Moral ethics. General issues of human morality and ethics

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

1. Concepts"ethics", "morality", "morality"

Ethics(Greek ethika, from ethos - custom, disposition, character), a philosophical discipline that studies morality; its development, principles, norms and role in society.

The term was first used by Aristotle to designate a special field of study. From the Stoics comes the traditional division of philosophy into logic, physics and ethics, which was often understood as the science of human nature, that is, it coincided with anthropology: “Ethics” by B. Spinoza is the doctrine of substance and its modes.

Ethics is the science of what is proper in the system of I. Kant, who developed the ideas of the so-called. autonomous moral ethics as based on internal self-evident moral principles, contrasting it with heteronomous ethics, proceeding from any conditions, interests and goals external to morality.

In the 20th century M. Scheler and N. Hartmann, in contrast to Kant’s “formal” ethics of duty, developed a “material” (substantive) ethics of values. The problem of good and evil continues to be central to ethics.

Morality(from lat. moralis - moral) - moral standards of behavior, relationships with people:

1) morality, special form public consciousness and type of social relations (moral relations); one of the main ways to regulate human actions in society through norms. Unlike simple custom or tradition, moral norms receive ideological justification in the form of the ideals of good and evil, due, justice, etc. Unlike law, the fulfillment of moral requirements is sanctioned only by forms of spiritual influence (public assessment, approval or condemnation). Along with universal human elements, morality includes historically transitory norms, principles, and ideals. Morality is studied by a special philosophical discipline - ethics.

2) Separate practical moral instruction, moral teaching (moral of a fable, etc.).

Moral- internal, spiritual qualities that guide a person (see morality).

The “Golden Rule of Morality” is the oldest ethical norm of human behavior. Its most common formulation is: “(Don’t) do unto others as you (wouldn’t) want them to do unto you. The “Golden Rule” is already found in the early written monuments of many cultures (in the teachings of Confucius, in the ancient Indian Mahabrath, in the Bible, in Homer’s “Odyssey”, etc.) and is firmly entrenched in the consciousness of subsequent eras. In Russian, it appears in the form of a proverb: “What you don’t love in another, don’t do that yourself.”

In the history of ethics, a system of categories has developed that reflect in their content the moral values of society. The main categories include: “good” and “evil”, “duty”, “conscience”, “honor”, “dignity”, “happiness”, “love”, “friendship”, “meaning of life”.

These categories are not only theoretical concepts ethics, but also the basic concepts of moral consciousness that a person uses when evaluating certain actions of people, and through which society carries out moral regulation of people’s behavior.

1. “Good” and “evil”

“Good” and “evil” are the central concepts of moral consciousness. It is through the prism of these concepts that a person’s actions and all his activities are assessed. These concepts were developed by moral consciousness a very long time ago and already the first ethical systems used them in their constructions. Good is the most general concept morality, which unites the entire set of positive norms and moral requirements and acts as an ideal. In addition, goodness can be considered as a moral goal of behavior and in this case it acts as a motive for an action. At the same time, goodness is a human quality (virtue). Such a multi-valued definition of good follows from the very nature of morality, which permeates all aspects of human life.

Evil is the opposite of good. The category of evil is a generalized expression of ideas about everything immoral that deserves condemnation and must be overcome. For example, in relationships between people, evil is when a person is treated not as an individual as such, but in order to benefit, to use for their own selfish purposes.

Evil is a generic concept in relation to all morally negative phenomena - deception, meanness, cruelty, etc. Evil manifests itself in both small and large things. Evil is rooted in habits, in morals, in everyday psychology. When, having committed an unseemly act, we try to shift the blame onto another, then we are acting ignoble, we are losing our dignity. When, for the sake of some benefit, we sacrifice our moral principles - in all these cases we commit actions that can be qualified as evil - as moral evil.

To act morally means to choose between good and evil. A person can make a free conscious choice only when he knows what good and evil are, when he has a positive attitude towards good and negative towards evil, and when, striving to act along the line of good, he has objective conditions and opportunities for this. At the same time, it cannot be argued that good is something absolute, because good and evil are interconnected. A person's moral life, as a rule, is contradictory, torn apart by conflicting aspirations. On the one hand, a person is aimed at satisfying his desires, selfish inclinations, and private interests, on the other hand, he is inherent in the consciousness of duty and responsibility to other people.

What theories of the relationship between good and evil existed?

Religious ethics argued that good is an expression of the will or mind of God, while evil is fatally inherent in man - the sin that Adam and Eve committed is the source of the existence of evil on earth.

Naturalistic theories saw the origin of good in the abstract “nature of man”, in his desire for pleasure and happiness.

Thus, the ethics of hedonism asserts that good is that which gives pleasure or leads to it. Good is what is pleasant. Only pleasure, pleasure, joy are good; suffering, grief, displeasure are evil. However, one can immediately object that the content of pleasure depends not only on the era, but also on the environment, age, education, therefore, positive and negative emotions themselves do not objectively carry definitions of good and evil.

The ethics of utilitarianism states that good is what is useful to the individual, and evil is what is harmful. However, a person does not always do what is useful for him, for often he follows such life rule: “Knowing the best, I follow the worst.” In addition, we know that in history there have been cases of selfless service by a person in the name of some ideas - this behavior is difficult to explain by utilitarian ethics.

Relativistic ethics argues that the difference between good and evil is not inherent in nature, but exists only in the opinions of people. From this point of view it follows that there are as many equivalent moral judgments as there are peoples and individuals.

The main drawback of the relativistic ethical theory is that it is impossible to identify the universal content of morality, i.e. that beginning in it that is preserved in different historical eras among different peoples. In addition, such a view often leads to immoralism (refusal of morality in general).

Modern ethical theories believe that the definition of good is practically impossible (intuitionism), or good depends entirely on the personal intention of the individual (existentialism).

2. Conscience

Apparently, historically, the first formation of moral consciousness was conscience, which acted as a person’s ability to feel and understand the moral meaning of his behavior. Conscience is the voice of God in us, an internal judge who guides and judges our actions. Regardless of views on the nature of morality, many moralists (Abelard, Kant, Kierkegaard, Tolstoy, Moore, Fromm) defined conscience as the highest ability to comprehend moral truth.

Kant said that conscience is fear that has gone inward and is directed at oneself. He defined conscience as “solitary worship” and “moral genius,” emphasizing, on the one hand, its dark nature, “the amazing faculty in us,” and, on the other, its uniqueness. Feuerbach later remarked, speaking about the origin of conscience: “Conscience has its origin in knowledge and is associated with knowledge, but it does not designate knowledge in general, but a special department or kind of knowledge - that knowledge that relates to our moral behavior and our good or evil moods.” and actions." The very etymology of the word “conscience” in many languages shows that it goes back to knowledge: “news”, “to know”, but not just to know, but to know together with others, to know what the other also knows.

Conscience can manifest itself not only in the fact that a person realizes the moral significance of the act he has committed, but also in the form of emotional experiences. These experiences are similar to a feeling of shame - a moral feeling of shame and guilt before other people and oneself, which covers a person who has committed an act.

