Abstract

The article analyzes the methodological possibilities and limits of applied functionality of the concept of social capital. The article reconstructs socio-economic prerequisites for the formation of theories of social capital as the leading factor of socio-economic growth in the conditions of formation of postindustrial society. The logical and methodological analysis of the content of the concept of social capital allows us to reveal the differences in the economic, sociological and political interpretation of the phenomenon of capitalization of social relations. Recognizing the idea of liquidity of such social phenomena as expert or charismatic authority of a subject or group, the power of a social network of which the subject is a part, or the general level of trust in other people or social institutions as commonplace in all concepts of social capital, attention should be paid to the debatable nature of the status of social capital in sociophilosophical theories. Following the logic of F. Fukuyama and R. Putnam along with instrumentalist classifications of social capital forms, it is reasonable to substantiate a historical typology of social capital functioning models, dividing them into open (built on the principle of bridge) and closed (built on the principle of "bond"). The conclusion of this research is the assertion that the target benchmark of catch-up social modernization should be a qualitative way of describing the balance of strong and weak social ties in the structure of social capital, rather than a quantitative analysis of the overall level of trust, the power and ramification of horizontal social ties, and tolerance.