Answer from Yergey[guru]
Conscience is such an accommodating old woman :)

Answer from 2 answers[guru]

Hello! Here is a selection of topics with answers to your question: What is conscience???

Answer from .............. [guru]

Answer from Ўnona[guru]
For some reason, it seems to me that conscience is the voice of our Guardian Angel, who instructs us, so when you do something bad, your conscience torments you so much.

Answer from Inna[guru]
Conscience is a person’s ability to exercise moral self-control, independently form moral responsibilities for himself, demand that he fulfill them, and make a self-assessment of his actions. Conscience can manifest itself not only in the form of a rational awareness of the moral significance of the actions performed, but also in the form of emotional experiences, for example, in a feeling of remorse or in the positive emotions of a “quiet conscience.”

Answer from User deleted[expert]
conscience is what is left in us from God

Answer from Ksyu[active]
Conscience is an illusion created by the weak to counter the strong. 🙂

Answer from Olga Grushetskaya[guru]
Fazil Iskander in one of his works says, “We can prove the existence of God by the fact that we have a conscience.”

Answer from User deleted[guru]
Human internal self-control. Inner voice, internal moral control. Love, duty, responsibility encourage a person to act. But inside, every step he takes is checked by his conscience: the man himself is conscious! analyzes his duties, consciously demands that he fulfill them, and he himself consciously criticizes himself and evaluates his actions. Conscience is a personal, deep awareness of one’s duty and responsibility, that is, a person’s internal moral self-control and self-esteem. In many European languages, the word “conscience” means “shared knowledge.” In Russian it has the same meaning and comes from the words “so” (i.e. jointly) and “vest” (i.e. know-know). This means that conscience is consciousness, shared knowledge. A person may not even be fully aware of why his conscience tells him to act this way and not otherwise. This means that conscience is not only consciousness! , but also, perhaps, above all, sympathy! , with your deep inner feeling, with hidden spiritual sensations. Guided by conscience, a person judges good and evil in the deepest recesses of his soul. When internal self-control tells a person that he acted honestly, correctly, that is, he did not do anything bad or evil, and acted on the side of good, the person’s conscience is clear and calm. Some believe that conscience is the voice of God within a person, others argue that it is the result of a long development of human experience.

The social system of the 21st century presupposes the presence of a set of certain legal and moral laws that create an unbreakable hierarchical system of moral and state standards. From childhood, caring parents explain to their child the difference between good and bad deeds, instilling in their offspring the concepts of “Good” and “Evil.” It is not surprising that in the life of every person, murder or gluttony is associated with negative phenomena, while nobility and mercy belong to the category of positive personal qualities. Some moral principles are already present at the subconscious level, other postulates are acquired over time, forming the image of an individual. However, few people think about the importance of instilling such values ​​in themselves, neglecting their significance. It is impossible to coexist harmoniously with the outside world, guided solely by biological instincts - this is a “dangerous” path, invariably leading to the destruction of personal appearance.

Maximum happiness.

This facet of human morality was examined and proven by the utilitarians John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, who studied ethics at the US State Institute. This statement is based on the following formulation: an individual’s behavior should lead to an improvement in the lives of those around him. In other words, if you adhere to social standards, then a favorable environment for the coexistence of each individual is created in society.

Justice.

A similar principle was proposed by the American scientist John Rawls, who argued for the need to equate social laws with internal moral factors. A person occupying the bottom rung in a hierarchical structure should have equal spiritual rights with a person at the top of the ladder - this is the fundamental aspect of the statement of the US philosopher.

It is important to think about your own personal qualities in order to engage in self-improvement in advance. If you neglect such a phenomenon, then over time it will develop into betrayal. A variety of changes that cannot be avoided will form an immoral image that is rejected by others. The main thing is to take a responsible approach to identifying life principles and determining the vector of your worldview, objectively assessing your behavioral characteristics.

Commandments of the Old Testament and modern society

When “understanding” the question of the meaning of moral principles and ethics in human life, in the process of research you will definitely turn to the Bible to familiarize yourself with the Ten Commandments from the Old Testament. Cultivating morality in oneself invariably echoes statements from the church book:

the events taking place are marked by fate, suggesting the development of moral and moral principles in a person (everything is the will of God);
do not elevate the people around you by idealizing idols;
do not mention the name of the Lord in everyday situations, complaining about unfavorable circumstances;
respect the relatives who gave you life;
Dedicate six days to work, and the seventh day to spiritual rest;
do not kill living organisms;
do not commit adultery by cheating on your spouse;
You shouldn’t take other people’s things and become a thief;
avoid lies in order to remain honest with yourself and the people around you;
Don't envy strangers about whom you only know public facts.

Some of the above commandments do not meet the social standards of the 21st century, but most of the statements have remained relevant for many centuries. Today, it is advisable to add the following statements to such axioms, reflecting the features of living in developed megacities:

don’t be lazy and be energetic to keep up with the fast pace of industrial centers;
achieve personal success and improve yourself without stopping at achieved goals;
When creating a family, think in advance about the feasibility of the union in order to avoid divorce;
limit yourself to sexual intercourse, remembering to use protection - eliminate the risk of unwanted pregnancy, which results in abortion.
do not neglect the interests of strangers, going over your head for personal gain.

Essay on the book by D. Lieberman "Psychopaths are everywhere."