In this sense, conscience is directly related to the feeling of guilt, to the personal responsibility of an individual for his actions, and to a person’s ability to adequately assess the morality of his own actions. Conscience is the expression of morality within a person, i.e. not what I am asked to do from the outside, but what is present to me from within.

The torment of a “bad conscience” is one of the greatest misfortunes that a person takes upon his shoulders. Treason, betrayal, meanness, deceit, lies, ill-gotten property - all these acts weigh heavily on the conscience. Your own conscience becomes the strictest judge and accuser. She constantly reminds the criminal of what he has done, sometimes driving him crazy.

Kant writes: “A man can cunning as much as he pleases, so that his law-breaking behavior, which he remembers, is represented as an unintentional oversight, the mere imprudence of which can never be avoided, completely, therefore, as something in which he was involved in the flow natural necessity to plead not guilty; and yet he sees that the lawyer who speaks in his favor cannot in any way silence the accuser in him if he realizes that when the injustice was committed he was of sound mind, that is, he could exercise his freedom.” Thus, according to Kant, you cannot play hide and seek with your conscience, you cannot understand everything correctly, but act unjustly - no deals with conscience are possible, because sooner or later it will wake up and force you to answer.

3. Debt

The concept of debt, first of all, reveals the relationship between the individual and society. The individual acts as an active bearer of certain moral responsibilities to society, which he is aware of and implements in his activities. The category of debt is very closely related to such concepts as responsibility and self-awareness.

The interpretation of the nature and origin of duty has been one of the most difficult problems in the history of ethics. The basis and source of duty was seen either in the divine commandments, or in the a priori moral law (Kant), or in human nature itself, in man’s “natural” desire for pleasure. They tried to say in different ways who, ultimately, is competent to determine the content of duty: society - socially approbative theories, God - religious theories, conscience - Fichte, moral feeling - theories of moral feeling. Consequently, the basis of duty was declared to be authority of one kind or another, but thereby the question of the content of moral duty was rendered meaningless. Duty presupposes responsibility in people, the ability to step over the personal “I want” for the sake of a high, responsible “should.”

The apologist for duty was Kant, who became pathetic when speaking about duty: “Debt! You are an exalted, great word, there is nothing pleasant in you that would flatter people, you demand submission, although in order to motivate the will, you do not threaten with anything that would inspire natural disgust in the soul and frighten; you only establish a law that automatically penetrates the soul and, even against its will, can gain respect for itself (although not always fulfilled); all inclinations fall silent before you, even if they secretly oppose you - where is your source, worthy of you, and where are the roots of your noble origin, proudly rejecting any relationship with inclinations, and where do the necessary conditions for that dignity that only people can give you arise? This can only be what elevates a person above himself (as part of the sensory world), which connects him with the order of things, which only reason can think and to which at the same time the entire sensory world is subordinated, and with it empirically determined existence a person in time and the totality of all goals... This is nothing more than a person.”

F. Nietzsche rebelled against the rigorism of Kant, for whom the “law” ruled both over the phenomena of the external world and over human soul. According to the author of The Genealogy of Morals, the concept of debt historically arose from the relationship of creditor and debtor. In case of non-payment of a debt, the creditor gains power over the debtor, which turns out to be greater than the power of a simple demand for payment of the debt. Moral superiority serves as a kind of compensation that the creditor receives if the debt is not repaid to him. By forgiving a debt and showing mercy, the creditor enjoys the humiliation of the debtor.

4. Honor

When determining the specific content of debt, you need to consider its relationship with two more categories: honor and dignity. The moral value of an individual, expressed in the concept of “honor,” is associated with a person’s specific social position, with the type of his activity and the social roles he performs. The content of the concept of “honor” is revealed in the requirements for behavior, lifestyle and actions of a person that public morality imposes on a person as a member of a certain group, as a bearer of social functions. Hence the set of specific requirements for the behavior of a man, a woman, a doctor - male honor, female honor, professional honor.

According to A. Schopenhauer, honor is external conscience, and conscience is internal honor. Honor is public opinion about our worth, our fear of this opinion. So, for example, the concept of official or professional honor is directly related to the opinion that a person holding a position really has all the necessary data for this and always accurately fulfills his official duties. Historically, the concept of honor arose in the moral consciousness of society in the form of ideas about tribal and class honor, in the form of cumulative requirements prescribing a certain way of life and course of action. Violation, deviation from the way of life prescribed by public morality was assessed sharply negatively, causing a feeling of shame and disgrace and therefore was interpreted as unworthy behavior. The consciousness of honor was especially clearly manifested in the morality of feudal society, which was distinguished by a rigid class structure and detailed regulation of the way of life of each social group. A person’s dignity in this morality, including self-esteem, was determined by how strictly a person observed these class moral norms.

5. Happiness, meaning, purpose

Happiness, meaning, purpose and ideal of human life. It is difficult to find other categories of ethics that, from ancient times to the present day, would not arouse such keen interest. Why does a person live? What is his purpose in the world? Is there any meaning to his life if he is a finite being, i.e. mortal?

These and other similar questions, which G. Heine once called cursed, cannot but worry everyone thinking man, for the question of death and immortality is a deeply moral question - only a person tends to think about the finitude of his existence. It is at such moments that he feels with particular force and realizes the need to determine what the meaning of life is for him, whether he is happy. This is the moment of a person’s moral self-esteem.

In the history of ethics there are many answers to questions about the meaning of human life.

All of them can be divided into three main areas:

1) some saw the meaning of life in individual well-being;

2) others saw him in the implementation of some extraterrestrial tasks;

3) proclaimed the meaninglessness and absurdity of human existence.

We find individualistic concepts of happiness and the meaning of life in hedonism and eudaimonism. In addition, in one version or another, the understanding of happiness as the maximum of pleasure is found in the ethics of utilitarianism.

The second direction in understanding the meaning of life is most clearly manifested in religious ethics. The other world is understood and proclaimed to be the highest value, and earthly existence is understood as a kind of test sent by God to man. Therefore, the meaning of earthly life is to endure all sorts of trials and difficulties, but in the name of atonement for original sin, in the name of saving the immortal soul. In contrast to the hedonistic concept, religious ethics makes renunciation of pleasure and asceticism the principle of earthly life; its ideal is an ascetic person.

The third direction in understanding the meaning of life can be called pessimistic. This is the denial of any meaning of human existence, a deep conviction in the absurdity, complete meaninglessness of human existence. From this point of view, human life is devoid of any objective certainty, and therefore is always meaningless and absurd. A lonely person, left to his own devices, experiences a constant feeling of anxiety and fear. As Byron said: “Whoever you are, it would be better not to be.”

We will find pessimistic sentiments in the most poetic book of the Bible, in Ecclesiastes: “And I hated life, for all is vanity and vexation of the spirit,” “Everything came from dust and to dust it will return.”

The book of Job says: “Man is born to suffer.” A. Schopenhauer is recognized as the father of pessimism in European philosophy, according to whom human desires can never be satisfied and therefore “life from all sides is essentially suffering.”

