Ethics as a practical philosophy: subject, structure, modern problems and tasks. Definition of ethics

Ethics, its subject and structure

Ethics- the oldest theoretical discipline that emerged as an integral part of philosophy, the object of study of which is the phenomenon of morality. The spiritual source of philosophy and ethics is mythology (pre-philosophy), within which the comprehension of moral problems occurs at the level of everyday consciousness.

With the formalization of philosophical knowledge, the origin of which takes place in the era of the formation of a class society and the division of material and spiritual labor, within its framework, there is a selection of issues related to moral issues (primarily questions about a person’s place in this world and the meaning of his being), which subsequently became object of study of science, called "ethics". The first philosophical teachings contain the germ of ethical thought (Heraclitus, Thales, Democritus, etc.). As a science, ethics arises in the 4th century BC, the founder of which is Aristotle, who created the first ethical work "Ethics to Nicomachus", which is a systematization of ethical knowledge. Aristotle gave a name to this science.

The subject and features of ethics as a science. The subject of ethics as a science is to find out the origin, essence and specifics of morality, the patterns of its historical development, the analysis of ethical systems and the study of applied problems of ethics (professional ethics, ethics of family and marriage relations, ethics of communication, etiquette culture, etc.). Ethics as a science has its own characteristics associated with the specifics of the object it studies - morality. These features are:

1) the empirical nature of ethics: it is associated with the need to describe by it real moral relations (existing mores).

2) the theoretical nature of ethics: associated with the task of clarifying the issues of the origin, essence and specifics of morality.

3) the normativity of ethics: due to the fact that, explaining morality, raising ordinary moral consciousness to a higher level of generalization, systematizing everyday knowledge about morality, ethics acts as an element of morality itself, performs a value-orienting function, thereby answering questions about how a person should act.

Classification of the main directions of ethics:

There are various options for classifying the areas of ethics. One of the main classification criteria is understanding the essence of morality, its source. From this point of view, three main directions can be outlined in the history of ethics:

1) naturalistic, in which the essence of morality, its ideals, as well as the moral qualities of the individual are explained by the universal laws of nature as a whole, the cosmos (cosmocentrism) or the laws of the natural (biopsychic) ​​nature of man (anthropocentrism);

2) socio-historical, deriving the content of moral relations and imperatives from the laws of the historical development of society;

3) idealistic, interpreting morality as a manifestation, realization in the human community of any spiritual principle:

Divine (religious-idealistic ethics);

An objective spiritual principle, i.e. ideas, concepts of spiritual culture (objective-idealistic ethics);

Subjective spirit, spiritual creativity of the subject (subjective-idealistic ethics).

The main functions of ethics:

1) cognitive function- teaches people to see the actions of other individuals in terms of moral values.

2) Methodological function- under the method itself general view is understood as such knowledge and the system of actions based on it, with the help of which new knowledge can be obtained.

3) value orientation- morality allows you to highlight certain guidelines for each individual. This function does not carry any practical significance, however, it gives a person ideas about his purpose and the meaning of life. It is likely that the individual will not think about this on a daily basis, but in difficult times, the thought “why do I live?” And the value-oriented function allows you to find the answer to the question.

4) Normative evaluation function- evaluates the development of reality by a person from the position of good and evil.

5) Socio-practical function- morality through a value approach to human activity harmonizes and optimizes relationships between people based on common ideals, principles of behavior, etc.

In general, all these functions are closely interconnected and determine the richness and richness of a person's spiritual life.

The unity of human existence is manifested in the close connection between the various forms of social consciousness that reflect it - morality, art, politics, religion, etc.

Topic 2 Ethics and morality

Ethics is a philosophical science, the subject of which is morality and morality. This is the doctrine of the essence of morality, its structure, functions, laws, its historical development and role in public life. The term "ethics" is used in the sense of a system of norms of moral behavior of a person, a social or professional group, and as a way of evaluating human actions (approval, condemnation). Ethics gives an answer to the question of how to live correctly. Ethics plays the role of a "social regulator" in the behavior and relationships between people. Ethics tries to show a person a general direction in life.