When a person has met a person, sometimes he does not know whether he can continue the relationship with him?
If something is alarming in his behavior, then the question involuntarily arises: “What if he is abnormal?”, emotionally unstable or just slightly eccentric? Isn’t this new person you know a scammer?”
The main thing is that a person needs to learn to understand people in order to be able to identify and analyze what causes anxiety and find out what the warning is.
The vast world of emotions is sometimes full of surprises.
Sometimes innocent and even benevolent behavior turns out to be an alarm, warning that all is not well here.
In a person’s life there are people with insufficient emotional stability, which can and most often does affect us.
Even if at first glance it seems to one person that the other person is healthy and emotionally stable, this is not always the case.
In the psychological encyclopedia, edited by R. Corsini and A. Auerbach, the definition of a psychopathic personality is stated - “The moral and active principles of the mind are greatly distorted or corrupted, power over oneself is lost or limited, the individual is not able to speak or reason about any subject proposed to him , and to conduct oneself with decorum and propriety in the affairs of life.
Thus, the English psychiatrist J. Pritchard defined a new concept of “moral insanity”... The problem is understanding why a smart and rational person can be involved in antisocial behavior, despite the risk of punishment, which will drown out most of such impulses in a normal individual...
A person with antisocial behavior is fundamentally unreliable, truth means nothing to him, and he is incapable of true love or emotional attachment.
He takes pointless risks, demonstrates low capacity for inference and indifference to punishment, based on the inability to learn from negative experiences.
He does not experience true remorse or shame and often resorts to rationalization when assessing his behavior or projects guilt onto others.
He has a “specific loss of insight.
To be happy, maintain good relationships with others, and achieve emotional well-being, a person must love and respect himself.
Where does self-respect come from?
Each of us has a body, ego and soul.
They often don't get along with each other.
In short, the body prefers to act for the sake of pleasurable sensations; the ego strives for what seems good to it; and the soul wants what is really good.
When we fail to control our behavior, get instant gratification, or maintain our image, we become angry with ourselves and feel drained as a result.
Self-esteem and self-esteem decline.
The ego comes into play, trying to compensate for feelings of guilt and inferiority, and we focus on ourselves, becoming self-centered.
Self-esteem grows only when we are able to make responsible choices and do the right thing, regardless of what we want or how others perceive our actions.
This choice is determined by the soul (morality or conscience), thereby raising us even higher.
Self-esteem and ego are inversely proportional, like a “children’s swing” that moves up and down: as one rises, the other falls.
Both emotions and intellect are involved in assessing each situation.
If we perceive the world purely emotionally, we construct our thoughts and explain the background of events in such a way as to justify our own beliefs, attitudes, and actions.
We try to confirm and justify our beliefs every time.
The lower our self-esteem, the less objective we are. If we approach a situation more objectively, we can deal with our emotions and not allow them to overwhelm us; we worry, but we channel our excitement into a more productive direction.
When we are motivated by ego, we do what we think makes us look better. Usually the EGO confuses us in the following way:
1) chooses what we concentrate on;
2) makes us take things personally;
3) leads to the conclusion (usually unconscious) that any of our negative experiences are a consequence of our inferiority;
4) forces us to believe that we are not able to find a way out of a difficult situation.

What is the cause of internal conflict?
People are naturally disposed to love themselves, but when they are unable to maintain self-esteem on their own, then they look for support in the world around us.
Both self-esteem and self-esteem are based on respect.
A person needs to receive respect from somewhere, and if we cannot give it to ourselves, then he demands it from others and turns into an emotional terrorist who manipulates others and needs them; achieves his goal by any means, as they say: ".. not by washing, but by skating."
If a person suffers from low self-esteem, then he is simply driven by an instinctive desire for love and recognition.
Emotional nourishment from others, it turns out, does not truly satisfy us.
Anyone who tries to gain self-respect externally will never truly be satisfied.
Such people are like a "bottomless barrel."
They begin to demand approval and respect from everyone and cannot tolerate criticism from others.
Such people need self-confidence training, that is, they must learn to judge their own behavior, thoughts, emotions, and they should learn to take responsibility for their actions and their consequences.
Self-esteem means that a person does not need respect from other people in order to respect themselves.
Because self-esteem is associated with a sense of control, and a person needs to feel that he is in control of himself or someone - or at least something.
It's all about making the right choice.
The main thing is to learn and be able to control yourself (have self-control and use your hidden reserves), then the person will not fall into psychopathy. The degree of self-control determines how irritated, upset or angry a person is in a given situation.
Self-control gives a person the opportunity to make better choices (which increases his self-esteem and reduces self-centeredness, and also allows him to perceive the world clearly and objectively.)

Egocentrism [from lat. ego - I and centrum - center] - 1. perception of the world, in which the individual considers himself to be its center, the inability to see what is happening and himself through the eyes of other people, from a different position. Normally, it is characteristic of children who, as they develop, acquire the ability to “decenter,” to perceive the world from other points of view (V.A. Zhmurov, p. 749).
Although people experience strong emotional reactions when unexpected changes occur in their lives, these reactions usually subside quickly and a positive assessment of the situation takes over.
But for someone who does not control himself and overindulges his desires, sudden wealth or fame sometimes leads to destructive behavior. Of course, external circumstances affect our mood.
We all have better and worse days.
But true emotional stability is constant, unaffected by everyday trials and tribulations - the main thing is faith in a positive future and free will.
It's not what we have that matters, but what we do with it.
Research shows that income, physical attractiveness, and intelligence have only a small impact on our overall emotional well-being.
Even physical health has been shown to play a minor role in our emotional health.
However, the opposite is not true: emotional problems significantly affect a person's physical well-being.
Ultimately, spirit, body and ego are one.
The mental and physical state of a person are closely related.
All mental disorders usually manifest themselves at both psychological (thinking and emotion) and physical (biological and physiological) levels.
And while the importance of free will should not be underestimated, a person's level of emotional stability can be partly (and in unusual cases, even completely) explained by circumstances that are beyond our control.
There is a direct correlation between self-disrespect and the self-blame that comes with self-indulgence.
The road to self-destruction is gluttony, substance abuse and addiction to gambling and compulsive shopping.
Without self-respect, without self-love, a person eventually “loses himself”, he feels worthless and is unable to act in ways that ensure his own health and happiness.
Instead of organizing oneself, the person continues to indulge his desires to fill the emptiness and avoid pain (physical, psychological).
The desire to avoid pain, to overindulge oneself is a vicious circle that sooner or later narrows anyway.
When a person feels bad about himself, he seeks temporary salvation in immediate pleasures and gives in to momentary impulses, instead of overcoming them.
A person strives for quick success and does not try to find a solution that would truly save him from pain and emptiness.
The only way for a person to regain control over his own life is his desire to learn to manage his behavior again on his own or, if necessary, seek the help of professionals.