The meaning of life and the purpose of life are not equivalent concepts, although they are closely related. The meaning of life is the objective significance of his life, independent of a person’s desire; it takes place whether a person wants it or not. The purpose of life is set by the person himself; it is a person’s internal, personal awareness of the meaning and content of life, its concretization in some activity or phenomenon.

Reflecting on the problem of the meaning of life, L.N. Tolstoy came to the conclusion that the question of the meaning of life is a question of faith, and not rationally argued knowledge. The concept of faith in Tolstoy’s philosophy does not coincide with the traditional concept of faith: “Faith is knowledge of the meaning of human life, as a result of which a person does not destroy himself, but lives. Faith is the power of life." Thus, for Tolstoy, a life that has meaning and a life based on faith are one and the same.

The concept of happiness in all ethical systems is directly connected with the understanding of the meaning of life, since in the most general form happiness is defined as a state of moral satisfaction, satisfaction with one’s life. Every era had philosophical manifestos of happiness. In many ethical systems, happiness was proclaimed as an inalienable human right, the desire for happiness was considered as an innate property of the individual, and in these teachings happiness and the desire for it were considered as the basis and source moral activity. La Mettrie, French educator of the 18th century. wrote: “Whoever finds happiness has found everything.” In France in the 18th century. The Order of Happiness was even founded.

According to Voltaire, “the great work of life and the only thing one should care about is to live happily.” This is the formula for eudaimonism. However, eudaimonism differs from hedonism, because the source of happiness can be not only pleasure, but also a prosperous fate, human perfection, and satisfaction with life.

Happiness is the state of a person’s greatest satisfaction with the conditions of his existence, a feeling of completeness and meaningfulness of life - this is well-being, health and the degree of freedom and confidence of a person in the usefulness of his existence on earth.

Happiness cannot be a permanent state; it is not a state of continuous joy, but rather a moment of special emotional uplift. One ancient thinker said that happiness alternates with unhappiness like a rose with thorns. Heinrich Heine confirmed the widespread belief when he compared happiness to a frivolous girl who caresses, kisses and runs away; misfortune, on the contrary, looks like a woman who becomes very attached, is in no hurry to leave and sits calmly around you. Consequently, as a rule, happiness is fleeting and difficult to maintain, while unhappiness, on the contrary, is permanent.

6. Love

In connection with the above example, we can say that many associate the concept of happiness with the opportunity to love and be loved. Love is another category of ethics: many theoretical treatises have been written about love. In the ancient Indian treatise “Peach Branches” it is noted that “Man’s desires have three sources: soul, mind and body. The attractions of souls give rise to friendship. The attractions of the mind give rise to respect. The drives of the body give rise to desire. The union of three attractions gives rise to love.”

If we talk about the characteristic signs of love, then the most significant is selectivity, i.e. it is a feeling that is directed at a specific specific person. The object of individual love is perceived by the lover as a unique set of personal merits. One of the most secrets of love lies in the inexplicability of this selectivity, in the ability of the lover to see in his beloved what others do not notice. The famous French writer Stendhal compared this process to crystallization, when a simple branch, covered in salt mines with crystals of ordinary salt, turns into a shining miracle. A similar miracle happens, according to Stendhal, to lovers - for them, the beloved looks like the same miracle. And the point here, probably, is that a kind of idealization is taking place, but as M. Nordau wrote: “The baser and simpler the ideal, the easier the individual finds its embodiment. That’s why vulgar, ordinary people can easily fall in love and replace one object of love with another, while refined and complex natures find it difficult to meet their ideal or replace it with another in case of loss.”

Engels notes important signs of love when speaking about the socio-historical nature of love: “Modern sexual love differs significantly from simple sexual desire, from the eros of the ancients. Firstly, it presupposes mutual love in the beloved being; in this respect, a woman is in an equal position with a man, whereas ancient eros did not require her consent. Secondly, the strength and duration of sexual love can be such that the impossibility of possession and separation seem to both parties to be a great, if not the greatest misfortune; they take enormous risks, even put their lives on the line, just to belong to each other, which in ancient times only happened in cases of adultery. And finally, a new moral criterion appears for condemning and justifying sexual intercourse; they ask not only whether it was marital or extramarital, but also whether it arose out of mutual love or not.”

Engels's reasoning is basically correct; it is based on the assertion that ideas about love are indeed historically changeable. However, one cannot categorically assert, for example, that in antiquity there was no love, but only one bodily eros, simply sexual desire. You can recall the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice, who followed his beloved to Hades, then, having lost her, could not look at other women, for which, according to legend, he was torn to pieces by the Bacchantes. And in the Trojan epic cycle, love is almost the main source of war.

In classical Greek tragedies, love is a terrible engine of human actions, it brings death and horror. Here Eros is a terrible god, whom even the gods themselves fear. (Euripides “Electra”, “Medea”, “Hippolytus”). Thus, in mythological form, the idea was expressed that love brings a person not only joy and bright feelings, but also trouble, misfortune, and suffering.

7. Friendship

Ancient Greece has long been considered the kingdom of true friendship. The names of Castor and Polydeuces, Orestes and Pylades, Achilles and Patroclus became household names. The main features of friendship were considered to be its indissolubility. The symbol of such friendship was the story of Castor and Polydeuces, set out in the myths of the Dioscuri. According to myth, Polydeuces (or Pollux), the son of Zeus, being unable to bear the death of his brother and friend Castor, who died in battle, asked his father to send death to him too. Zeus allowed Polydeuces to give half of his immortality to his brother. Since then, the Dioscuri spent one day in the underground kingdom of the dead, and one on Olympus. This beautiful poetic myth perfectly expresses the idea of the great value of friendship: friendship is stronger than death.

The ancient Greek canon of friendship was conceived as an exclusively male institution. The dependent position of a woman and the resulting intellectual underdevelopment deprived her of the possibility of deep friendship with her, for, as Plato said, equality creates friendship.

A unique summary of the ancient Greek philosophy of friendship was summed up by Aristotle, who gave in the Nicomachean Ethics the first complete outline of the theory of friendship as an independent moral relationship.

Friendship according to Aristotle, the greatest social and personal value, the most necessary for life. Indeed, no one would choose to live without friends, even in exchange for other benefits.

Aristotle approaches the definition of friendship from several angles at the same time. Firstly, depending on the partnership, he distinguishes between paternal, fraternal, kindred, conjugal, neighborly, political, comradely, erotic and hospitality-based relationships.

Secondly, the philosopher distinguishes between equal relationships and relationships based on the social or moral superiority of one partner over the other.

Thirdly, it differentiates the nature of the feelings experienced by a person, distinguishing between calm friendliness, disposition and affection in general, individualized friendly feelings and passionate love, attraction.

Fourthly, Aristotle classifies the motives for concluding and maintaining friendly relations: utilitarian friendship - for the sake of benefit, benefit, hedonistic friendship - for the sake of pleasure, pleasantness, perfect friendship, in which these motives are subordinated to selfless love for a friend as such.

