of human vulnerability under contemporary wartime conditions. The tasks are to analyse vulnerability as an anthropological condition of human existence, to reveal its connection with socially produced insecurity and precarity, and to determine its significance for understanding the crisis of normative order. Research methods. The study employs socio-philosophical, critical-hermeneutic, and normative-analytical approaches. These methods make it possible to interpret vulnerability through the categories of dependence, freedom, recognition, insecurity, institutional protection, and to relate the lived experience of vulnerability to the limits of legal and political normativity. Research results. It is shown that vulnerability should be understood both as a universal condition of embodied and dependent human existence and as unevenly distributed across social contexts. The analysis distinguishes between precarity as an unevenly distributed condition of insecurity and precarization as the socio-historical process through which such insecurity is produced and normalized. War is interpreted as a factor that radicalizes already existing insecurity and exposes the gap between the formal language of rights and the actual selectivity of protection. Discussion. The analysis demonstrates that vulnerability cannot be reduced either to abstract human fragility or to the immediate consequences of military violence alone. Its heuristic value lies in connecting anthropological dependence, social precarity, and the asymmetrical functioning of contemporary normative institutions. Conclusions. The article concludes that human vulnerability in wartime reveals the contradiction between universalist claims of protection and their unequal implementation. In this sense, vulnerability becomes an important analytical category for understanding the crisis of normative order and the conditions of protecting human life in present-day society.
References
Список літератури
Шоріна Т. Г. Соціальний номіналізм неоліберальної теорії та консервативні суспільні тенденції. Вісник Національного авіаційного університету. Серія: Філософія. Культурологія. 2016. № 1 (23). С. 98–103. DOI: 10.18372/2412-2157.23.12497.
Agamben G. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life / trans. D. Heller-Roazen. Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1998. 199 p.
Agamben G. State of Exception / trans. K. Attell. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2005. 104 p.
Brown W. Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York : Zone Books, 2015. 296 p.
Buchanan A. Human Rights, Legitimacy, and the Use of Force. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2010. 352 p.
Butler J. Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable? London : Verso, 2009. 224 p.
Butler J. Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence. London : Verso, 2004. 168 p.
Coicaud J.-M. Elements of a Critical Philosophy of International Law. The Law and Politics of International Legitimacy. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2025. P. 392–412.
Dardot P., Laval C. The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society / trans. G. Elliott. London : Verso, 2013. 337 p.
Fineman M. A. The Vulnerable Subject: Anchoring Equality in the Human Condition. Yale Journal of Law & Feminism. 2008. Vol. 20, No. 1. P. 1–23.
Fineman M. A. The Vulnerable Subject and the Responsive State. Emory Law Journal. 2010. Vol. 60, No. 2. P. 251–275.
Fromm E. The Fear of Freedom. 2nd ed. London : Routledge, 2001. 272 p.
Honneth A. The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts / trans. J. Anderson. Cambridge : Polity Press, 1995. 215 p.
Kalleberg A. L. Precarious Work, Insecure Workers: Employment Relations in Transition. American Sociological Review. 2009. Vol. 74, No. 1. P. 1–22.
Lorey I. State of Insecurity: Government of the Precarious / trans. A. Derieg. London : Verso, 2015. 236 p.
Murphy M. The Economization of Life. Durham : Duke University Press, 2017. 232 p.
Seglow J. Reassessing Recognition. Political Theory. 2018. Vol. 46, No. 1. P. 123–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177 /0090591717696024.
Standing G. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. London : Bloomsbury Academic, 2011. 248 p.
The Philosophy of International Law / ed. S. Besson, J. Tasioulas. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2010. 624 p.
References
Shorina, Tetiana H. 2016. “Sotsialnyi nominalizm neoliberalnoi teorii ta konservatyvni suspilni tendentsii” [“Social Nominalism of Neoliberal Theory and Conservative Social Tendencies”]. Visnyk Natsionalnoho aviatsiinoho universytetu. Seriia: Filosofiia. Kulturolohiia 1 (23): 98–103. https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.23.12497.
Agamben, Giorgio. 1998. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Translated by Daniel Heller-Roazen. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Agamben, Giorgio. 2005. State of Exception. Translated by Kevin Attell. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Brown, Wendy. 2015. Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books.
Buchanan, Allen. 2010. Human Rights, Legitimacy, and the Use of Force. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Butler, Judith. 2009. Frames of War: When Is Life Grievable? London: Verso.
Butler, Judith. 2004. Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence. London: Verso.
Coicaud, Jean-Marc. 2025. “Elements of a Critical Philosophy of International Law.” In The Law and Politics of International Legitimacy, 392–412. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dardot, Pierre, and Christian Laval. 2013. The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society. Translated by Gregory Elliott. London: Verso.
Fineman, Martha Albertson. 2008. “The Vulnerable Subject: Anchoring Equality in the Human Condition.” Yale Journal of Law & Feminism 20 (1): 1–23.
Fineman, Martha Albertson. 2010. “The Vulnerable Subject and the Responsive State.” Emory Law Journal 60 (2): 251–275.
Fromm, Erich. 2001. The Fear of Freedom. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Original work published 1941.
Honneth, Axel. 1995. The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts. Translated by Joel Anderson. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Kalleberg, Arne L. 2009. “Precarious Work, Insecure Workers: Employment Relations in Transition.” American Sociological Review 74 (1): 1–22.
Lorey, Isabell. 2015. State of Insecurity: Government of the Precarious. Translated by Aileen Derieg. London: Verso.
Murphy, Michelle. 2017. The Economization of Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Seglow, Jonathan. 2018. “Reassessing Recognition.” Political Theory 46 (1): 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0090591717696024.
Standing, Guy. 2011. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Besson, Samantha, and John Tasioulas, eds. 2010. The Philosophy of International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The scientific journal adheres to the principles of Open Access and provides free, immediate, and permanent access to all published materials without financial, technical, or legal barriers for readers.
All articles are published in Open Access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.
Copyright
Authors who publish their works in the journal:
-
retain the copyright to their publications;
-
grant the journal the right of first publication of the article;
-
agree to the distribution of their materials under the CC BY 4.0 license;
-
have the right to reuse, archive, and distribute their works (including in institutional and subject repositories), provided that proper reference is made to the original publication in the journal.