Egocentrism
Material from Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia
Egocentrism (from the Latin ego - “I”, centrum - “center of the circle”) - the inability or inability of an individual to take someone else’s point of view. Perceiving your point of view as the only one that exists. The term was introduced into psychology by Jean Piaget to describe the characteristics of thinking characteristic of children under the age of 8-10 years. For various reasons, this feature of thinking, to varying degrees of severity, may persist into adulthood.

Manifestations
It manifests itself most clearly in early childhood and, as a rule, is overcome by the age of 12-14; there is also a tendency to intensify in old age.
Jean Piaget in his books describes several experiments he conducted that demonstrate children's egocentrism. For example:
Experiment with a toy and a mountain. The child is carefully shown a miniature landscape from all sides, depicting a mountain with houses, trees, etc. After that, he is seated on a chair in front of this landscape and asked to describe what he sees. The child describes that part of the “mountain” that is visible to him. After this, on the opposite side of the “mountain,” a toy is placed on a chair, and the child is now asked to describe what the toy sees. Despite the obvious difference to an adult between what is visible from the child’s chair and what is visible from the toy’s chair, the child repeats the description given the first time. The result was interpreted by Piaget as the child's inability to imagine himself in the place of the toy.
Another experiment was that the child was asked two questions in succession: the first - how many brothers and sisters he has, the second - how many sisters and brothers his brother or sister has. The answer to the second question was one less person than the first. This was interpreted to mean that the child does not consider himself a “brother or sister”, that is, he is not aware that he may not be the central object.
Connection with other concepts
As follows from the definition, contrary to popular belief, egocentrism is not a form or degree of selfishness. However, egocentrism makes it difficult to understand that others may have their own feelings, desires and needs, and can lead the egocentrist to conflicts.
Literature
1. Piaget, Jean. Speech and thinking of a child. - Rimis, 2008. - 448 p. - 2500 copies. - ISBN 978-5-9650-0045-6
2. Vygotsky, Lev Semyonovich. Thinking and speech. - Moscow: Labyrinth, 2005. - 352 p. - ISBN 5876040371
3. Gippenreiter, Yulia Borisovna. Introduction to general psychology. Lecture course. - Moscow: AST, 2008. - 352 p. - ISBN 978-5-17-049383-8
Notes
1. 1 2 Jean Piaget, “Speech and Thinking of a Child,” Chapter 3, Moscow - Leningrad, “State Educational and Pedagogical Publishing House,” 1932
2. S. I. Ozhegov, N. Yu. Shvedova. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language.

Egocentrism
Material http://www.psychologos.ru/articles/view/egocentrizm
Egocentrism is the inability of an individual to change the initial cognitive position towards a certain object, opinion or idea, combined with the individual’s concentration on his own goals, even in the face of information that contradicts his experience.
An egocentric person sometimes cannot, and sometimes does not want to, understand that people are different, not like him, that other people look at many things in their own way, and not like him, that they have their own views and needs.
The world surrounding an egocentric person is not interesting to him, especially the inner world of other people. First of all, an egocentric person is interested in the world of himself, even to the point of narcissism.
Selfishness and egocentrism
As a rule, egocentrism is associated with egoism and is often its extreme expression. However, there are often cases when even completely altruistic people show egocentrism - for example, when parents take care of a child based on their ideas about what will be joyful for him. “I love history books - and I will delight my child with history books!” - Egocentrism...
Types of egocentrism, its manifestation
Several types of egocentrism are considered:
Cognitive, characterizing perception and thinking;
Moral egoism - speaking of the inability to perceive the grounds for moral actions and actions of other people;
Communicative, observed when transmitting information to other people. It consists of neglecting the semantic content of concepts.
When and in whom is egocentrism more pronounced?
It manifests itself most clearly at the age of 12-14 and in old age. In adults, egocentrism is more pronounced in women.
Overcoming egocentrism consists of a change in point of view that occurs as a result of encountering, comparing and integrating it with positions different from one's own; the formation of the ability to take the role of another person, which is associated with the levels of development of cognitive empathy, which is based on the intellectual processes of comparison, analogy, etc.
Overcoming children's egocentrism is one of the main tasks of education.
Overcoming egocentrism
General conditions for overcoming egocentrism:
a person wants this himself and understands why he needs it.

Individual morality
Material
Individual morality: what is moral is what I consider moral. If I was raised this way and therefore I consider it normal and acceptable, then this is normal and approved. And what I consider ugly and unacceptable is worthy only of condemnation and eradication.
See also
1. Morality: Moral is what makes a person healthy and happy without causing significant harm to others. And what deprives a person of happiness and is harmful to his health is immoral.
2. Official morality – officially proclaimed rules, views and assessments. What is required to be taught in schools and what is officially formulated by government officials.
3. Public morality is what the majority believes. "Decent people behave this way. But this is not accepted." "Who doesn't accept it?" "Everyone." The majority opinion is usually a reasonable compromise between ideas and life. This is a huge force, which is why it is most often identified simply with Morality.
4. Morals are what the majority does. "Don't listen to what they say, watch what they do." This is the broth of life with which we have been soaked since childhood and with which, to our regret or happiness, our moral foundations are laid.

Morality is not quite the same as morality. Morality is understood as historically established norms and rules of human behavior that determine his attitude towards society, work, and people. Morality is internal morality, morality is not ostentatious, not for others, but for oneself.