True friendship is selfless friendship, it is a necessary means of self-knowledge: “Just as if we want to see our own face, we look in the mirror and see it, so if we want to know ourselves, we can know ourselves by looking at a friend.” A friend is our second “I”. A person has no one closer than a friend. Therefore, Aristotle believes, the number of friends has limits, for close friendship is friendship with a few.

In fact, Aristotle formulated all the most important questions of the psychology and ethics of friendship.

3. Professional ethics

To find out the origin of professional ethics is to trace the relationship of moral requirements with the division of social labor and the emergence of the profession. Aristotle, then Comte, and Durkheim paid attention to these questions many years ago. They talked about the relationship between the division of social labor and the moral principles of society. For the first time, a materialist justification for these problems was given by K. Marx and F. Engels.

The emergence of the first professional and ethical codes dates back to the period of the craft division of labor in the conditions of the formation of medieval guilds in the 11th-12th centuries. It was then that for the first time they noted the presence in shop regulations of a number of moral requirements in relation to the profession, the nature of work, and partners in labor.

However, a number of professions that are of vital importance for all members of society arose in ancient times, and therefore, such professional and ethical codes as the “Hippocratic Oath” and the moral principles of the priests who performed judicial functions are known much earlier.

The emergence of professional ethics preceded the creation of scientific ethical teachings and theories about it. Everyday experience and the need to regulate relationships between people in a particular profession led to the awareness and formulation of certain requirements of professional ethics. Professional ethics, having emerged as a manifestation of everyday moral consciousness, then developed on the basis of the generalized practice of behavior of representatives of each professional group. These generalizations were contained in both written and unwritten codes of conduct, and in the form of theoretical conclusions.

Thus, this indicates a transition from everyday consciousness to theoretical consciousness in the field of professional morality. Public opinion plays a major role in the formation and assimilation of professional ethics standards.

Norms of professional morality do not immediately become generally accepted; this may be due to a struggle of opinions. The relationship between professional ethics and social consciousness also exists in the form of tradition. Different types of professional ethics have their own traditions, which indicates the existence of continuity of basic ethical standards developed by representatives of a particular profession over the centuries.

Professionalism as a moral personality trait.

Professional ethics is a set of moral standards that determine a person’s attitude towards his professional duty. The moral relations of people in the labor sphere are regulated by professional ethics. Society can function normally and develop only as a result of the continuous process of production of material and valuables.

Professional ethics studies:

Relations between work collectives and each specialist individually;

Moral qualities of a specialist’s personality that ensure the best performance of professional duty;

Relationships within professional teams, and those specific moral norms characteristic of a given profession;

Features of professional education.

Professionalism and attitude to work are important characteristics of a person’s moral character. They are of paramount importance in the personal characteristics of an individual, but at different stages historical development their content and assessment varied significantly. In a class society, they were determined by the social inequality of types of labor, the opposition of mental and physical labor, and the presence of privileged and unprivileged professions. The class nature of morality in the world of work is evidenced by writings written in the first third of the 2nd century BC. Christian biblical book “The Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach”, in which there is a teaching on how to treat a slave: “feed, stick and burden are for the donkey; bread, punishment and work are for the slave. Keep the slave busy with work and you will have peace "Loosen his hands - and he will seek freedom." In Ancient Greece, physical labor was at the lowest level in terms of value and significance. And in feudal society, religion viewed labor as a punishment for original sin, and paradise was imagined as immortal life easily. Under capitalism, the alienation of workers from the means of production and the results of labor gave rise to two types of morality: predatory-predatory capitalist and collectivist-liberation of the working class, which extended to the sphere of labor. F. Engels writes about this “... every class and even profession has its own morality.”

The situations in which people find themselves in the process of performing their professional tasks have a strong influence on the formation of professional ethics. In the process of labor, certain moral relationships develop between people. They contain a number of elements inherent in all types of professional ethics.

Firstly, this is the attitude towards social work, to participants in the labor process,

Secondly, these are the moral relations that arise in the area of direct contact between the interests of professional groups with each other and society.

Professional ethics is not a consequence of inequality in the degree of morality of different professional groups. It’s just that society has increased moral requirements for certain types of professional activities. Basically, these are professional areas in which the labor process itself requires coordination of the actions of all its participants. Dedicated Special attention the moral qualities of workers in that sphere that are associated with the right to manage people’s lives, here we are talking not only about the level of morality, but also, first of all, about the proper performance of their professional duties (these are professions from the service sectors, transport, management, healthcare, education). The labor activity of people in these professions, more than any other, does not lend itself to preliminary regulation and does not fit within the framework of official instructions. It is inherently creative. The peculiarities of the work of these professional groups complicate moral relations and a new element is added to them: interaction with people - the objects of activity. This is where moral responsibility becomes crucial.

Society considers the moral qualities of an employee as one of the leading elements of his professional suitability.

General moral norms must be specified in a person’s work activity, taking into account the specifics of his profession. Thus, professional morality must be considered in unity with the generally accepted system of morality. Violation of work ethics is accompanied by the destruction of general moral principles, and vice versa. An employee’s irresponsible attitude towards professional duties poses a danger to others, harms society, and can ultimately lead to the degradation of the individual himself.

Now in Russia there is a need to develop a new type of professional morality, which reflects the ideology of labor activity based on development market relations. We are talking primarily about the moral ideology of the new middle class, which makes up the overwhelming majority work force in an economically developed society.

IN modern society personal qualities of an individual begin with his business characteristics, attitude towards work, level of professional suitability. All this determines the exceptional relevance of the issues that make up the content of professional ethics. True professionalism is based on such moral standards as duty, honesty, demanding of oneself and one's colleagues, and responsibility for the results of one's work.

Each type of human activity (scientific, pedagogical, artistic, etc.) corresponds certain types professional ethics.

Professional types of ethics are those specific features of professional activity that are aimed directly at a person in certain conditions of his life and activity in society. The study of types of professional ethics shows the diversity and versatility of moral relations. For each profession, certain professional moral standards acquire some special significance. Professional moral standards are rules, patterns, and procedures for internal self-regulation of an individual based on ethical ideals.

The main types of professional ethics are: medical ethics, pedagogical ethics, ethics of a scientist, actor, artist, entrepreneur, engineer etc.

Each type of professional ethics is determined by the uniqueness of professional activity and has its own specific requirements in the field of morality. For example, the ethics of a scientist presupposes, first of all, such moral qualities as scientific integrity, personal honesty, and, of course, patriotism. Judicial ethics requires honesty, justice, frankness, humanism (even towards the defendant if he is guilty), and loyalty to the law. Professional ethics in the context of military service requires strict fulfillment of official duty, courage, discipline, and devotion to the Motherland.

Introduction

Ethics can be called a science, field, knowledge, intellectual tradition, and “morality” or “morality”, using these words as synonyms, is what is studied by ethics and its subject.

It is no accident that reflections on morality turn out to be different images of morality itself. Morality is not just what it is. She rather is what should be. Morality in relation always acts as moderation; it is closer to antiquity, the ability of a person to limit himself, to impose, if necessary, a ban on his natural desires.