Morality- this is a specific way of spiritual and practical development of the world, which implies a special value-imperative attitude towards it. Morality is the individual and social forms of human relations based on the distinction between good and evil. Morality, as a subject of study of ethics, manifests itself in specific human relationships. The essence of morality is to ensure a balance of personal and public good, regulating and ordering the behavior of people in a team.

Moral- internal, spiritual qualities that guide a person; ethical norms, rules of conduct determined by these qualities. In this definition, it comes down to certain spiritual qualities of a person, as well as to certain internal norms and principles of behavior. But does not cover everything as a moral. Morality, as a rule, is focused on the external evaluating subject (other people, society, church, etc.). Morality is more focused on the inner world of a person and his own beliefs. Morality is a value structure of consciousness, a way of regulating human actions in all spheres of life, including work, life and attitude towards the environment.

Etymologically, the terms "ethics", "morality" and "morality" arose in different languages and at different times, but meaning a single concept - "temper", "custom". In the course of using these terms, the word "ethics" began to denote the science of morality and morality, and the words "morality" and "morality" began to denote the subject of study of ethics as a science. In ordinary usage, these three words can be used as identical. For example, they talk about the ethics of a teacher, meaning his morality, that is, the fulfillment by him of certain moral requirements and norms. Instead of the expression "moral norms" the expression "ethical norms" is used.

In the most general terms, in modern ethics it is customary to distinguish between theoretical and applied parts. The theoretical area of ​​ethical knowledge combines all issues related to the analysis of the essence, the specifics of the functions of morality, its genesis, role and significance in society. Applied ethics took shape in the last third of the 20th century. The beginning was laid by "bioethics", which took shape as a desire to provide people with decent living conditions. In 1988, one of the first books, Applied Ethics and ethical theory". The purpose and objectives of the articles in the collection were to explore the ethical issues raised by modern technological progress.

Applied ethics is understood as a section, a direction in which generally significant problems that are manifested in certain areas of social practice are considered. Applied ethics studies the moral aspects, the value content of social relations in which a person is included in the process of a particular type of activity, its sociocultural conditions. In Western ethical thought, applied ethics is viewed ambiguously. Some (P. Singer) consider it as a substantive part of moral philosophy. Others see it as an application of classical normative ethical theories to practical moral problems.

According to the level of generalization of the totality of ethical knowledge, it is customary to distinguish:

1) descriptive ethics, which describes the history of ethical teachings, the genesis and evolution of morality;

2) metaethics (philosophy of morals), which explores the essence of morality, its basic principles and categories, structure, functions and patterns of manifestation through a formal logical analysis of the language of morality;

3) normative ethics, within which the substantiation of moral principles and norms takes place, which act as a theoretical development and addition to the moral consciousness of society and the individual;

4) applied ethics, designed to develop common approaches to the implementation of moral norms and principles in social practice.

Applied ethics includes many areas of application: management ethics, business ethics, business ethics, professional ethics. Traditionally, ethics is understood as a theoretical, philosophical science about morality, morality (O. G. Drobnitsky, V. G. Ivanov), about human virtues (Aristotle), as axiology - the doctrine of the meaning and values ​​of life (N. A. Berdyaev), as a set of norms, principles, ideals, values ​​realized in the moral experience of the subject (A. A. Guseinov), as a system of universal and specific moral requirements and norms of behavior that regulate social life (A. Ya. Kibanov). For many centuries, ethics has been formed into a scientifically based system of concepts, categories, laws, and has become a philosophy of understanding the moral life of society.