Moral
Author: N.I. Kozlov












Moral
Author: N.I. Kozlov
Material http://www.psychologos.ru/articles/view/nravstvennost
Morality is a person’s internal assessment of the norms of his behavior and his actions from the point of view of good. Moral is what a person sees in his actions not just as acceptable, but as good and good. Immoral - bad, unacceptable, harmful, ethically ugly and unworthy of a person.
Morality is not typical for children: the concept of “good” is very vague for them, and they are not interested in looking at their behavior from any point of view. Children more often live from the position of “like” and “dislike,” and not all of them become moral people as they grow up.
An ethical person treats morality as a guiding star: all our earthly turns make sense only insofar as we follow the right path. The moral meaning of any word and deed is the first thing such a person thinks about, what he is guided by, regardless of whether anyone is looking at him or not.
But there are not many ordinary ethical people. Ordinary people treat morality like a fence: let it be as long as it doesn’t interfere. We ourselves remember about morality, once someone violates our boundaries, but we are quite ready to climb over the fence when we really need or want to, but no one sees. Not every adult is a moral person; depending on his awareness and development of perceptual positions, a person looks at his behavior with different moral depth. With little awareness, a person can do bad things and not consider himself immoral precisely because he does not see or does not think about what he is doing; A person with stereotyped thinking instead of constantly searching and trying on “is this good or not?” thoughtlessly accepts common formulas, sometimes not of the highest quality.
What is “moral” and what is not can be very difficult to decide. Is lending moral or immoral? Good deed or not? Sex before marriage - acceptable or immoral? Can a man have four wives? In different cultures and at different times these issues are resolved very differently.
The first position of perception tells a person moral formulas like: “Good is what is good for me. And everything that is against me is immoral.”
Bushman's view: “If I stole the cows, that’s good. If they stole my cows, that’s evil.”
The more developed a person’s perceptual positions are, the more a person in his morality thinks about the good for others. As a general formula, we can accept the following: “What is moral is what makes a person healthy and happy without causing significant harm to others. And what deprives a person of happiness and is harmful to his health is immoral.”
Don't forget about other people. For example, if your behavior concerns not only you, then you need to take into account the interests of your partner. If what is happening concerns not only the couple, then the interests of others must also be taken into account. Your freedom ends where another person's life begins. "The freedom of my fist ends in front of another person's nose."
Conflicts are very difficult when individual freedom collides with the conservative views of others. Frank, long and heartfelt kisses of a loving couple in a subway car for them seem to be their free right, but for the elderly lonely woman sitting next to them it seems like wild licentiousness. It seems that these conflicts require mutual correctness. Let people be brought up wildly in your opinion, but there is no need to hit their moral (moral) feelings with your freedom (in their perception - licentiousness). But also, no one needs to call everything that goes beyond your usual and rigid boundaries obscene, immoral; in this case, it is immoral to show aggressiveness and apply offensive labels.
Morality is opposed not so much by pragmatism as by narrow-mindedness. A pragmatist can be a person of high morality if he realizes that this is beneficial to him at least from the point of view of prospects. A pragmatic leader can instill morality if he sees that it will lead to increased profits over time. If a pragmatist is not used to it and does not know how to look far, he is decent only in the observation zone of a policeman or out of habit.

Vices

We will talk about the 7 main vices or the 7 deadly sins, if we speak in the language of religion, which lead to the “death of the soul” or the destruction of the human personality.

Whether this is true or not, decide for yourself after you read the description of the vices and which of the virtuous components oppose them in a person.

It must be said right away that the concepts of vices and their meanings are not given entirely in the spirit of official religious doctrine for the simple reason that the language and form of presentation of such personal manifestations is not always understandable to modern people. Therefore, consider the description not as a dogma, some immutable and final formulation, but as information for thought.

Pride (arrogance)- this is the first vice in a series of destructive components of personal human evil, which pushes a person onto the path of personality destruction. Its essence lies in the fact that a person overestimates himself and his capabilities, and, moreover, positions himself in society as the owner of these superpowers.

Such a person can be compared to a child who has fantasized about himself and behaves in accordance with this image, demonstrating to others his fictional level.

The threat of such behavior for the human personality lies in the fact that a person, giving himself an overestimation and projecting it onto others, says and believes that he can do more. But when the situation comes to the real application of its capabilities, it turns out that this is not true.

This is bad for a person who cannot take on the obligations placed on him, it is bad for people who have no hope, but cannot get what they want. And, of course, it is detrimental to his development, which is impossible without real deeds that simply cannot be accomplished due to the fact that a person cannot do them.

Pride, self-respect oppose the vice of Pride, implying that a person not only realistically evaluates his capabilities, but is also satisfied with them and how he knows how to manage them. He knows himself and knows what he is worth in this world. And as a result, in situations in which he makes decisions, he is able to do so objectively and responsibly, but resembling the adventurism of a proud man and the arrogance of his self-esteem.

Envy how vice follows pride, saying that a person driven by such a vice actively desires what he sees in other people. And he doesn’t care at all how exactly they got it, how they deserved it. He just wants to have it, and if he understands that this is impossible, then he tries in every possible way to humiliate the owner of what he wants, which the envious person strives for.

I think you have encountered people who, knowing practically nothing about a person, called him a thief, a slacker, a swindler, a lazy person and other unflattering epithets for the sole purpose of denigrating what he owns. After all, if the “thief” owns something, and the envious person is “honest,” then everything works out, because otherwise, you either have to do something in order to possess it, or worry that there is no way to do it.

This is a “defensive” mental mechanism that pushes a person back into the darkness of centuries. After all, in order to have what you want, you don’t have to do something. You don’t have to think about how you can get it and strive for it. It is enough to build a barrier of “conditional evil” and many problems seem to be solved.

Of course, an envious person can not only blame others, but also harm them, and simply try to steal something from them, because he does not see or does not want to see the natural way of possessing what he is doing.

In fact, the condemnation of the vice “envy” is based on the condemnation of theft, both in its infancy and in its development.