Morality cannot be identified with arbitrariness. She has her own logic, no less strict and obligatory than the logic natural processes. It exists in the form of law and does not allow exceptions. But this is a law that is established by the individual himself, by his free will. In morality, man is subject, in the exact words of Kant, “only to his own and nevertheless universal legislation.”

Morality and morality are interconnected. A moral rule is essentially a thought experiment designed to reveal the reciprocity and mutual acceptance of norms for subjects of communication.

ethics morals prohibition

Ethics morality and ethics

The term “ethics” comes from the ancient Greek word “ethos” (“ethos”). Initially, ethos was understood as a habitual place of living together, a house, a human dwelling, an animal’s lair, a bird’s nest. Subsequently, it began to primarily denote the stable nature of a phenomenon, custom, custom, character; Thus, in one of the fragments of Heraclitus it is said that the ethos of man is his deity. The change in meaning is instructive: it expresses the connection between a person’s social circle and his character. Starting from the words “ethos” in the meaning of character, Aristotle formed the adjective “ethical” in order to designate a special class of human qualities, which he called ethical virtues. Ethical virtues are properties of a person’s character and temperament; they are also called spiritual qualities. They differ, on the one hand, from dianoetic virtues as properties of the mind. For example, fear is a natural affect, memory is a property of the mind, and moderation, courage, generosity are properties of character. To designate the totality of ethical virtues as a special subject area of meaning and to highlight this knowledge itself as a special science, Aristotle introduced the term “ethics”.

To accurately translate Aristotle's concept of the ethical from Greek language In Latin, Cicero coined the term “moralis” (moral). He formed it from the word “mos” (mores - the Latin analogue of the Greek “ethos”, denoting character, temperament, fashion, cut of clothing, custom. Cicero, in particular, spoke about moral philosophy, understanding by it the same field of knowledge that Aristotle called ethics.In the 4th century AD, the term “moralitas” (morality) appears in Latin, which is a direct analogue of the Greek term “ethics”.

Both of these words, one of Greek and the other of Latin origin, are included in modern European languages. A number of languages have their own words denoting the same reality, which is summarized in the terms “ethics” and “morality”. This is “morality” in Russian. As far as one can judge, they repeat the history of the emergence of the terms “ethics” and “morality”: from the word “temper” (sitte) the adjective “moral” (sittlich) is formed and from it a new noun “morality” (Sittlichkeit).

In their original meaning, “ethics”, “morality”, “morality” are different words, but one term. Over time, the situation changes. In the process of cultural development, in particular, as the uniqueness of ethics as a field of knowledge is revealed, different meanings begin to be assigned to different words: ethics mainly means the corresponding branch of knowledge, science, and morality - the subject studied by it. There are also various attempts to separate the concepts of morality and morality. According to the most common of them, going back to Hegel, morality is understood as the subjective aspect of the corresponding actions, and morality is the actions themselves in their objectively expanded completeness: morality is how actions are seen by the individual in his subjective assessments, intentions, experiences of guilt, and morality - what a person’s actions actually are in the real experience of life of a family, people, state. We can distinguish a cultural and linguistic tradition that understands morality as high fundamental principles, and morality as down-to-earth, historically changing norms of behavior; in this case, for example, the commandments of God are called moral, the instructions of a school teacher are called moral.

In general, attempts to assign different substantive meanings to the words “ethics,” “morality,” and “morality” and, accordingly, give them different conceptual and terminological status have not gone beyond the scope of academic experiments. In general cultural vocabulary, all three words continue to be used interchangeably. For example, in the living Russian language, what is called ethical norms can just as rightly be called moral norms or ethical norms. In language that claims scientific rigor, significant meaning is attached mainly to the distinction between the concepts of ethics and morality (morality), but this does not fully hold up. Sometimes ethics as a field of knowledge is called moral philosophy, and the term ethics (professional ethics, business ethics) is used to denote certain moral phenomena.

Ethics should be called science, a field of knowledge, an intellectual tradition, and “morality” or “morality”, using these words as synonyms, is what is studied by ethics, its subject.

What is morality? This question is not only the initial, first in ethics; throughout the history of this science, covering about two and a half thousand years, it remained the main focus of its research interests. Different schools and thinkers give different answers to this question. There is no single, indisputable definition of morality, which is directly related to the uniqueness of this phenomenon. It is no accident that reflections on morality turn out to be different images of morality itself. Morality is more than a set of facts that can be generalized. It simultaneously acts as a task that requires, among other things, theoretical reflection for its solution. Morality is not just what it is.

Rather, it is what should be. Therefore, an adequate relationship between ethics and morality is not limited to its reflection and explanation. Ethics is also obliged to offer its own model of morality: moral philosophers in in this regard can be likened to architects, whose professional calling is to design new problems.

These definitions are largely consistent with popular views of morality. Morality appears in two interrelated, but nevertheless different differences: a) as a characteristic of a person, a totality moral qualities, virtues, for example, truthfulness, honesty, kindness; b) as a characteristic of relationships between people, a set of moral norms (demands, commandments, rules), for example, “don’t lie,” “don’t steal,” “don’t kill.”

Morality(from lat. toga lis - moral; mores - morals) is one of the ways of normative regulation of human behavior, a special form of social consciousness and a type of social relations. There are a number of definitions of morality that highlight certain of its essential properties.

Morality is one of the ways to regulate the behavior of people in society. It is a system of principles and norms that determine the nature of relations between people in accordance with the accepted in a given society concepts of good and evil, fair and unfair, worthy and unworthy. Compliance with moral requirements is ensured by the power of spiritual influence, public opinion, inner conviction, and the conscience of a person.

The peculiarity of morality is that it regulates the behavior and consciousness of people in all spheres of life (production activities, everyday life, family, interpersonal and other relationships). Morality also extends to intergroup and interstate relations.

Moral principles have universal significance, embrace all people, and consolidate the foundations of the culture of their relationships, created in the long process of historical development of society.

Every act and behavior of a person can have a variety of meanings (legal, political, aesthetic, etc.), but its moral side, moral content is assessed on a single scale. Moral norms are daily reproduced in society by the power of tradition, the power of a generally recognized and supported discipline, and public opinion. Their implementation is controlled by everyone.

Responsibility in morality is spiritual, ideal character(condemnation or approval of actions), appears in the form of moral assessments that a person must realize, internally accept and, accordingly, direct and correct his actions and behavior. Such an assessment must correspond general principles and norms, accepted by all concepts of what is due and what is not due, what is worthy and what is unworthy, etc.

Morality depends on the conditions of human existence, the essential needs of man, but is determined by the level of social and individual consciousness. Along with other forms of regulating the behavior of people in society, morality serves to harmonize the activities of many individuals, transforming them into aggregate mass activity, subject to certain social laws.

When exploring the question of the functions of morality, they distinguish regulatory, educational, cognitive, evaluative-imperative, orienting, motivational, communicative, prognostic and some other functions. Of primary interest to lawyers are such functions of morality as regulatory and educational.

The regulatory function is considered the leading function of morality. Morality guides and corrects a person’s practical activities from the point of view of taking into account the interests of other people and society. At the same time, the active influence of morality on social relations is carried out through individual behavior.

