There are various systems of ethics: the ethics of Ancient Greece, the ethics of Hinduism, the Confucian ethics. Each of them offers its own model of morality, highlighting a limited number of key, all-encompassing concepts: humanity, reverence, wisdom, etc. Such concepts receive the status of moral principles, or laws, which support the building of ethics.

All other, private moral concepts are grouped around moral laws, performing the functions of their internal justification and argumentation. For example, humanity as a moral principle, or law, is based on concepts such as compassion, sensitivity, attentiveness, the willingness to forgive or help. The moral law of reverence is realized through respect, delicacy, modesty, obedience, tact, reverent attitude towards the world.

Different systems of ethics use a different set of moral laws. In ancient Greece, courage, wisdom, and justice were considered to be among the main moral principles (cardinal virtues). In the Confucian ethics widespread in China and Japan, there are five so-called constancies: humanity, justice, decency, wisdom, honesty. Christian ethics prioritizes faith, hope, mercy.

Moral philosophers sometimes offer their own model of morality. For example, the famous Russian philosopher of the nineteenth century. V.S.Solovyov put forward the idea of ​​three main virtues: shame, pity, reverence. The model proposed by the German-French thinker A. Schweitzer (1875-1965) is based on the value of life as such, and from this he deduces one all-encompassing moral law - "reverence for life."

Schweitzer writes: "Truly a person is truly moral only when he obeys the inner urge to help any life he can help, and refrains from doing any harm to the living."

We are talking about the main, universal laws, which in one combination or another are repeated in various systems of ethics. The value of these laws lies in the fact that they consolidate the most important moral obligations in moral experience. They serve as designations for the constant states of consciousness that have developed in the process of upbringing: humanity, justice, reverence, rationality, etc. These are virtues, which even Aristotle called "habitual inclinations" to commit moral deeds. It is known that the ways (means, techniques) of implementing each moral principle are very diverse. They depend on the individual characteristics of a person, on the conditions and circumstances of a particular life situation, on the traditions of moral thinking and behavior that have developed in a given society.
Let's dwell on five moral principles, most often found in the systems of secular ethics and reflecting the most important and best that was deposited in the moral experience of mankind - humanity, respect, rationality, courage, honor... Well-developed functional connections are established between them in the sense that each of them supports, strengthens and expresses everything else. These principles, while maintaining relative independence, are important only as a means of the most complete, accurate and successful implementation of the attitudes of philanthropy. Respect provides benevolence and respect in contacts with the world, courage organizes and mobilizes the efforts necessary to achieve moral goals, the mind is assigned the role of intellectual censorship of behavior, and honor is the emotional and emotional one.

Humanity- a system of positive, uniting feelings and reactions: sympathy, understanding, sympathy. In its highest manifestations, it includes a conscious, kind and impartial attitude not only towards people, but also towards nature, flora and fauna, and the cultural heritage of mankind. It is the ability and readiness of the individual to transfer natural love for himself and his loved ones to other people, to the whole world around him, which is of a naive nature.

There is a common duty for the inhabitants of our planet: in any, even the most difficult situations, to remain human - to behave in accordance with the moral level to which people have ascended in the process of evolution. “If you are a person, then behave like a person” - this is the universal formula of moral and anthropological identity. The duty of humanity is kind and active participation in everything that happens around. This is loyalty and conformity to oneself, to one's social nature.
You cannot consider someone human just because he does not harm anyone. Humanity as a personality trait is formed from everyday altruism, from such acts as understanding, revenue, service, concession, favor. This is the ability to enter into the position of other people, to help them at least with kind advice and words of participation. After all, situations when people need moral support are not so rare. Sometimes sympathy is like helping with deeds.

The nourishing inner environment of philanthropy is participation, compassion, empathy inherent in human nature. In the language of psychology, it is empathy- the ability to enter someone else's emotional state of a person, to sympathize with him. Empathy is characterized as "warm entry" into the role of another person, as opposed to "cold entry", when it is not accompanied by sympathy and goodwill. In accordance with the idea and general orientation of humanity, compassion should be assessed as a moral obligation and an important moral quality of a person, opposite to such properties as callousness, heartlessness, moral deafness.

Of course, we respond to the experiences of other people not only by virtue of purely emotional responsiveness, involuntarily. Empathy is formed and maintained through the efforts of the will, under the control of moral principles and rules. In order to enter the personal world of another person, to share his joy or sorrow, you sometimes have to overcome yourself, leave your own worries and experiences aside. Being empathic is difficult, it means being responsible, active, strong and at the same time subtle and empathetic (K. Rogers). Hence the concept of the development of "personal power" put forward by him in the process of personality-centered upbringing and education.

In everyday life, a significant part of empathic actions is performed almost automatically, out of habit. They are among the so-called simple volitional actions, correlated with simple moral norms. Simply put, in such cases we behave appropriately, humanly out of habit, perceiving it as something completely natural and not burdensome.

Outside of interpersonal connections and relationships, there is a clearly defined, largely highly institutionalized layer of the culture of empathy associated with the creation of a human-friendly living environment during the construction of residential and industrial premises, the design of industrial products, the greening of cities, etc. only natural, but also man-made environment, in order to find out to what extent it meets the national and universal standards of empathic, aesthetic attitude to the world. In a word, there is, and quite realistically, a powerful layer of culture, formed under the influence of sympathy, empathy, and mutual assistance. We call it a culture of empathy, understanding by this a system of principles and norms developed by humanity, compassionate, understanding, aesthetically consistent thinking and behavior.

Remaining a well-organized and coordinated whole, the culture of empathy is clearly divided into individually-personal and socially oriented a culture of empathy. In the first case, we are talking about the skills and abilities of empathic thinking and behavior of an individual. Empathy acts here as an important personal property, and in such cases they speak about the character of an individual: about his kindness, responsiveness, sensitivity. In contrast, a socially oriented culture of empathy is a characteristic of society as a whole. It includes a system of standards of a prosperous life, approved and supported by the state.

Sensitivity occupies a special place in the complex palette of moral concepts and feelings that make up philanthropy. As one of the personality traits, sensitivity is a fusion of moral attention, moral memory and moral understanding.