Objectivity and justice oppose envy, encouraging a person to reflect on both his desire and the possibility of realizing it. And also, and of course, over the recognition of the right of other people to have something for the reason that they deserve it.

Of course, such a reaction as objectivity is not always able to resist envy, but having a balanced and reasonable view of the world makes a person less angry and envious.

Gluttony (gluttony)- a simple, but at the same time very destructive human vice, which tells us that a person with such a vice puts his desire to please his body above everything else.

Yes, if you look at the meaning of the vice “flatly”, then the meaning of this word lies only in the fact that a person puts the satisfaction of his nutritional needs in the first place. But in fact, food, as a form of continuation of life, is not the only desire of our body. And the desire for coziness, physical contentment, maximum comfort, prosperity, as insurance that guarantees this comfort, all this is combined into one chain of providing for one’s own body.

And what's wrong with that? In fact, nothing except that in the physical world, unlike the spiritual, there is such a thing as measure. So, for example, drinking three liters of water a day, a person feels quite comfortable. But if he drinks six, enjoying it or simply doing it violently, then he is simply ruining his body.

And this is only part of the question, since a person, having put the aspirations of personal physical satisfaction above all else, becomes socially and publicly uninteresting, and in some cases even dangerous. Why?

Yes, because he will always do everything for himself and for his body. And neither family, nor friends, nor friends will stand as high as a warm sofa or a piece of meat in his assessment of this world.

Modesty and moderation as manifestations of virtue are designed to resist gluttony, limiting a person in his simple physiological aspirations, asking him to consume no more than is necessary.

Of course, the concept of moderation is much broader and helps a person not only in resisting gluttony, but first of all, it allows a person to maintain a balance between physical and spiritual needs. Not to put something higher and something lower, but to find the right harmony.

It is not difficult to understand that an excess of food, as well as a lack of it, has a detrimental effect on a person. And a lack of emotion or enjoyment in all aspects of human life can sooner or later lead to severe depression and a simple question: Why live if life is so sad?

Fornication (lust)- comes after gluttony, showing us the weaknesses of human physiology. After all, the fact that a person strives to satisfy his sexual needs is primarily due to the nature of the person himself. Just as a man, by his nature, can impregnate many women, so a woman, by her nature, strives to reproduce the most viable offspring.

But we are not talking about animals, but about people who have not only needs, but also obligations to other people that bind them in the implementation of this physiological instinct.

Thinking about procreation is not so bad. It is also necessary to receive pleasure from sex as a physiological and spiritual process, since this is inherent in nature itself. But at the same time, acting uncontrollably and recklessly in this matter means simply forgetting about the other possibilities of a person as an individual.

After all, the instinct of self-preservation and the instinct of procreation are two powerful instincts that drive a person in many situations. But the moderation we talked about can make this movement more meaningful.

That is why chastity is opposed to fornication, but not as a form of complete renunciation of sexual contacts, sexual pleasure or marriage as such, but as a moderate and balanced policy of personal sexual life.

It’s not for nothing that the second part of virtue sounds like “...wisdom,” thereby suggesting the presence of reason and meaningfulness in human behavior. And, of course, moderation.

Anger (malice) exists both as a vice and as a form that allows a person to defend his interests or subordinate other people to his interests. When does a person get angry? Yes, when something happens not according to his will and not according to his desire.

But the question is, should everything that happens in this world be subject to the will of a particular person? Shouldn't other people have the opportunity to choose, to express their opinions, to act as they see fit?

It is precisely the fact that a person, having natural aggression at his disposal, is completely unprepared to take into account the opinions and will of other people, begins to show anger or simply get angry.

But what will this lead to? Or to the fact that an angry person will “crush” another, subjugate him to his will and strength. Or that he will create an insoluble conflict if he encounters someone who is equal or stronger than him.

A struggle, unreasonable and destructive, which will not make a person one ounce happy, but will give the opportunity to his selfishness and primitive instinct to exist and rule where possible.

Therefore, Justice and Kindness stand on the opposite side from Anger, giving a person the necessary balance. After all, justice makes it possible to evaluate both the situation and oneself, thereby protecting against mistakes or incorrect assessment of the situation. And kindness allows you to simply be more tolerant of people and what they do and think.

It is not condescension, but kindness that is able to perceive the world more tolerantly and more balancedly, allowing justice to draw the right conclusions. What if you need to resist “evil”? So after all, justice is not forgiveness, but only a correct and adequate reaction to what is happening around. And this reaction can be forgiveness, righteous anger and punishment for what is unjust and unacceptable.

Avarice or greed follows the next human vice, demonstrating a person’s extreme reluctance to part with what he possesses. First of all, of course, the conversation is about material processes, about property and money, which a person places above all else both in assessing the situation and in behavior.

But still, we should not forget that money is a natural and completely balanced instrument of human society, and the ability to manage it competently allows a person to conduct correct public policy.

The one who is greedy and wants to have money above all else in the world, focuses the solution of all issues only on the level of material relations. Feelings, emotions, soul, morality and other personal aspects simply fade against the background of all-consuming greed, which is always put at the forefront.

For her sake, a person is ready to forget everything and about everyone, to “sell” everyone and everything, to put it more simply. It is precisely these vices that are opposed by the same moderation, which goes hand in hand with frugality.

Thrift is the ability to rationally and carefully manage your material capabilities, without falling into stinginess, or becoming greedy or greedy, without losing your head and self-esteem.

Thrift is what creates a barrier between a person’s colossal desire to possess all the treasures of the world and the ability to competently and carefully manage the treasures that he possesses.

Despondency and laziness close the list of the main human vices, saying that lack of will and idleness do not lead to anything good. Agree, your liver, heart or kidneys simply cannot afford laziness, since they must work so that the whole organism, the whole body, continues to fulfill its duties.