The educational function of morality is that it participates in the formation of the human personality and its self-awareness. Morality contributes to the formation of views on the purpose and meaning of life, a person’s awareness of his dignity, duty to other people and society, the need to respect the rights, personality, and dignity of others. This function is usually characterized as humanistic. It influences the regulatory and other functions of morality.

Morality is considered both as a special form of social consciousness, and as a type of social relations, and as norms of behavior operating in society that regulate human activity - moral activity.

Moral consciousness is one of the elements of morality, representing its ideal, subjective side. Moral consciousness prescribes certain behaviors and actions to people as their duty. Moral consciousness evaluates various phenomena of social reality (an act, its motives, behavior, lifestyle, etc.) from the point of view of compliance with moral requirements. This assessment is expressed in approval or condemnation, praise or blame, sympathy or dislike, love or hatred. Moral consciousness is a form of social consciousness and at the same time the area of individual consciousness of the individual. In the latter, an important place is occupied by a person’s self-esteem, associated with moral feelings (conscience, pride, shame, repentance, etc.).

Morality cannot be reduced only to moral (moral) consciousness.

Speaking against the identification of morality and moral consciousness, M. S. Strogovich wrote: “Moral consciousness is views, beliefs, ideas about good and evil, about worthy and unworthy behavior, and morality is the social norms operating in society that regulate actions and behavior people, their relationships."

Moral relations arise between people in the process of their activities that have a moral character. They differ in content, form, and method of social communication between subjects. Their content is determined by to whom and what moral responsibilities a person bears (to society as a whole; to people united by one profession; to a team; to family members, etc.), but in all cases a person ultimately finds himself in the system of moral relations both to society as a whole and to oneself as its member.

In moral relations, a person acts both as a subject and as an object of moral activity. So, since he bears responsibilities to other people, he himself is a subject in relation to society, a social group, etc., but at the same time he is an object of moral duties for others, since they must protect his interests, take care of him, etc. d.

Moral activity represents the objective side of morality. We can talk about moral activity when an act, behavior, and their motives can be assessed from the standpoint of distinguishing between good and evil, worthy and unworthy, etc. The primary element of moral activity is an act (or misdeed), since it embodies moral goals, motives or orientations . An action includes: motive, intention, purpose, action, consequences of the action. The moral consequences of an action are a person’s self-esteem and evaluation by others.

The totality of a person’s actions that have moral significance, performed by him over a relatively long period in constant or changing conditions, is usually called behavior. A person’s behavior is the only objective indicator of his moral qualities and moral character.

Moral activity characterizes only actions that are morally motivated and purposeful. The decisive thing here is the motives that guide a person, their specifically moral motives: the desire to do good, to realize a sense of duty, to achieve a certain ideal, etc.

In the structure of morality, it is customary to distinguish between the elements that form it. Morality includes moral norms, moral principles, moral ideals, moral criteria, etc.

Moral norms are social norms that regulate a person’s behavior in society, his attitude towards other people, towards society and towards himself. Their implementation is ensured by the power of public opinion, internal conviction based on the ideas accepted in a given society about good and evil, justice and injustice, virtue and vice, due and condemned.

Moral norms determine the content of behavior, how it is customary to act in a certain situation, that is, the morals inherent in a given society, social group. They differ from other norms operating in society and performing regulatory functions (economic, political, legal, aesthetic) in the way they regulate people’s actions. Morals are daily reproduced in the life of society by the power of tradition, the authority and power of a generally recognized and supported discipline, public opinion, and the conviction of members of society about proper behavior under certain conditions.

In contrast to simple customs and habits, when people act in the same way in similar situations (birthday celebrations, weddings, farewell to the army, various rituals, habit of certain work activities, etc.), moral norms are not simply fulfilled due to the established generally accepted order, but find ideological justification in a person’s ideas about proper or inappropriate behavior, both in general and in a specific life situation.

The formulation of moral norms as reasonable, appropriate and approved rules of behavior is based on real principles, ideals, concepts of good and evil, etc., operating in society.

The fulfillment of moral norms is ensured by the authority and strength of public opinion, the subject’s consciousness of what is worthy or unworthy, moral or immoral, which determines the nature of moral sanctions.

A moral norm is, in principle, designed for voluntary fulfillment. But its violation entails moral sanctions, consisting of a negative assessment and condemnation of a person’s behavior, and directed spiritual influence. They mean a moral prohibition to commit similar acts in the future, addressed both to a specific person, and to everyone around. Moral sanction reinforces the moral requirements contained in moral norms and principles.

Violation of moral norms may entail, in addition to moral sanctions, sanctions of a different kind (disciplinary or provided for by the norms of public organizations). For example, if a serviceman lied to his commander, then this dishonest act will be followed by an appropriate reaction in accordance with the degree of its severity on the basis of military regulations.

Moral norms can be expressed both in a negative, prohibitive form (for example, the Mosaic Laws - the Ten Commandments formulated in the Bible) and in a positive form (be honest, help your neighbor, respect your elders, take care of honor from a young age, etc.).

Moral principles are one of the forms of expression of moral requirements, in the most general form revealing the content of morality existing in a particular society. They express fundamental requirements concerning the moral essence of a person, the nature of relationships between people, determine the general direction of human activity and underlie private, specific norms of behavior. In this regard, they serve as criteria of morality.

If a moral norm prescribes what specific actions a person should perform and how to behave in typical situations, then the moral principle gives a person a general direction of activity.

Moral principles include such general principles of morality as humanism - recognition of man as the highest value; altruism - selfless service to one's neighbor; mercy - compassionate and active love, expressed in readiness to help everyone in need; collectivism - a conscious desire to promote the common good; rejection of individualism - the opposition of the individual to society, all sociality and egoism - preference of one's own interests to the interests of all others.

In addition to the principles that characterize the essence of a particular morality, there are so-called formal principles that relate to the methods of fulfilling moral requirements. Such, for example, are consciousness and its opposites, formalism, fetishism, fatalism, fanaticism, and dogmatism. Principles of this kind do not determine the content of specific norms of behavior, but also characterize a certain morality, showing how consciously moral requirements are fulfilled.

Moral ideals are concepts of moral consciousness in which the moral demands placed on people are expressed in the form of an image of a morally perfect personality, an idea of a person who embodies the highest moral qualities.

The moral ideal was understood differently in different time, in various societies and teachings. If Aristotle saw the moral ideal in a person who considers the highest virtue to be self-sufficient, detached from the worries and anxieties of practical activity, the contemplation of truth, then Kant characterized the moral ideal as a guide for our actions, “the divine man within us,” with whom we compare ourselves and improve, never, however, being able to become on the same level with him. The moral ideal is defined in its own way by various religious teachings, political movements, and philosophers.

The moral ideal accepted by a person indicates the ultimate goal of self-education. The moral ideal accepted by public moral consciousness determines the purpose of education and influences the content of moral principles and norms.

We can also talk about a public moral ideal as an image of a perfect society built on the requirements of the highest justice and humanism.

