The article clarifies the philosophical and legal features of legal behavior as a factor of human self-affirmation in the postmodern era. Within the limits of philosophical and legal understanding, postmodernism should be considered in two aspects: conceptual-idealistic (as a theoretical concept) and nihilistic (as a modern social reality). According to the natural law theory, any behavior will be lawful if a person, exercising his natural rights, does not violate similar rights of other persons. The philosophical basis of this approach is the doctrine of freedom as the natural state of man and his (man's) free will. Freedom consists in the ability to do everything that does not harm another. Human freedom, accordingly, cannot be absolute, because it is limited by the same condition of other people. This actually reflects the postmodern philosophical and legal understanding of human behavior in a conceptual and idealistic aspect. Regarding the understanding of lawful human behavior in the nihilistic plane of postmodernity, this is a conformist philosophical and legal concept. According to which a person's behavior is subject to new social standards and requirements, and can also be subjected to psychological pressure and manipulation by others who have stronger worldview and value beliefs.
It is concluded that legal behavior is a factor of self-affirmation of a person in the postmodern era, self-identifies him as a person in social reality. Law has value, as it contributes to self-determination and self-realization of a person, provides new opportunities for individual and social development. The importance of the value of law for "postmodern man" and "postmodern society" is undeniable. In the conditions of a hyper-dynamic pace of life, conceptual chaos and radical pluralism, law remains a fundamental value for self-identification, self-creation, self-presentation and preservation of human self-worth.
1.Shcherbyna V. Suchasna liudyna yak dzerkalo postmodernu. [Modern man as a mirror of postmodernity]. URL: http://oldconf.neasmo.org.ua/node/514 (Accessed: 22.05.2023). [in Ukrainian].
2.Filosofski problemy KhKhI stolittia. (2016). [Philosophical problems of the 21st century] Monohrafiia Za zah. red. A.I. Boiko; Peredmova O. V. Kulieshova. Cherkasy: FOP Hordiienko Ye.I. Publ. 210 p. [in Ukrainian].
3.Menshenina A. (2021). Postmodern VS. postpostmodern: mozhlyvosti osiahnennia politychnoi diisnosti[Postmodern VS. post-postmodern: possibilities of understanding political reality]. Naukovyi chasopys NPU imeni M.P. Drahomanova. Vol. 22. Politychni nauky ta metodyka vykladannia sotsialno-politychnykh dystsyplin. No 22(30). P. 30–37. [in Ukrainian].
4.Hobatenko V. (2010) Liudyna i suspilstvo v sytuatsii postmodernu: filosofsko-politychni determinanty. [Man and society in the postmodern situation: philosophical and political determinants]. Sotsiohumanitarni problemy liudyny. No 5. P. 151–166. [in Ukrainian].
5.Volter. (2011) Kandid: filosofski povisti. [Candide: philosophical novels] Pereklad z frantsuzkoi: V. Pidmohylnyi. Za redaktsiieiu M. Tereshchenka; Peredmova ta prymitky: Ya. Kravets; Kyiv: Instytut literatury imeni Tarasa Shevchenka NAN Ukrainy; Kharkiv: FolioPubl. 410 p. [in Ukrainian].
6.Romanova A. (2014) Pravomirna povedinka yak umova samostverdzhennia liudyny [Lawful behavior as a condition for self-affirmation of a person] Yurydychnyi visnyk. No6. P. 91–95. [in Ukrainian].