Moral attention is an ethical interest or a special form of curiosity or inquisitiveness, the ability to identify, recognize the experiences or states of a person and in a kind, human way to respond to them. Simple observation is not enough for this; morally motivated, heartfelt attention is required. It is not for nothing that they say that the eyes look and see, but it is the heart, the soul, that really recognizes and highlights the joy or sadness of another person. Moral attention sets a certain tone, a certain, ethically verified direction of external attention, contributes to the formation of a special type of personality, subtly feeling the experiences of people. The manifestations of moral or positive attention include questions about health used in communication, congratulations on a joyful event, condolences, all kinds of warning gestures, movements, actions. In all cases, this is caring for other people, a pleasant and flattering evidence of importance for them.

Gratitude is an important part of humanity. This is a manifestation of attentiveness, sensitivity, nobility, indicating that a good attitude is noticed, accepted, and appreciated. Gratitude presupposes a willingness to respond with kindness for good, love for love, respect for respect. Ingratitude destroys this harmony and inflicts a tangible blow on the foundations of morality. Therefore, not a single significant good deed, word, motivation should be left without attention, without a moral response.

Gratitude not only completes the building of humanity, it expands the horizons of philanthropy, plays the role of a spring that accumulates the necessary spiritual and moral energy, activates the mechanism of new good deeds. If gratitude falls out of the moral system, humanity will lose a significant part of its inner strength and energy. As a result, this can so weaken the motivation for philanthropic actions that it will be tantamount to the destruction of morality. I. Kant not in vain emphasized that gratitude bears the stamp of special responsibility, responsibility for the state and fate of morality in general. He believed that gratitude should be viewed as a sacred duty, that is, a duty, the violation of which (as a shameful example) can, in principle, destroy the moral motive of good deeds.

The paradox, however, lies in the fact that ethics obliges to do good deeds, not counting on gratitude, so as not to reduce, not to destroy the moral value of the act. They say: "Do good and forget about it." Having rendered help to someone, it is unworthy to complain that you were not thanked for it; it is indecent to remind a person of the services rendered to him. Even in conversation with third parties, you should avoid reporting your benefits. There is a contradiction between noble self-sacrifice and the expectation of gratitude.

Such a contradiction affects the foundations of the inner world of the individual and requires its resolution. It is recommended to supplant information about your own good deeds and not to forget about the good deeds of other people, and above all about the services provided to you personally. As a result, it all boils down to the fact that everyone knows, remembers and appropriately fulfills his duty of humanity and gratitude, concentrating as much as possible on the kind attitude of those around him, and not on the extent and form of recognition of his own deeds.

Respectfulness usually associated with politeness, benevolence, courtesy, good manners, which in general correctly reflects the essence of this moral principle.

But the philosophical understanding of reverence is broader than the ordinary. This concept contains a respectful, reverent, poetic attitude to the world as a miracle, priceless, divine gift. The principle of respect obliges us to treat people, things, natural phenomena with gratitude, accepting all the best that is in our life. On this soil, in antiquity, various kinds of cults were formed: the cult of trees, the cult of iron, the cult of animals, the cult of heavenly bodies. In fact, they reflected a reverent attitude towards the universe, a small part of which is every person who is called to become a useful link in the world. In a famous poem by N. Zabolotsky, it is said about this as follows:

Link to link and form to form. Peace In all its living architecture - Singing organ, sea of ​​pipes, clavier, Not dying neither in joy nor in a storm.
(Metamorphosis)

Ethical immunity of the individual(in our understanding) is the unconditional right of a person to respect, regardless of age, gender, social or race. A personal legal field of the individual is established, into which no one should intrude, any encroachment on the honor and dignity of a person is condemned.

Ethical immunity establishes the equality of rights to the elementary respect and recognition of every person, be it a high-ranking official, a child or a beggar tramp. This is how a democratic character structure is formed, in which, according to A. Maslow, the central place is occupied by "the tendency to respect any human being just because it is a human being." Taking into account and under the control of ethical immunity, generally accepted rules of mutual treatment arise, develop and operate, a certain level or necessary minimum of ethical legality is maintained.

Antithesis of etiquette and unethical personality

There is a belief that the rules of good manners must be known and followed for the best self-realization, achieving personal goals in contacts. In such cases, a good reputation, which a person gains through deference, is crucial. This is a reputation for being benevolent, respectful, pleasant to talk to.

At the pole of assessments are people who do not know the norms of etiquette very well. Usually, in contact with people, they show shyness, helplessness, and confusion. "Respect without ritual leads to fussiness," emphasized Confucius. Most often this is expressed in the fact that a person is inactive where etiquette prescribes a certain activity that symbolizes respect. For example, he does not rise from his seat when elders or women appear, is silent when it is necessary to apologize or thank for a service, does not make the necessary courtesy visits, etc. In addition to the general characteristics applied to such a person: "ignorant", "ill-mannered", "Uncouth", there is another psychologically accurate characteristic: "awkward, awkward, worthless, lack of initiative." Such a person does not succeed in showing his personality in a refined form. Etiquette ignorance as a specific form of deviant (deviant) behavior limits the field and possibilities of self-realization.

An active form of etiquette ignorance manifests itself when a person violates the rules of decency openly, even demonstratively: unceremoniously intervening in a conversation, slandering, making frivolous jokes, sitting lounging, laughing loudly, shamelessly praising himself and his loved ones, etc. As a negative phenomenon close to active forms of etiquette ignorance, consider the identification of reverence with flattery and servility. By all accounts, this is a symptom of an undeveloped capacity for understanding and a source of false judgments.

Dialectics of respect and self-respect

The importance of respect and the associated strategy of achieving personal goals through politeness and courtesy raises some concerns: will a slave psychology develop on this basis? Is there a risk of conceptual substitution here?

To eliminate the possibility of such transformations, an ethically verified border of deference is established, which cannot be crossed without prejudice to one's own dignity. Each person himself determines this border. At the same time, there is a rule: while showing respect to people, remember that this is done in order to show yourself and others how and how much you respect yourself, how much you value the image of the Self, coming into contact with the person evaluating you.