But a person, any person, is a part of an even larger organism, born for a reason and existing for a reason. All his actions, small or large, affect both himself and the world around him. And laziness, despondency, which pushes him towards idleness, seem to isolate him from the general cycle.

Is it needed? Undoubtedly. Is it important? Certainly.

But by excluding himself from the circle of public affairs, he excludes himself from life, not benefiting anyone, not even himself.

Yes, we can talk about self-sufficiency or lack of need to communicate with other people, but this is only a protective mask that allows a person to be in a state where there is no desire to benefit people.

Or maybe something happened in life that does not allow a person to rejoice, but drives him into despair and despondency?

Yes, this is possible. And this is called an obstacle or test, which is aimed at ensuring that a person overcomes it and becomes stronger by going through the science of life. But if he has given up, if he has set himself up as an ardent lazy person, then even a small obstacle will become an insurmountable test for him.

That is why activity and optimism, opposed to despondency, allow a person to maintain not so much faith in higher powers or higher justice, but faith in himself. Without sitting idly by and struggling with the vicissitudes of fate, which are often the result of the mistakes of the person himself, he develops and grows, gaining experience and great vitality.

Virtues

Having talked about vices and what opposes them in a person, it is impossible not to talk about virtues as such, without contrasting them with vices or weaknesses of the individual. And this must be done this way because virtue, as a form of action that creates good, is more clearly visible not in comparison with something, but in itself, without requiring evil as an antagonistic element in human development for its existence.

Love for one's neighbor is the main virtue of Christianity, based on the appeal of Jesus Christ “love your neighbor as yourself,” implying that the attitude towards neighbors, towards those who are close to a person at one time or another, should be built on the basis of love and understanding, kindness and tolerance.

In fact, this motto was subsequently used by many philosophers to make it clear to a person that his demands on the outside world must pass through the projection of a personal attitude. That is, a person must first understand for himself how ready he is to do what he demands from another. And if he is not ready or cannot accept such a desire, then refuse such an action-demand, since he understands not only the strengths, but also the weaknesses, forgiving him this weakness.

It is clear that we have not come to love our neighbor in the form in which Jesus spoke even in the 2000 years that have passed since these words were uttered. But this does not mean at all that society and individuals have stopped striving for this. Strive and try to fulfill this covenant, because they understand perfectly well that only in the harmony of relationships is harmony of existence possible.

Wisdom is the next virtue, preserving in its essence a person’s desire to understand the world around him. After all, wisdom is the presence of reason, as a measure of assessing what is happening, knowledge, as a method of assessment and experience, as a measure of the accumulation of knowledge based on practice.

But human wisdom is not only based on practice or practical experience, since everything always happens on the basis of the Laws of the Universe, laws that were founded at the creation of the world (or at the moment of the big bang) and operate unchanged to this day.

And you should not confuse the real Laws of the universe with those forms that humanity uses, calling them laws. In fact, what people use is only the human understanding of the laws of the universe, formulated at the time they were understood. But, as reality shows and the wisdom of centuries tells us, conclusions, like the laws of mankind, are not unambiguous and final, continuing to change and strive for the truth.

Courage There is the following Christian and human virtue, which demonstrates to us personal perseverance and will in overcoming life’s difficulties and life’s adversities.

After all, going through trials, overcoming difficulties, a person grows and develops, we learn about the world and recognize our own nature. And only in this way will he be able to expand his knowledge more and more and change his inner world.

It is clear that difficulties or problems are not positive parts of human life. True, who likes that something went wrong in his life. But you must understand that “something went wrong” because the person himself did something wrong. Or the one next to him made a mistake. And then the task of a person, if he is not ready to come to terms with the existing state of affairs, is to correct this mistake.

Sometimes it is difficult, difficult, one might say, almost unbearable, and only courage, based on a person’s willpower, allows him to endure and go towards his intended goal.

Justice as a consequence of courage tells us that when something goes wrong, there is a good reason for it.

Yes, I want it to be better, I want it to be without problems and difficulties. But all this arises only if the balance of power is upset, and this happens as a result of the justice that exists in the universe.

It is clear that a person is not always ready to accept the fact that universal justice exists in the world. He is not ready to wait for some date of the “Last Judgment”, when everyone will be given what they deserve. But on the other hand, the very concept of justice is much deeper than the satisfaction of human “want” and its emotional impulse.

Think about it, when do you say that something is unfair? When something doesn't happen the way you think it should or the way it should.

And the two words “you think” and “should be” only mean that humanity, in its development and its worldview, believes that this is exactly what is true. But, as you understand, if something happened, then it is true the way it happened, and not the way someone wants it to be.

An event is the result of the interconnection of numerous factors, actions, actions or inactions of many people and forces, and they, brought together at one point, give a certain result. And not because someone likes it or doesn’t like it, but it simply cannot be otherwise.

This is the basic principle of justice, based not on opinion, but on the interaction of forces. And if you accept that any outcome, regardless of its moral connotation, is fair, you will be able to understand what universal justice actually is.

Moderation is the last of the cardinal virtues, which in our story follows justice as if to say that everything must be either in the balance of power, which is determined by justice, or in the balance of relationships, which is determined by a person's point of view.

Indeed, moderation is not a material and measurable quantity, since for each individual, as for each process, this is its own component. But it is the concept of moderation, as an individual’s assessment of what happens to him or around him, that gives him the opportunity to exist harmoniously and correctly in this world.

Massively, no more, no less, just what is needed - all these phrases “grew” from the concept of moderation, which invites a person to act within reasonable moral boundaries, sensing what is happening. It is by feeling, perceiving what is happening around, because otherwise it is quite difficult to understand or feel the boundaries of the reasonable.

That’s all we wanted to tell you about the main motivational components or hidden human forces that are present in absolutely any process or situation. All of them, to a greater or lesser extent, create both the person himself and his actions. And if you work hard, try to look closely at anyone, starting with yourself, you will be able to see these forces and their manifestations in the real world.

