Collective identity. Between essentialism, narrativism and pragmatism

Stories and practices define the shared identity of a group. Both elements are not set in stone, they could be different, and they change over time. However, there are good reasons that can explain why stories and practices are what they are in a specific moment. In other words, their characteristics are neither necessary nor arbitrary. Since there is inherent controversy about the legitimacy of the reasons which support the construction, perpetuation, or removal of specific narratives and practices, collective self-conceptions grounded on narratives and practices are subject to structural instability—they are never definitive and can always be modified. This fundamentally precarious condition of collective self-characterization and habitualness cannot be eliminated because it is a direct result of the contingency of the social world. As a result, the individual members of open societies will not agree on a uniformity of evaluation practices with regards to their way of life. We need to acknowledge the plurality of values as a fact, that finds its place and limit in an institutionalized normative order (legal system) that centers upon the dignity of the individual.