Ethics authoritarian and humanistic. authoritarian ethics can be distinguished from humanistic by two criteria - formal and material. Formally, authoritarian ethics denies a person's ability to know what is good and what is bad; here the norm is always set by an authority above the individual. Such a system is based not on reason and knowledge, but on reverent fear of authority and a subjective feeling of weakness and dependence; on the refusal of decisions, giving authority the right to make them, guided by its magical power; its decisions cannot and should not be questioned. Materially, or in terms of content, authoritarian ethics answers the question of what is good and what is bad, proceeding primarily from the interests of authority, and not the interests of the subject; it is exploitative, although the subject may derive significant mental or material benefits from it.

humanistic ethics, although it is the opposite of authoritarian, can also be characterized by formal and material criteria. Formally, it is based on the principle that only man himself can determine the criterion of virtue and sin, and not the authority transcendent to him. Materially, it is based on the principle that “good” is what is good for a person, and “evil” is what harms a person; the only criterion for ethical evaluation is the well-being of the individual.

Topic 3. Ethical thought of the ancient world

Ethical views of ancient India. The middle of the 1st millennium BC is the time of the emergence of the ethical and philosophical worldview in Ancient India, the content of which was influenced by a number of sociocultural factors:

1) the caste-caste structure of ancient Indian society (the main castes are Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras);

2) the continuity of the cultural tradition, which contributed to the strong mythological coloring and religious-idealistic orientation of the ethical and philosophical knowledge of Ancient India, the main ideas of which were formed under strong influence the main source of knowledge of the religion of Brahminism ("Vedas").

"Vedas" - a collection of religious texts, consisting of four parts, the main of which is the Rig Veda. The idea of ​​an impersonal universal force, subordinating human life to a higher spiritual principle, contained in the texts of the Rig Veda, becomes dominant in all philosophical reflections of Ancient India. On the basis of the Vedas, commentary literature arose a little later (Brahmanas, Aranyakas, Upanishads), the authors of which, trying to decipher complex symbolic texts, created the basis for philosophical interpretation and programmed the further development of ancient Indian philosophy.

The main ethical and philosophical thoughts were outlined in the Upanishads, the main ideas of which boiled down to the following: the world (man, nature, cosmos) is ruled by a single spiritual principle (law), the knowledge of which is available to man as a special being with spirituality. The meaning of human life lies in the knowledge of the highest spiritual law, which can be comprehended by renouncing maya, i.e. liberated as much as possible from the influence of physicality, having risen above the material world with the aim of spiritual perfection. Therefore, the goal of a person is to stop rebirth, to be free from suffering (this can be achieved by getting rid of dependence on one's body, which requires pleasure, wealth, etc.) and gaining the state of nirvana (internal freedom from the outside world).

The value of the Upanishads is great, because they program the further development of the philosophical thought of ancient India, the main directions of which can be divided into orthodox ("astika"), i.e. guided by the authority of the Vedas and unorthodox ("nastika"), i.e. criticizing the main provisions of the Vedic literature.

Yoga- an unorthodox direction, the ideas of which are based on the practical application of certain provisions of the Upanishads by developing a system of psychophysiological exercises, the development of which contributes to the comprehension of the state of nirvana. This is an eight-step system of separating the body from the soul, which helps to free the mind from false ideas. The eightfold means of yoga are divided into external and internal. The external ones are:

1) abstinence, self-restraint, the ability to be content with little, overcoming all vicious aspirations, etc.;

2) observance of hygiene rules (clean body and food) and the development of good feelings (friendliness, etc.);

3) body discipline (asana) - skill long time keep your body immobile;

4) breathing discipline (pranayama) - the ability to hold your breath;

5) discipline of feelings - the ability to control your feelings with the help of the mind.

Internal steps:

6) discipline of attention - the ability to focus for a long time on one specific object (hard to distinguish from the background);

7) discipline of reflection - the ability to mentally contemplate an object for a long time;

8) deep concentration, in which there is a separation of the spiritual from the bodily (nirvana). The unorthodox direction is represented by such schools as Buddhism and Jainism.