This is necessary so that you understand that all this is not a chimera, and that all this is as real and significant as any motivation of a person who commits an act, acts, achieves a goal, or simply lives.

Look at the people around you to discover the motivations listed there. And it will become clear to you why people in different situations behave this way and not otherwise. And why do those who are next to you, despite the fact that centuries have passed since these events, continue to behave in this way. After all, all this is in the nature of man, in the nature of his immortal soul.

Related information.

Moral values ​​are imperative and obligatory. The imperativeness of morality is expressed in the concept of “duty”.
Moral duty as a concept of ethics means morally reasoned compulsion to act. Moral duty requires not coercion, but self-coercion. Debt is recognized as an internal urge, as a need to perform some action.

Debt is a manifestation of necessity, therefore fulfilling a duty puts a person in front of the need to give up his own choice. Duty carries a moral principle only when its fulfillment is voluntary. Moral duty is conscious and free submission to the requirements of moral behavior. Following duty, we realize the priority of a higher principle than our own interests.
Human duty is divided into two types: empirical and strictly moral. Empirical duty: parental, friendly, to the homeland, professional, etc. Moral duty (universal) is a disinterested, indiscriminate reverence for all living beings. Empirical duty may conflict with universal human duty. (For example, between the corporatism of the principles of professional morality and universal morality.)
Historically, the content of moral duty has changed. In pre-class society there was “talion law” (retribution equal in force to crime). It read: “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Talion acted only in relation to another community. It did not imply individual duty and individual responsibility.
In early class society, the talion was replaced by the “golden rule of morality”: (don’t) act towards others as you would (not) want others to act towards you.

Medieval Christian ethics considers the golden rule of morality in the context of the Sermon on the Mount: “So, in everything, as you want people to do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.” The duty dictated in this case is already a moral law. L.N. Tolstoy considered the golden rule of morality as an ethical option inherent in all religions, most consistently formulated in the teachings of Jesus Christ.
I. Kant developed the idea of ​​the golden rule. The categorical imperative requires a person to act in such a way that the maxim (a short saying of a moral, ethical nature; a rule of behavior that guides a person in his actions) of his will could serve as the basis for universal legislation. This means that moral behavior is one that will ensure harmony between people.
A man doing his duty:
- fulfills his requirements without external coercion;
- treats the requirements of duty as if he himself had established them;
- I am convinced that the requirements are correct;
- performs duty selflessly.
A person's moral duty presupposes:
- contribute to the good of other people;
- resist evil;
- virtue;
- do not allow depravity in yourself.

Date of publication: 2015-02-03; Read: 335 | Page copyright infringement

Studopedia.org - Studopedia.Org - 2014-2018 (0.001 s)…

give an example of moral duty?

• Tribute is a moral duty, obligation (in the expressions “tribute to memory” and similar). example - Respecting the older generation is a high moral duty of youth... example - “if I clean up the table, I will get candy”))) Nothing valuable can be born from ambition or a sense of duty. Values ​​arise through love and devotion to people and the objective realities of this world... BUT NOW ON THE TOPIC. Conscience, Honor and Duty. Three related concepts. The concept of honor is brought up in a person from childhood. So in the story by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin “The Captain's Daughter” we see how this happens and what results it leads to. Shvabrin is valuable and indifferent to the suffering of these people. He treated ordinary people with contempt and thought only about how to save his own life at any cost. Senses of duty and honor were not developed in him.

  He broke his oath and went over to the side of the rebels, but not because he sympathized with them and shared their views, but only to save his life. And he also had a plan, having dealt with Grinev, to force Masha to marry him. In his grandiose work “War and Peace,” L. N. Tolstoy pays main attention to the problem of moral purity of the soul. A sense of honor and duty, spiritual generosity and purity are the key to peace and happiness of people on earth. Showing what troubles war brings to the world, Tolstoy concludes that only self-improvement, the desire of each person individually to become better, kinder, will save peoples from destruction and death. A sense of shame is closely intertwined with a sense of duty. A feeling of shame invariably covers a person in all those cases when he does not fulfill his duty. In fiction, a sense of duty often comes into conflict with some strong desire of the character. In the drama “The Cid” by Corneille, the heroine Jimena is distinguished by a very strong sense of duty. Her beloved Rodrigo kills Jimena's father in a duel, but she cannot blame Rodrigo for this: his self-esteem demanded that he accept the challenge. But Ximena also knows her filial duty. We observe a lack of consciousness of duty in Racine's Phaedrus. Phaedra, seized by a passion for her stepson Hippolytus, allows her confidante to slander a young man in front of her father who did not meet Phaedra’s love advances, i.e., in fact, the stepmother becomes the culprit of Hippolytus’ death. And in Euripides’ tragedy “Hippolytus,” Phaedra goes even further: before committing suicide, she herself slanderes Hippolytus in a letter to her husband. In the play “The Thunderstorm” by A. N. Ostrovsky, the aggravated struggle between feeling and duty ends with the unfortunate woman publicly, on the city boulevard, repenting to her husband. The denouement of the drama soon occurs: the suicide of the heroine, who showed her desperate, albeit powerless protest against the “dark kingdom.” In the story “The Man on the Clock,” Leskov makes you think about what is more important: a person’s life or loyalty to the oath. Sentinel Postnikov stood at his post. And suddenly he heard that the man had fallen into the wormwood and was drowning. The sentry faces a problem. He thinks whether to save the drowning man or remain at his post. After all, Postnikov is a soldier. This means that he cannot break his oath. If they find out about his violation, the hero could be sent to hard labor and even shot. Nevertheless, Postnikov decided to save the drowning man. And he was punished with flogging. Debt is a category of morality that denotes the moral responsibilities of an individual (group of persons, people) performed in accordance with the requirements of conscience. The fulfillment of a certain task becomes a duty when generally accepted moral requirements in specific social conditions turn into internal requirements of morality, and the task itself becomes a personal task of a specific person, group of persons, people. The category of duty is closely related to other concepts that characterize the moral activity of an individual: responsibility, self-awareness, honor, conscience.” But all the same, for everyone these words have their own, special meaning.