Among the many sources on this subject, see in particular: Drobnitsky O. G. The concept of morality. M., 1974; Marxist ethics: Tutorial for universities / Under general. ed. A. I. Titarenko. M., 1980; Anisimov S. F. Morals and behavior. M., 1985; Guseinov A. A. Introduction to Ethics. M., 1985; Ethics / Ed. A. A. Guseinova, E. L. Dubko. M., 1999; Guseinov A. A., Apresyan R. G. Ethics. M., 2000; Razin A.V. Ethics: history and theory: Textbook for universities. M., 2002.
Cm.: Arkhangelsky L. M. Course of lectures on Marxist-Leninist ethics. M., 1974. S. 37-46.
See: Philosophical Encyclopedia: In 5 volumes. M., 1964. T. 3. P. 499; Philosophical encyclopedic Dictionary. M., 1983. S. 387-388.
Problems of judicial ethics / Ed. M. S. Strogovich. M., 1974. P. 7.
See: Philosophical Encyclopedia. T. 4. P. 100; Anisimov S. F. Decree. Op.

So, a preliminary examination of three basic concepts - ethics, morality, morality - allows us to give brief definitions: ethics - the science of morality and ethics; morality - the entire sphere of moral consciousness, including commandments, norms, codes and individual moral beliefs; morality is the entire sphere of real relationships and behavior, taken in their directly interhuman content and assessed precisely from the point of view of this content.

The uniqueness of morality and ethics is that they permeate the entire life of human society and the individual. People living in society are actually only more or less connected with certain spheres of social life (science, politics, religion, law, etc.) - and this, however, does not prevent them from being full members of the human community. But no and there was not, moreover, it cannot be! - a person who would be an outsider, alien to the sphere of morality and ethics. And this is not a matter of his personal desire. A person may not know anything about this sphere, but he cannot - if he is a person - find himself outside of it.

So, morality has to do with the sphere of consciousness, and morality has to do with action. And it turns out that the connection between moral consciousness and moral behavior is far from clear-cut. On the contrary, very complex, contradictory relationships are possible here; This circumstance has long been known and enshrined in the aphorism “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

“Morality” and “morality”, based on what has already been said, are close concepts, but they form a unity, not an identity.

That is why, in contrast to the accepted definitions of ethics (“the spider of morality” or “the spider of morality”), it was proposed: “Ethics is the science of morality and ethics.”

Ethics - one of the oldest theoretical disciplines, which arose as part of philosophy during the formation of slave society. To denote the doctrine of human virtues the term "Eh." was introduced by Aristotle.

Normative ethics - an integral part of ethics, in which problems of the meaning of life, the purpose of a person, the content of a person’s moral duty are posed and solved, and certain moral principles and norms are substantiated.

Rigoristic ethics - it includes all concepts in which the fulfillment of duty is recognized as the highest moral value; Only following the dictates of duty determines a person’s behavior that is worthy from a moral point of view: there is no other goal than fulfilling duties. A typical example is the ethical system of I. Kant.

Theocentric ethics - a set of religious ethics, which, by virtue of their nature, relate moral values and norms to a supernatural being and subordinate the purpose of man on earth to it. A typical manifestation of such ethics in our culture is Christian ethics, in which the highest value

is God.

Evolutionary ethics - a direction in modern humanitarian and biological knowledge that explores the origin of morality as a result of biological evolution (ethology, sociobiology, etc.); the totality of all ethical concepts in which life is recognized as the highest moral good and which approves of all actions aimed at increasing the chances of development of the human race and helping to ensure life of the greatest stability and intensity.

Morality - the concept was introduced by Cicero (106-43 BC). Properties of morality: integrativeness, normativity, evaluativeness. Imperativeness (from Latin to command). Morality is the subject of the study of ethics; a form of social consciousness that appears in the form of norms, rules and principles that guide people in their behavior. M. regulates human behavior in all spheres of public life without exception. M. of a particular society, first of all, presupposes a certain content of behavior, the way it is customary to act, morals. M. consists of moral activity, human behavior, actions that are motivated in a special way; moral relations of people. Moral activities and relationships are reflected and consolidated in moral consciousness.

Sociology of morality is an area of sociological knowledge that studies certain types of morality that appear in different periods of history (morality of the Enlightenment period, bourgeois morality, etc.). The sociology of morality examines moral phenomena in their historical context and tries to identify the interdependence between the moral consciousness of people and their social status and living conditions. He also studies the influence of geoclimatic and demographic factors on the formation of customs and mores.

Morals and Science - problems of the relationship between morality and science are studied in different aspects. The most important are: the role of moral principles in the activities of a scientist; can the achievements of science and technology be subjected to moral diagnostics; do scientific achievements contribute to the improvement of social mores and moral self-improvement of the individual; should scientific and technological progress be restrained by moral principles, etc.

Morality Andpolicy - problems of the relationship between morality and politics are analyzed in different aspects. The most important of them are the following: whether immoral means can be used in politics to achieve a goal; can a state pursue an inhumane policy towards its citizens; in what situations morality and politics come into conflict with each other, etc.

Morality Andright - represent a set of relatively stable norms (rules, regulations) regulating the behavior of people in society. The difference is that the rules of law are written in nature, i.e. are officially proclaimed by the state (codified), and moral norms live in the individual and public consciousness. The most important difference M. and P. concerns the way in which they regulate human behavior. The implementation of legal norms is ensured, if necessary, by coercive measures (administrative, criminal and economic sanctions) with the help of a special apparatus of justice, which is carried out by officials. Moral requirements are advisory in nature. They are supported by the force of generally accepted norms, customs, public opinion or personal convictions of individuals.

Religious morality - a system of moral ideas, norms and commandments justified by religious means, closely related to doctrine, dogma and based on the idea of God.

Moral models Andpersonality patterns - a set of qualities and lines of behavior of people postulated by the accepted hierarchy of values. They represent the system by which the educational process is carried out. They always reflect the features of the era in which they arose and the social groups by which they are recognized and cultivated. They provide direction and encourage educational goals and objectives. The models contain interacting sets of qualities that characterize the ideal of a person (noble, reliable, benevolent, etc.), a good citizen (loyal to the state, country, people), a good worker (doing his job, understanding what labor discipline is , initiative, etc.), or a good member of an organization or community.

The manifestation of moral models are personal patterns that clearly demonstrate a certain value system. The same moral model may include several personal samples addressed to different social, professional and cultural communities. These can be real and fictitious characters, historical and modern. For example, saints, legendary winners, discoverers, athletes, etc. served as models.

Moral assessment - these are statements containing, in a more or less vivid form, some kind of reaction to reality in the form of approval or condemnation. Evaluation is most often expressed in linguistic form, but can also be expressed as a conventional gesture or facial expression. Moral evaluation is a kind of praise or blame in relation to actions, deeds, thoughts in the context of the evaluator’s understanding of good and evil. Unlike moral norms, which take the imperative form of a prescription or a prohibition, a moral assessment establishes the conformity or non-compliance of an act with a moral norm and thus determines the correctness or incorrectness of behavior.