Self-esteem is a psychological basis and an internal justification for respectful attitude towards people. This view is best reflected in the well-known judgment: the respect that you show to another is the respect that you show yourself. But there are other variants of this formula: the more you value and respect people, the more you value and respect yourself; appreciate, honor people - and you yourself will be honored. These statements have their own logic. Showing respect, a person actively takes root in the mind of another person and offers him such a scheme of benevolent relations, which he himself counts on. This is a kind of ethical clue, the way in which a person prepares a model of goodwill for his own person. This kind of reasoning is part of the traditional notion that it takes subtle calculation to navigate the nuances of respectful behavior. American sociologist Homans knowingly compared the interaction of people with an economic deal or "social economy", when people, like a commodity, exchange love, respect, recognition, services, information. Elements of such a calculation do exist, and they are primarily associated with the activities of the mind, which is entrusted with the functions of moral and intellectual monitoring or control of behavior. This is especially important for today's interaction of people, taking place in the context of the intercultural diversity of the world.

Ethics of intercultural dialogue

In the politics of multiculturalism, we must rely on positive, unifying social capital. Expressions like “conflict of civilizations”, “civilizational split” that have become fashionable now, of course, reflect some trends in the development of the modern world, but are hardly appropriate in the practice of multicultural education. They undermine faith in the reality of the spiritual unity of mankind, focusing on fatally acting and almost insurmountable contradictions leading to the disintegration and disintegration of the world community.

It is much more useful to focus on creating highly synergistic, safe societies, about which Ruth Benedict wrote, contrasting them with low-synergic societies, in which negative energy and aggression accumulate in the presence of large interpersonal, intergroup and intercultural contradictions. Developing the ideas of R. Benedict, the outstanding American psychologist A. Maslow focuses on the conscious search for socially acceptable plans and structures of behavior that can provide mutual benefit to the participants in the interaction, excluding actions and goals that harm other groups or members of society. According to him, in the end it all comes down to the formation of this type of social structure in which an individual, with the same actions and at the same time, serves both his own interests and the interests of other members of society.

At the same time, the question inevitably arises: is national originality and identity an obstacle or an insurmountable obstacle on the path of integration processes? Anyone who accepts this point of view, willingly or unwillingly, finds himself in the field of negative intercultural orientation, where mistrust and rejection of other means and methods of cultural self-organization best arise. This is how various forms of discrimination, mutual misunderstanding, everyday nationalism, and morbid suspicion appear.

The exact opposite is the answer of multicultural pedagogy to the question asked. Multiculturalism is perceived as a source of mutual enrichment, unity and dynamic development of society. At the same time, a well thought out and balanced policy of multiculturalism should be implemented. In each specific case, it should be based on the specific features of the multiethnic environment: historical, socio-economic, psychological, demographic, geographical, etc. But the general formula of multiculturalism remains unchanged in all cases and appears in the form of various combinations of two key words: “ unity "and" diversity ", which presupposes a morally reasoned, reasonable combination of variability and integrativity in the practice of multicultural education.

Of particular importance is the filling of the general principles and guidelines for the interaction of cultures with a specific moral and psychological content that unites the common human and culturally unique experience of the ethical rationalization of the world. For example, the concept of humanity, expressed in a specific linguistic form in one people, is not much different from how it is presented in the linguistic consciousness of another people. Quite identical to the Russian word for "humanity", the Chinese ren, Kabardian tsykhuge, Balkarian adamlyk etc. For many peoples, the key is the concept of "face": face- the British, nape- among the Kabardians, bet- among the Balkars. The Kabardians and Balkars define a low, shameless person as a result of this as a deprived person - napshe, betsyz, which in general corresponds to similar displays of this content in English - to lose face or in Russian - lose face.

The term namus... It goes back to the Greek word nomos- a norm, a law, thereby strengthening the importance of mutual respect and recognition as a generally binding, universal rule that does not know cultural barriers and restrictions. Hence the idea of ​​the inalienable right of every person to respect and social recognition. It is believed that every person, regardless of age, gender, religion, nationality and other differences, has this right, a kind of "ethical immunity" that protects him from encroachments on personal safety, dignity and honor.

Mutual respect and recognition create a good basis for trust and openness in contacts, a feeling of psychological comfort, confidence that the participant in the dialogue will be treated with sympathy and understanding that, if necessary, they will help him halfway. This also testifies to how closely humanity, respect, trust, openness are connected with tolerance and empathy - the ability to sympathize, compassion, and narrow the boundaries of one's own self.

Moral concepts and attitudes that make up a positive intercultural attitude and unifying social capital mutually reinforce and support each other. The practice of multiculturalism should be built on the basis of the commonality of basic symbols, values ​​and norms. Formal differences in culture in this case will only strengthen the process of their mutual attraction and enrichment. “The discovery of differences is the opening of new connections, not new barriers,” wrote K. Levi-Strauss. Therefore, a deep, respectful immersion in the culture of other, especially neighboring, peoples should be welcomed.

The most effective means of multicultural education is intercultural dialogue - free, benevolent communication of carriers of different cultures, during which exchange, comparison and combination of various methods, methods of ethical rationalization of the world are carried out. Such communication relieves fear, anxiety, reduces mistrust, allows you to make the necessary adjustments to stereotyped, often erroneous ideas about life, customs, true reasons and goals of real participants in social contact and exchange.

Intercultural dialogue, built on the basis of positive social capital, brings people closer together, makes them want to demonstrate through their actions the best features of the culture they represent. It's kind of cultural patriotism, forcing a person to constantly care about showing himself in a refined form, making the most favorable impression on people, not dropping the honor of his surname, profession, people, etc. At the same time, the instinct of ecological alignment, a morally reasoned critical attitude to the flaws of their culture.

Experience shows that, on the basis of cultural patriotism, it also develops ethically significant cultural competition when each of the participants in the dialogue constantly and unobtrusively proves to what extent he, as a bearer of a certain culture, can contribute to the creation of a society with a high level of cultural interaction. Correctly organized intercultural dialogue becomes an instrument of positive transformations in the space of the individual and society. This is how a civil society is being formed step by step, in which cultural differences only strengthen the processes of consolidation around universal human values.

Many people are tormented by experiences: "How could I (do this), because I knew ...", "Why, although I wanted to be good, I constantly do others badly?" Or, for example, why the world is morally decaying and sliding into the abyss, morally degrading to a drinker, a smoker, having sex and issues of biomass prestige….

Shame, guilt and morality, moral principles. All this worked a century ago, and all this “works” much less for modern society.

Why is that?

Let's figure it out!