Morality- a form of social consciousness, determined by a set of norms and beliefs regarding human behavior in society.

The structure of morality is built on the following components:

• Code of Conduct(egoism, mutual assistance, collectivism)
• Personal qualities(benevolence, loyalty, responsiveness, etc.)
• Moral values(human purpose, desire for freedom and awareness of life)
• Generally accepted categories of morality(duty, conscience, goodness, justice)

Morality starts from such historical forms as:

1. Taboo(characteristic of the tribal system of society) - the strictest, categorical prohibition. For example, for mixing of blood or murder within the same family.
2. Custom- an activity accepted by the majority, possible in specific circumstances in a particular society.
3. Tradition- a certain norm of behavior that presupposes forms of activity that are feasible in specific circumstances in a certain society (in contrast to custom, it can be individual or family).
4. Standards of modern morality.

Central functions of morality:

Morality must be distinguished from morality. Morality is a set of norms of behavior accepted by the majority, while moral represents the degree to which an individual has assimilated moral values.

Debt concept

The concept of debt in the modern sense is quite broad. First of all, it should be noted that we constantly enter into relationships with the people around us and thus acquire objective responsibilities. Due to the fact that modern man lives an active social life, he is constantly burdened with responsibility.

And it doesn’t matter who exactly you work for or what your status is. Responsibility manifests itself even in simple actions - if you go on a trip, then in any case you need to buy a ticket, provide documents, board a train or plane, follow the rules of conduct in a public place...

Each person has close people, family, colleagues - and we are connected with all of them by a certain duty and objective responsibilities. The latter means that these duties do not depend on our desire.

It’s hard to imagine life in society any other way; in any sphere it is necessary to act according to duty and conscience.

Social and moral duty

Often, the concept of duty distinguishes between two sides - moral and social. Public duty name the objective duties that a person needs to perform. This type of debt manifests itself in all areas of a modern person’s life - at school, at home, at work, among friends and in society.

Moral duty should be understood a little differently. This means that a person independently turns the requirements of morality and duty into a personal task. There can be no instructions from superiors or parents here; this is an individual choice of a person. Then a person is not only aware of the laws of morality, he himself sets himself the goal of following them - making such a demand for himself.

It often happens that such a view is difficult for a person for a long time - he experiences many internal contradictions and does not know which duty to follow in the first place. But when a moral duty is formed and it becomes an integral part of the individual’s consciousness, strength and courage are manifested, which only a person with a moral duty is capable of.

The highest manifestation of moral duty is the process of overcoming one’s internal conflicts and discord, and choosing in favor of morality and conscience. Then a person boldly and confidently moves towards his goal.

Conscience

Most of the choices in our lives are internally checked by our conscience. Duty and obligation are of great importance to a civilized man, but it is conscience dictates to the individual what to do correctly. Therefore, conscience is defined as a deep knowledge of one’s responsibility and duty, as internal moral self-control.

It is believed that conscience is a personal feeling of each person; it cannot be attributed to the arguments of reason. And a person is not always able to soberly realize for what reasons his conscience allows him to do certain things, and why certain actions are strictly prohibited. It is internal moral self-control that allows a person to feel harmonious and calm, because when he is guided by his conscience, he is sure that he acted honestly and fairly.

Need help with your studies?

Previous topic: The role of morality in human life: moral assessment as a regulator of activity
Next topic:   Marriage and family: the moral duty of a man and the moral duty of a woman in the family

History provides many examples of the heroic service of doctors to their people and the patriotic performance of their professional duty. Thus, doctors S.I. Andrievsky and D.S. Samoilovich, back in the 18th century, while studying the nature of infectious diseases, including the plague, conducted medical experiments on themselves, thereby proving the ways of transmitting a terrible infection, and developed based on the results these experiments are methods for its prevention. In 1886, N. F. Gamaleya tested on himself the effectiveness of the rabies vaccine manufactured by Louis Pasteur. This heroic activity of the doctor-scientist played a positive role in the promotion and dissemination of a reliable method of preventing rabies in people throughout Russia.

Great patriot of our Motherland,the world famous scientist and physiologist I. P. Pavlov wrote:“Whatever I do, I constantly think that I am serving, as far as my strength allows me, first of all, my fatherland.”

These and many other examples show how leading Russian medical scientists understood their social duty, how, without fear of an immediate threat to their health and even life, they courageously developed ways and methods to combat infectious diseases, achieved success and emerged victorious in the struggle for people’s health.

A striking manifestation of the highly moral performance of their professional duty is the selfless work of medical workers during the Great Patriotic War (1941 -1945).

Doctors, paramedics, nurses and other medical workers provided medical assistance to soldiers and commanders of the Soviet Army and Navy under heavy enemy fire. Exposed to mortal danger, they pulled the wounded from the battlefield under enemy bullets and saved their lives. Only thanks to the dedicated work of doctors at the forefront of military operations and in the rear of the country, 72% of the wounded were returned to the active army. For their heroism at the front, 47 physicians were awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union, 283 were awarded the Order of Lenin, and 600 were awarded the Order of the Red Banner. In total, 115 thousand doctors were awarded government awards, including many paramedical workers.

The country's average medical workers perform their professional duty no less selflessly in peacetime.

Hundreds and thousands of paramedics, midwives, nurses, sparing no effort and their own health, in the most difficult conditions of the Far North and Far East, in the Pamir mountains and the sands of Central Asia, with a medical bag over their shoulder, come to the aid of people who are sick and in trouble, selflessly serve the cause of restoring and strengthening the health of the builders of communism.

“Ethics and deontology of paramedical workers”,
A.L. Ostapenko