The purpose of the article is to consider theoretical discussions on fundamental questions which form the basis for further development of social security concept. The author considers the main stages of the transformation of social security concept in the academic discourse and its humanistic content in modern sociology. The article analyzes the issues regarding the relativity of “security” concept and its consequences for science and society. The discussion on the subjective and objective knowledge of security includes the analysis of the “security paradox” and the division of safety / security into subjective and objective. The further discussion serves to identify two kinds of insecurity: insecurity and uncertainty. These types of insecurity could explain why the events that actually increase safety reduce it at the same time. In addition, the author of the article discusses the degree of rationality of the opinions of experts and ordinary people about the risks that are a threat to security that introduces the problem of the relationship and social adequacy of the ordinary and scientific knowledge. The author considers the problem of social adequacy of the ‘objective' risks assessment emerging in the public discourse. The article discusses the shortcomings of risk management on the example of actuarial justice and the process of economization of punishment. The author examines the debate about the relationship between the concepts of human dignity, rights and aspirations of people and capacity of the state alone to shape a policy of social security. The author provides an understanding of human dignity in the concept of “objective formula” and “intentionally-balancing” model and analyzes the disadvantages of these approaches. As a result, the author formulates a specific law of self-assessment reflection, establishing the relationship between human dignity and resistance to socially inadequate norms.