Sociological part

Let's start with social studies. Indeed, not so long ago (until the 1950s and 1960s in the USA, until the 1970s and 1980s on the territory of the (former) USSR, moral norms and ethical principles meant a lot. "Took on" the heavy burden of these feelings.

Now it is quite difficult to make someone ashamed of their actions, or to blame themselves for what happened.

This is a natural result of a long process.

a) For a long time, people lived in communities, villages, families. Now, instead of villages (where everything is in plain sight - and everything as a whole), people prefer megacities. The ratio (approximately) per century has changed from 90/10 (village-city) to 10/90.

In the city, instead of public censure, public morality and a punishing "single whole", the Criminal Code, the Civil Code and the NK, that is, legislation, operates. The “paternal function” is at the mercy of the state.

b) People have become more aware of themselves as individuals, like.

In different periods, this process was different - sometimes closer to “we are a single whole”, (one people, one family, the significance of the family was great), then to “each person is unique”.

In particular, Karl Whitaker noted the periods of the 1920s. (the value of individuality), 30-40 (the value of the family), the post-war years - the restoration of the value of the family, 60-70 - again the time of individuals, and so on.

We have this process a little late, and according to my personal impressions, we have in a peculiar way refracted and played out the “hippie time”, the time when the value of the family, marriage (and therefore the “morality of the inner circle”) is minimal.

pros- greater freedom of creativity, self-expression, greater potential, but less reliance on values ​​(and therefore less confidence in the future).

So, shame and guilt, like moral principles, wither and "bend" where a person suddenly realizes himself as such and begins to evaluate himself on one's own.

Not without "local excesses" - that is, not without childish dope and youthful super-enthusiasm, but still.

Psychological component

Unfortunately, not all principles are created equal.

Most of them are learned by children in rather early childhood, and then they are very poorly aware.

Are you familiar with the phrases:

Money is evil

You have to be nice to all people

Smile at the one sitting in the pond and he will smile at you

Girls should want to get married

A man must provide for his family,

You have to eat soup for lunch,

A worthy person always does the right thing ...

(the list is almost endless).

And already the first glance of a teenager at the learned norms, dogmas and rules reveals that they work, to put it mildly,

a) not always

b) for some reason, not for everyone.

This causes bewilderment, anger, but at the same time provokes "to test the strength of this world."

Returning to sociology, we remember that in our country a person-in-the-city is a Personality, and often a person, rather strangely formed (without sufficient support, guardianship, with a “crooked” attachment, in dysfunctional and dysfunctional families, etc.) )

Eventually we have: adult "adolescents" who find it very difficult to live in this world. They do not have a stable connection with significant people, and at the same time perceive their freedom of action as impunity and the right to take any action.

Eventually they are largely governed by instincts and unconscious motives ("wherever I want - I fly there! I am a free bird!")

And in the gestalt approach ...

According to the structure of the Self function in the theory of gestalt therapy, moral (ethical) principles relate to the Persona - the part that is responsible for self-description:

What am I?

What can I (could)?

What do I (usually) want?

What am I worthy (unworthy)?

What is important (valuable) to me?

What is permissible (unacceptable) for me to do?

In short, whatever is responsible for evaluating oneself.

Our attitudes, moral and other values ​​are the “slowest” part of the psyche.

In Id, processes are ongoing. The ego function is "connected" when it is necessary to balance the Person and the Id, to make the right choice (I want to go to the toilet, but there are no toilets nearby, is it permissible for me to relieve myself right on the square?)

So what is next result of this choice - the action - and its assessment (as I was when I relieved myself on the square) - are “recorded” in self-description.
The persona changes very, very slowly, and under the influence of only impressive enough forces.

Plus, many people have

Flattened,

Fuzzy,

Not true self description.

They are stupidly unusual to think about themselves.

Indeed, in order for it to be formed “exactly the opposite”, clear, voluminous, real, the skills of reflection (thinking about the situation and oneself, analysis) are needed.

Nevertheless, for many people, the Personality is a rather meager description, and with the help of psyche defenses it excludes “inconvenient” descriptions, for example,

• - when they got drunk and behaved in a dangerous way for others,
• - when they did not do what they think was right for others,
• - when they did something, in accordance with momentary needs, did not correlate with the description of themselves as a “highly moral person,” for example.

Those. the need (ID) turned out to be stronger than the installation. Hunger turned out to be greater than the fear of punishment for stealing food ...

Final results on morality and ethics in our society

As a result: supposedly personalities walk between you and me, and do a lot of things that an adult and well-reflecting (evaluating, analyzing oneself) person usually forbids himself.

They can only be punished under the Criminal Code, Civil Code, Tax Code. But in our country, unlike in Germany, it is not accepted to punish - “they don’t knock on their own people”, “they don’t give up their own people”.

(so that, roughly speaking, “it was a shame in front of the mother that she had such a son”) - it has not been formed.

And people are like people. People try to live in this in everything and, if possible, remain kind.

I would like now to focus on moral and ethical principles and the role they play in the life of an individual, especially in his relationship with others. Although these terms are often viewed as synonymous, there is some difference between them: ethical principles should probably be distinguished from moral principles, since the former are obviously modified in critical knowledge and intellectual inquiry. However, both moral and ethical principles are rooted in human behavior.

Are there any general ethical principles that apply to people, regardless of what kind of society they live in? Are we obligated to follow them? In other words, can we discover any common moral decencies that manifest in human behavior?

As we have seen, our moral and ethical principles are general prima facie guidelines for behavior. Etymologically, the term principle comes from the Latin principium, which is associated with a beginning or foundation, i.e. with source, origin or with primary truth. In a moral sense, referring to the principia of a person means pointing out the most fundamental norms of her life, which she cherishes and considers the most important in her life. The principled person has moral principles that he strives to strictly observe and when it is necessary to maintain. If she is courageous enough, then perhaps even fight for them. She is devoted to her moral convictions about how life should be lived. She is reliable and responsible, if not overly complacent. One may disagree with her principles, but at least one can assume how she will behave in a given life situation. An unscrupulous person does not know remorse, she does not feel doubts about her righteousness in violation of the norms of justice and honesty.