Demand (moral) - the simplest element of moral relations in which the individual and society exist. In these relationships, a person submits to various forms of obligation.

Moral sanctions - forms of censure or praise that ensure that people fulfill moral standards.

Values (moral)- one of the forms of manifestation of moral relations of society. Under C. are understood:

Firstly, the moral significance, the dignity of the individual (group of persons) and his actions or the moral characteristics of social institutions;

Secondly, value concepts related to the field of moral consciousness - moral norms, principles, ideals, concepts of good and evil, justice, happiness.

Philosophical problems of nature C. studies axiology. People's actions have a certain moral significance because they affect social life, affect the interests of people, strengthen or undermine the foundations of the existing society, promote or counteract social progress. It is precisely because of the social significance of people’s actions that society regulates their behavior through moral relations, makes moral demands on people, and sets certain goals for them that they must follow. This is where morality arises in actions. C.(positive or negative): an action that meets moral requirements is good, an action that contradicts them is evil. Representations of moral consciousness are a type of spiritual C. society. In ideals, principles, concepts of good and evil, one can highlight their value side: they express people’s attitude to the phenomena of reality.

They contain, firstly, a moral requirement (a desire for something to be realized), and secondly, an assessment of existing or past phenomena from the point of view of their inherent moral significance. In addition, the concept of good is a criterion for evaluating a wide variety of human actions.

Moral choice - an act of spiritual activity of a person that precedes the making of a decision (intention), predetermining the content of a future practical action. The presence of moral choice is a distinctive feature of a moral act, which presupposes the freedom of personal decision, the ability of a person to choose between good and evil. Moral choice is expressed in giving preference to one of the possible actions when the interests of the individual and the group, society, one’s own and others’ interests collide and various moral and active requirements come into conflict

Moral norm - a simple, specific form of moral demand; acts as an element of moral relations and as a form of moral consciousness. In any society there is an objective need for people to act in the same way in certain, frequently repeated situations. This need is practically realized through N.m. The moral requirement, expressed in the form of norms, is reflected in moral consciousness in the form of corresponding rules and commandments. Moral consciousness N.m. is formulated in the form of a command equally addressed to all people, which they must strictly fulfill in a wide variety of cases. An example would be some of the “Ten Commandments” found in the Bible (“Thou shalt not kill,” “Thou shalt not steal,” “Honor thy father and mother”). However, on their own N.m. cannot serve as an exhaustive guide to moral activity. Such, for example, N.m., as “Thou shalt not kill,” cannot be applied in all cases without exception (for example, in relation to a habitual murderer who poses a danger to society, or in relation to an enemy in a military situation). In this case, one must proceed from more generalized moral ideas - principles, ideals, concepts of justice, good, evil, etc. There are positive and negative N.m. Positive N.m. prescribe the necessary line of behavior, encourage a certain kind of action (“Be truthful”, “Be honest”). Negative N.m. prohibit any actions, limit the choice of action (“Do not steal”, “Do not kill”).

Moral culture of the individual - the degree of human perception of the moral consciousness and culture of society; an indicator of how deeply and organically the requirements of morality are embodied in a person’s actions due to the influence of society and self-education. N.k.l. acts as a complex program, including the acquired experience of humanity, which helps to act morally in traditional situations, as well as creative elements of consciousness - moral reason, intuition, which contribute to making moral decisions in problem situations.

Moral theology - a theological discipline in Christianity, designed to justify the purpose of Christian morality as a necessary condition for achieving salvation, to show its advantage over other ethical systems.

Moral - one of the main forms of normative regulation of human actions, which is based on the strength of an established and generally accepted order, habits and the cumulative impact on the individual and the people around her. Moral norms are fixed by a system of values, ideals, ideas about good and evil, about the duty and purpose of a person, accepted in a given society. Hegel distinguished morality from morality, the first has an objective nature, is the “substance of the life of society”, the second regulates individual human behavior. Morality is the basis of morality.

Religion and Morality - the historical role of religious morality and morality in the system of social regulation of human life and activity is obvious. Thus, Christianity transformed the inner world of man, the archetype of his psyche, providing him with the highest religious freedom and proclaiming the salvation of the soul as the goal and meaning of individual human life. The moral criterion has become the main one in assessing a person and his deeds. It is from a moral position that righteousness and unrighteousness are assessed in the Christian consciousness; labor, property, wealth, poverty, etc. Creative, conscientious work is recognized as righteous. Unrighteous, worthy of condemnation - contempt for work. One of the three (Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Protestantism) Christian branches, Protestantism for the first time elevates everyday activities to the level of the highest religious values. In this regard, intense activity, moral discipline, industry, honest work and righteously accumulated wealth are the components of capitalism in Europe.

Universality in morality - studies that study the living conditions of people and forms of human community common to all historical eras. This mainly concerns requirements related to the simplest forms of relationships between people: do not kill, do not steal, help each other in difficulties, etc. At all times, in one way or another, cruelty, greed, cowardice, hypocrisy, treachery, betrayal, slander, envy were condemned and courage, honesty, courage, self-control, heroism, sacrifice, etc. were encouraged.

Grademoral - approval or condemnation by moral consciousness of various phenomena of social reality, in which it establishes the conformity or non-compliance of an action (as well as motive or behavior in general), personality traits, social way of life with certain moral requirements.

Psychology of morality - studies the mental sources of determining moral actions, studies a person’s reaction to his own actions and to the actions of other people. It covers the motives of behavior, the role of mental mechanisms in moral choice, issues related to the formation of a sense of responsibility, as well as how the psyche predetermines moral approval or condemnation, the moral inclinations of people towards certain values, assessments and self-esteem.

Professional morals - a historically established set of moral precepts, norms, commandments, codes on the proper behavior of representatives of certain professions. P.m. is part of general morality and has certain specifics in specific professional areas.

Professional honor - concern for the authority of one’s profession in society.

Professional ethics - this is a type of labor morality of society that appears to the individual in the form of norms, regulations, rules of behavior, assessments of the moral character of representatives of various professions, especially those professions whose subject of labor is a person or social groups.

Professional ethics of employees of the State Fire Service - is the science of applying general norms and principles of morality in their activities and everyday behavior.

CONCLUSION

In the presented lecture, we examined a number of important issues: what is ethics, what are its main categories, what is their role in shaping a person’s worldview, in his adaptation to the world around him, what are the points of interaction between ethics and other fundamental areas of human activity, with other humanitarian disciplines - pedagogy , sociology, ecology. We have tried to display the available philosophical justifications for the answers to these questions and to give an idea of the psychological foundation of these answers.

The increasing influence of man on the world around him has led to the fact that the sphere of morality has gone beyond the boundaries of interhuman relations defined by it since the time of Aristotle. Environmental ethics and space ethics are clear evidence of this. The development in our days of bioethics and euthanasia, attention to the problems of life and death have convincingly shown the relativity and boundaries of social relations. Influencing the nature around him, a person at the same time studies and gets to know himself, opening previously unknown abysses - this is the deep reason for expanding the sphere of morality and morality

Moral ethics. General issues of human morality and ethics

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Similar documents

Introduction

Ethics morality and ethics