Individuals whose principles correspond to the transcendental type of morality, i.e. religiously based moral code, see their principles as God-given absolute and universal rules that they must follow. Critical scholars of ethics do not view the moral principle as an immutable regulator, it does not provide a directive that everyone should unambiguously follow. This is a relative rather than a categorical obligation. Such a moral principle is more like a hypothesis than a dictate. Its application in a specific context is preceded by critical interpretation and evaluation. This does not mean, however, that the general principle can be easily violated. Once discovered or revealed, it cannot be easily accepted or carelessly abandoned. If he is deeply rooted in behavior, he cannot be blindly ignored or rejected without any justification. General principles should be followed until there are compelling reasons why the principle can no longer be followed.

We recognize a certain number of moral norms that are inherent in our behavior, especially in our relationships with other people. I'm talking about behaviors that are generally appropriate and rewarding. It is our moral principles that are their indicators. For example, in principle, we should be kind, but sometimes an individual may abuse our good will or not deserve our gratitude. In principle, we should appreciate what is positive that others can do for us, although the consciousness of this help or its compensation may be insufficient or come too late. A morally developed personality understands that the existence of general rules of human behavior is one thing, but how they are connected (especially when they come into conflict with each other) and which of them we should give preference to is another. For example, we may make a frank promise that, over time, when an unfavorable environment or circumstances change, will be difficult or even impossible to fulfill due to the fact that we will be bound by equal principles or values.

The reasons we demonstrate for why we should or should not do something include the dependence of the moral principle on a particular situation. Utilitarians emphasize the fact that in deciding what we should do, we evaluate the action on the basis of whether it increases the amount of good and contributes to the achievement of pleasure or happiness. We must take this important consideration into account. However, there is a danger that some utilitarians, especially in regimes leading to autocracies, may seek to compromise basic and reasonably established moral principles in order to achieve what they consider to be the greatest good, or for the sake of certain social goals they desire.
Moral principles are autonomous in the sense that they are not merely instruments. They are not accepted or rejected out of purely subjective desire. Moral principles have intrinsic value and should not be seen simply as means to achieve certain goals, since they are themselves part of the goals. Our moral values ​​can function as values ​​protected for their own sake. For example, we cannot choose to be honest or dishonest simply to achieve our goals. Value is valuable in itself as an integral part of a person's character and is the highest principle on the scale of human values. Principles and values ​​may overlap. However, principles and values ​​are not necessarily the same, as values ​​are not necessarily general or setting uniform rules of conduct.

The central question about moral and ethical principles concerns their ontological basis. If they are not received from God and do not go back to some trenscendental source, then are they not purely ephemeral? If they simply correspond to human interest, can they be violated with impunity? What happens if they collide with each other or come into conflict? How to determine which one has the highest priority or legitimacy? Will moral collapse occur if higher first principles are not inherent in reality itself?

I think that moral collapse will not happen. The ethical and moral principles by which we live and which we adhere to are real. This means that we can make factual descriptions and make judgments about the central position they occupy in human behavior. In this sense, they, like all real qualities, are part of nature. Second, these kinds of principles are relative to people, their interests, needs, values, and concerns. To say that they are relational does not mean that they are purely subjective or that they can be rejected at will or rejected out of whim. It simply means that they are functions of human behavior and are the essence of the phenomena of human communication. It makes no sense to talk about them in an abstract way, isolating oneself from their consequences in the life of the individual. In fact, the obligation to follow moral principles becomes so important in human civilization that they begin to form a special kind of objective reality and turn out to be part of the bio- and sociocultural environment. They have natural and objective reasons.

It is impossible to imagine modern society without ethical standards. Every self-respecting state draws up a set of laws that citizens are obliged to follow. The moral side in any business is a responsible component that cannot be neglected. In our country, there is a concept of moral damage, when the inconvenience caused to a person is measured in material terms in order to at least partially compensate for his experiences.

Morality- accepted in society norms of behavior and ideas about this behavior. Morality also means moral values, foundations, orders and prescriptions. If in society someone commits acts that contradict the designated norms, then they are called immoral.

The concept of morality is very closely related to ethics. Compliance with ethical concepts requires high spiritual development. Sometimes social attitudes run counter to the needs of the individual himself, and then a conflict arises. In this case, an individual with his own ideology runs the risk of being misunderstood, alone among society.

How is morality formed?

Morality of man largely depends on himself. Only the personality itself is responsible for what happens to it. On how much she is ready to follow the established order in society depends on whether a person will be successful, accept others. The development of morality, moral concepts occurs in the parental family. It is those first people with whom the child begins to interact at the first stages of his life, and leave a serious imprint on his future destiny. So, the formation of morality is significantly influenced by the immediate environment in which a person grows up. If a child grows up in a dysfunctional family, then from an early age he has a wrong idea of ​​how the world works and a distorted perception of himself in society is formed. As an adult, such a person will begin to experience colossal difficulties in communicating with other people and will feel discontent on their part. In the case of raising a child in a prosperous average family, he begins to absorb the values ​​of his immediate environment, and this process occurs naturally.

Awareness of the need to follow social precepts occurs due to the presence of such a concept as a person's conscience. Conscience is formed from early childhood under the influence of society, as well as individual inner feelings.

Moral functions

Few people really wonder why morality is needed? This concept consists of many important components and protects a person's conscience from unwanted actions. For the consequences of his moral choice, a person is responsible not only to society, but also to himself. There are functions of morality to help it fulfill its task.

• Evaluation function is connected with how other people or the person himself determines the actions he has committed. In the case when self-assessment occurs, the person is usually inclined to justify his own actions by some circumstances. It is much more difficult to bring actions to a public court, because society is sometimes relentless in evaluating others.
• Regulatory function helps to establish norms in society that will become laws intended for universal observance. The rules of behavior in society are assimilated by the individual at a subconscious level. That is why, getting to a place where there are a large number of people, most of us after some time begin to unmistakably follow the unspoken laws adopted in this particular society.
• Controlling function directly related to checking how an individual is able to follow the rules established in society. Such control helps to achieve a state of "clear conscience" and social approval. If an individual does not behave in an appropriate way, then he will definitely receive condemnation from other people as a feedback.
• Integrating function helps to maintain a state of harmony within the person himself. Performing certain actions, a person, one way or another, analyzes his actions, "checks" them for honesty and decency.
• Educational function is for a person to be able to learn to understand and accept the needs of the people around him, to take into account their needs, characteristics and desires. If an individual achieves a state of such an inner breadth of consciousness, then we can say that he is able to take care of others, and not just about himself. Morality is often associated with a sense of duty. A person who has responsibilities to society is disciplined, responsible and decent. Norms, rules and procedures educate a person, form his social ideals and aspirations.

Moral standards

They are consistent with Christian ideas about good and evil and what a real person should be.

• Prudence is an essential component of any strong person. It presupposes that the individual has the ability to adequately perceive the surrounding reality, build harmonious connections and relationships, make reasonable decisions, and act constructively in difficult situations.
• Abstinence implies a prohibition to stare at persons of the opposite sex who are married. The ability to cope with one's desires and impulses is approved by the society, unwillingness to follow spiritual canons is condemned.
• Justice always implies that for all deeds committed on this earth, sooner or later retribution or some kind of response will come. A fair treatment of other people is, first of all, to recognize their value as significant units of human society. Respect, attention to their needs also belong to this point.
• Persistence is formed due to the ability to endure the blows of fate, endure the necessary experience for oneself and constructively get out of the crisis state. Fortitude as a moral norm implies the desire to fulfill one's destiny and move forward, despite the difficulties. Overcoming obstacles, the personality becomes stronger and in the future can help other people go through their individual trials.
• Hard work appreciated in any society. This concept is understood as a person's passion for some kind of business, the realization by him of his talent or abilities for the benefit of other people. If a person is not ready to share the results of their work, then he cannot be called hardworking. That is, the need for activity should not be associated with personal enrichment, but in order to serve as the consequences of one's work for as many people as possible.
• Humility achieved through prolonged suffering and repentance. The ability to stop in time, not to resort to revenge in a situation where they have been badly offended, is akin to real art. But a truly strong person has tremendous freedom of choice: he is able to overcome destructive feelings.
• Politeness necessary in the process of interaction of people with each other. Thanks to it, it becomes possible to conclude transactions and agreements beneficial to both parties. Politeness characterizes a person from the best side and helps her to move constructively towards a given goal.

Principles of morality

These principles exist, making significant additions to generally accepted social norms. Their significance and necessity lies in contributing to the formation of general formulas and laws adopted in a given society.

• Talion principle clearly demonstrates the concept of uncivilized countries - "tit for tat". That is, if someone has suffered any loss through the fault of another person, this other is obliged to compensate the first through his own loss. Modern psychological science says that you need to be able to forgive, reconfigure yourself to be positive and look for constructive methods of getting out of a conflict situation.
• The principle of morality involves following the Christian commandments and keeping the divine law. A separate individual has no right to harm his neighbor, deliberately try to cause him any damage based on deception or theft. The principle of morality most of all appeals to the conscience of a person, makes him remember his spiritual component. The phrase “Treat your neighbor the way you want him to treat you” is the clearest manifestation of this principle.
• The principle of the "golden mean" expressed in the ability to see the measure in all matters. This term was first introduced by Aristotle. The desire to avoid extremes and move systematically in the direction of a given goal will certainly lead to success. You cannot use another person as a way to solve your individual problems. In everything you need to feel the measure, be able to compromise on time.
• The principle of well-being and happiness presented in the form of the following postulate: "Act towards your neighbor in such a way as to bring him the greatest benefit." It does not matter what act will be done, the main thing is that the benefit from it could serve as many people as possible. This moral principle presupposes the ability to predict the situation several steps ahead, to foresee the possible consequences of one's actions.
• The principle of justice based on equal treatment among all citizens. It says that each of us must abide by the unspoken rules of dealing with other people and remember that a neighbor who lives with us in the same house has the same rights and freedoms as we do. The principle of justice implies punishment in the event of illegal acts.
• The principle of humanism is the leading one among all of the above. It assumes that each person has an idea of ​​a condescending attitude towards other people. Humanity is expressed in compassion, in the ability to understand one's neighbor, to be as useful to him as possible.

Thus, the importance of morality in human life is of decisive importance. Morality affects all spheres of human interaction: religion, art, law, traditions and customs. In the existence of each separately taken individual, sooner or later questions arise: how to live, what principle to follow, what choice to make, and he turns to his own conscience for an answer.

Humanism (lat himapis -. Chelovechny) - Principles for mipovozzpeniya (.. In t h and npavctvennocti) in ocnove kotopogo lezhit ybezhdenie in bezgpanichnocti vozmozhnoctey cheloveka and ego cpocobnocti to covepshenctvovaniyu, tpebovanie cvobody or protecting doctoinctva lichnocti, ideya o ppave cheloveka nA cchacte and o that satisfying its needs and interests must be the ultimate goal of society.

At the heart of the principle of humanism lies the idea of ​​a respectful attitude to another person, which has been fixed since ancient times. Ona vypazhaetcya in zolotom "you would xotel poctypay on otnosheniyu to dpygomy tak zhe, kak, chtoby poctypali on otnosheniyu to tebe" ppavile npavctvennocti and kantovckom kategopicheckom impepative "poctypay vcegda tak, chtoby makcima tvoego povedeniya mogla ctat vceobschim zakonom".

One golden rule of morality contains an element of cybercism, just what a particular person desires for the sake of it, needlessly The categorical imperative looks more universal.

Gumanism, represented by its imperative side, which appears as a practical normative requirement, undoubtedly, comes from the sources of the Internet. Therefore, the content of humanism is related to the idea of ​​personal happiness.

However, in the past it is not invisible from the score of other people and, as a whole, from the character of the tasks solved by the community at this stage of its development. Become a long happiness presupposes the fullness, emotional saturation of life. It can be achieved only in the process of self-realization of a person, that is, or otherwise, on the basis of shared goals and values ​​with other people.

It is possible to identify three basic meanings of humanism:

1. Warranties of fundamental human rights as a condition for preserving the humane foundations of his being.

2. Support for weaknesses, out of the ordinary frame of reference of the given community of justice.

3. Formation of social and moral qualities that allow the individual to self-serve on the basis of public values.

By covpemennym tendentsiyam pazvitiya gymanicticheckoy thought mozhno otnecti vnimanie ychenyx, obschectvennyx deyateley, vcex zdpavomyclyaschix lyudey to cydbam pazvitiya chelovechectva "Bozniknovenie globalnyx ppoblem - pealnaya ocnova for obedineniya vcex nyne cyschectvyyuschix fopm pealnogo gymanizma nezavicimo From pazlichiya mipovozzpeny, politicheckix, peligioznyx and inyx ybezhdeny". Oiserman T. I. Reflections on real humanism, alienation, ytopism and positivism // Questions of Philosophy 1989 No. 10 P. 65.

B covpemennom mipe ogpomny ycpex imeli idei nenaciliya, pozvolivshie nA ppaktike ocvobodit mnogie napody From kolonialnoy zavicimocti, cvepgnyt totalitapnye MODE, vozbydit obschectvennoe mnenie ppotiv pacppoctpaneniya yadepnogo opyzhiya, ppodolzheniya podzemnyx yadepnyx icpytany etc. B tsentpe CAUTION gymanicticheckoy mycli naxodyatcya takzhe ekologicheckie ppoblemy, globalnye altepnativy, cvyazannye c nekotopym cnizheniem tempov pazvitiya ppoizvodctva, ogpanicheniem potpebleniya, pazvitiem bezotxodnyx ppoizvodctv. All this is possible only with a high level of mental awareness of people who are ready to go on certain sacrifices for the sake of human survival. Therefore, along with pragmatic, technical, rational principles, it is assumed Hedonism- the principle of morality, which prescribes to people the pursuit of earthly joys. Hedonism reduces the entire content of various moral requirements to a common goal - to obtain pleasure and avoid suffering. However, it cannot be considered a scientific principle of ethical theory.

Pocpedctvom fopmalnogo ppintsipa nelzya peshit konkpetnye voppocy o gymannom otnoshenii one sort cheloveka to dpygomy and pealny gymanizm, Po-vidimomy, ppedctavlyaet nekotopy balanc in cochetanii paznyx ppintsipov, ctepen coedineniya cvobody camovypazheniya lichnocti c tpebovaniyami to povedeniyu ee, zadavaemymi kyltypoy dannogo obschectva.

MILOCEPDIE - compassionate and active love, which is expressed in readiness to help everyone who is in need and spreads to all people, but to all people. In the understanding of mercy, two aspects are connected - spiritual-emotional (feeling like someone else's pain) and concrete-practical (trying to feel good about being alive) Philanthropy- charity, a specific form of humanism; a set of moral ideas and actions aimed at helping the disadvantaged. , without the other - in empty sentimentality.

The origins of mercy, as a moral principle, lie in apchaic pooled togetherness, which has strictly obliged, at a price, to call any victims out of trouble. Ppavda, podovaya colidapnoct mozhet chactichno pacppoctpanyatcya and nA tex, kto naxoditcya vne kpyga "cvoix" Nr HOW verily c it cvyazan (obyazannocti to goctyu, ppedpicannoe in Betxom zavete otnoshenie to necvobodnym litsam and "ppisheltsam", etc.).

Odnako mercy mozhno govopit only togda, kogda vce bapepy mezhdy "cvoimi" and "chyzhimi" if ye ne in povcednevnoy ppaktike, verily in the idee and otdelnyx gepoicheckix mopalnyx aktax ppeodoleny and chyzhoe ctpadanie pepectaet only be ppedmetom xolodnovatogo cnicxozhdeniya.

Religions such as Buddhism and Christianity were first practiced with the teaching of mercy. In Christian ethics, a caring attitude towards one's neighbor is defined as mercy, one of the basic virtues. The essential difference between mercy and friendly love-attachment is that, according to the commandment of love, it is mediated by the absolute ideal - love for God. Christian love for one's neighbor is not limited to loved ones; it extends to all people, including enemies.

In covetckoy eticheckoy nayke ponyatie Relief dolgoe On Time ne polychalo adekvatnogo ocmycleniya and otsenki, dazhe otbpacyvaloc za nenadobnoctyu ne tolko potomy chto ploxo otvechalo ciyuminytnym nyzhdam klaccovoy and politicheckoy bopby, Nr and potomy chto c obschectvennymi ppeobpazovaniyami cvyazyvaloc ppedctavlenie o takom cchactlivom popyadke veschey VARIATIONS kotopom mercy simply will not be needed by anyone.

Experience has shown that it is not so. Even in the case of the removal of property, the lack of indifference remains alone, old age, troubles and other sufferings that are not only merciful and indispensable Nowadays, the process of full-fledged revival of the term "mercy" in the lexicon of our society is gradually taking place, and it is now

PABEHCTBO (in morals) - the relation between people, in the framework of which they have the same right to develop creative abilities to the best of their ability, to improve their personality. Hapyady ppedctavleniem c o necessary, shall bpatckogo edinctva mezhdu people equality yavlyaetcya klyuchevoy ideey mopali, ictopichecki voznikayuschey HOW altepnativa kpovnopodctvennoy zamknytocti and cotsialnoy obocoblennocti lyudey, THEIR fakticheckomy ekonomicheckomy and politicheckomy nepavenctvy. Haibolee adekvatnym vypazheniem ppintsipa equality mopali yavlyaetcya zolotoe ppavilo of fopmylipovki kotopogo vytekaet ynivepcalnoct (vceobschnoct) mopalnyx tpebovany, THEIR pacppoctpanennoct nA vcex lyudey, nezavicimo From THEIR obschectvennogo polozheniya and yclovy life and ynivepcalnoct mopalnyx cyzhdeny, zaklyuchayuschayacya in tom, chto DURING otsenke poctypkov d.pugoy Human beings, a person derives from the same grounds that when assessing their own filings.

The idea of ​​equality receives a normative expression in the principle of altryism and the corresponding requirements of compassion (pity) of mercy, co-ordination.

Kak pokazyvaet ictopichecky Experience, mopalnoe equality mozhet be ppaktichecki pealizovano tolko DURING oppedelennom cotsialno - politicheckom and kyltypnom ctatyce lyudey, eccentricity xapaktepizyetcya ekonomicheckoy and politicheckoy camoctoyatelnoctyu, vozmozhnoctyu povysheniya obpazovatel-nogo and ppofeccionalnogo ypovnya, dyxovnym pazvitiem DURING neppemennoy otvetctvennocti kazhdogo chlena obschestva za pezyltaty cvoey deyatelnocti ...

ALTPUISM (from lat.alteg - other) - a moral principle that prescribes compassion to other people, careless service to them and ready to be appropriate for the name and In theory, the concept of "Altruism" was introduced by Comte Auguste Comte (1798-1857), a French philosopher, founder of positivism. who put this principle into the basis of their ethical system. Kont linked the moral perfection of society with the upbringing in people of a public sense of altruism, which should counteract their selfishness Selfishness- a life principle and moral quality, which means giving preference to one's own interests when choosing a line of behavior over the interests of society and the people around them. ...

In kachectve mopalnogo tpebovaniya altruism voznikaet HOW hazardous reactions and cvoeobpaznaya kompencatsiya obocobleniya intepecov lyudey, obyclovlennogo chactnoy cobctvennoctyu otchyzhdeniya and vydvizheniya nA pepvy plan in obschectvennoy life cheloveka motivov kopycti and ctyazhaniya. GOLDEN MANDALITY AND CHRISTIAN STORY "Love your neighbor like yourself" like and repulse this direction, to indulge in altrubism With this, if in the golden rule the idea of ​​parity in the morale is accentuated, then in the wake of love - the idea of ​​respect and mercy, in relation to others as to the self.

As a requirement for excellence and humanity, altruism is one of the normative bases of morality and humanism. Bmecte c tem, bydychi obpaschennym to individy HOW nocitelyu chactnogo intepeca altruism faktichecki neppemenno ppedpolagaet camootpechenie, ibo in ycloviyax vzaimnoy obocoblennocti intepecov zabota Ob intepece blizhnego vozmozhna only DURING yschemlenii cobctvennogo intepeca. The specific forms of the realization of altruism in behavior are bliss Boon- an action aimed at the benefit of another person or community and realizing a person's duty in relation to other people, to society. and philanthropy.

Justice is the concept of moral consciousness, which expresses no or other value, blago, but their general relationship between oneself and the specific distribution of the individual; a proper order of human society, corresponding to the expectations of human security and his inherent rights. Justice is also a category of legal and social-political consciousness. In contrast to the more abstracted notions of good and evil, with the help of which a moral assessment of certain phenomena in general

In chactnocti, ponyatie justice vklyuchaet Aspect mezhdy polyu otdelnyx lyudey (klaccov) in life and obschestva THEIR cotsialnym polozheniem, mezhdy deyaniem and vozdayaniem (ppectypleniem and nakazaniem) doctoinctvom lyudey and ego voznagpazhdeniem, ppavami and obyazannoctyami. Lack of responsibility between those and others is assessed by moral conscience as unrighteousness. Sense, included by people in the concept of justice, seems to them to be something of their own accord, suitable for assessing all the conditions of life, which they need to keep or change.

Justice does not contradict mercy, kindness, or love. Love includes both of these concepts. A just judge is obliged to punish the offender, however, driven by love and, in accordance with the circumstances, he can at the same time show mercy in order to mitigate the punishment, which must always be humane. For example, a judge should not harass the accused, deprive him of a lawyer, or administer an unjust trial.

INTENTION - a quality of character, a principle of action that orientates a person (group) to achieve the maximum of his own good (happiness).

According to Aristotle, the main business of the prudent (judicious) is to make the right decisions regarding the good and benefit for himself as a whole - for a good life. With the help of prudence, a person is able to choose the right means for this purpose in a particular situation and implement it in an act. Aristotle emphasizes that being prudent means not just knowing, but being able to do things in accordance with knowledge. If scientific and philosophical knowledge deals with extremely general definitions that do not allow substantiation, then prudence presupposes knowledge not only of the general, but even more of the particular, since it deals with making decisions and performing actions in specific (private) circumstances. And the prudent, as capable of making decisions, knows how to achieve the highest of the benefits that can be achieved in a specific act. If wisdom is gained through the mind, then prudence through experience and a special feeling, similar to conviction.

Subsequently, I. Kant separated prudence from morality. He showed that the moral law is not determined by any goal external to it. Prudence, on the other hand, is directed towards a natural end - happiness, and a prudent act is only a means to it.

The rehabilitation of prudence in modern moral philosophy presupposes the restoration of its meaning as practical wisdom, that is, as the ability to act in the best way in specific circumstances. In the best way, it means focusing, if not on a morally lofty, then at least - on a morally justified goal.

Prudence is determined by one of the key (along with justice and benevolence) principles of morality. This principle is formulated in the form of a requirement to take equal care of all parts of your life and not prefer the momentary good to the greater good that is achievable only in the future.

MIPOLYUBE - the principle of morality and politics, which is based on the understanding of human life by a higher socially moral value and maintaining the idea of ​​maintaining and sustaining Peacefulness presupposes a respect for the personal and nationality of individual citizens and whole peoples, the state of mind of the mind and the right to the right

Peacefulness is capable of maintaining the public order, comprehending the generations, developing historical, cultural traditions, the enjoyment of spirituality, Peacefulness is opposed by aggression, guilt, inclination to violent means of resolving conflicts, suspicion and disbelief in the minds of people, guilt In the history of morality, peacefulness and aggression, opposed to each other, are the main tendencies.

PATPIOTISM (Greek pateg - poodina) is a social-political and moral principle, in a general form expressing a feeling of love for Poedin, forgetting to enjoy etopecax and good Patriotism is manifested in the city of reaching one country, at least because of its failures and troubles, in respect of its historical past and at the same time

The human meaning of patriotism is defined by the fact that it is one of the forms of co-ordination of personal and public interests, the unity of a person and a report. Ho patpioticheckie chyvctva and idei tolko togda npavctvenno vozvyshayut cheloveka and napod, kogda coppyazheny c yvazheniem to napodam d.pugoy ctpan and ne vypozhdayutcya in pcixologiyu natsionalnoy icklyuchitelnocti and nedovepiya to "chyzhakam". Etot acpekt in patpioticheckom coznanii ppiobpel ocobyyu aktyalnoct in pocledney tpeti XX century, kogda ygpoza yadepnogo camoynichtozheniya or ekologicheckoy katactpofy potpebovala pepeocmycleniya patriotism HOW ppintsipa, povelevayuschego kazhdomy cpocobctvovat vklady cvoey ctpany in coxpanenie planety and vyzhivanie chelovechectva.