Buddhism- an unorthodox philosophical trend, the founder of which is considered to be Prince Gautama (later Buddha - "enlightened"), who at one time formulated four truths that form the basis of Buddhist teachings:

1) life is full of suffering;

2) the cause of suffering is the thirst for the fullness of life;

3) you can stop suffering by reaching the state of nirvana;

4) there is a path leading to this goal ("the eightfold path of salvation"), which consists in mastering the eight steps of moral perfection. The Eightfold Path is a kind of program spiritual cleansing, which includes:

1) correct views, involving deep understanding and knowledge of the four truths;

2) renunciation of attachment to the world, bad intentions, enmity towards people;

3) refraining from lies, slander, cruel words, frivolous conversations;

4) refusal to destroy the living;

5) honest work;

6) eradication of bad thoughts;

7) non-deification of everything unworthy;

8) the state of perfect wisdom (nirvana).

Jainism- an unorthodox doctrine that was in opposition to traditional Brahmanism. The founder of Jainism is Vardhamana, whom his followers called Mahavira ("great hero") or Jina ("winner"). Jainism claims that the world is material, not created by anyone, therefore it is eternal and infinite in space (in Jainism, as well as in Buddhism, there is no idea of ​​God as the creator of the world). All beings of the world are endowed with a soul, and the differences between them are in " quantitative ratio"souls and matter. The soul of a person, weighed down by matter, is drawn into the cycle of samsara, being a source of suffering.

The goal of Jainism is the liberation of the soul from any dependence on the material world, the implementation of which is determined by the "three jewels": "correct faith" (in the teacher's truth), "correct knowledge" (insight into the essence of his teaching), "correct behavior" (its implementation in perfection is available only to monks). "Right behavior" is concluded in the fulfillment of the "five great vows":

1) non-damage to any life ("ahinsa"), which is based on the idea of ​​the universal soul of the world, which prohibits "harming the soul" (as a result of this, in Jainism there is a ban on farming, fishing, hunting, etc.);

2) refraining from lying (lying is a kind of harm to life);

3) refusal to steal;

4) refraining from self-indulgence (renunciation of marriage, of any carnal and spiritual pleasures, of owning property);

5) abstinence from all attachments to the world (this is physical and spiritual asceticism brought to the point of absurdity, which required the use of various methods of mortification of the flesh, which amounted to prolonged fasting, testing by heat, a vow of silence, etc.).

Ethical Views of Ancient China. The period from the 6th to the 3rd century. BC. is the heyday of ethical and philosophical knowledge in ancient China, coinciding with the reign of the Zhou dynasty (XI-III centuries BC).

The existence of an administrative political system and the need for its rational structure contributed to the politicization of ancient Chinese philosophical thought (philosophy was subordinated to political practice);

Ritualism, as one of the characteristic features of the spiritual development of ancient Chinese society, had a noticeable influence on the ethical views of this country;

The revival of the cult of ancestors, the existence of the practice of divination contributed to the emergence of the "Book of Changes" ("I-ching"), the texts of which contributed to the formation of the conceptual apparatus of ancient Chinese philosophy.

Confucianism- an ancient Chinese philosophical school, the founder of which is Kung Fu-tzu (551-479 BC). The main concept of his teaching is the concept of "dao", borrowed from the "Book of Changes" and containing the meaning of life orientation of a person, to comprehend which Confucius used the concepts of "ren", "xiao" and "li". Following the principles of behavior embedded in these concepts helps a person to correspond to the "tao" as the "correct way of life."

"Ren" (in the translation of humanity, philanthropy) is a moral principle of behavior that determines the relationship between people in society and the family. Compliance with "jen" is the guidance in one's life of the "golden rule" of morality: "Do not do to others what you do not wish for yourself."

"Li" is the principle of moral behavior, which is a manifestation of philanthropy and requires the indispensable restraint of oneself with the help of the rules of etiquette (ritual, ceremonies). demanded strict obedience to superiors on the social ladder.

Taoism- a philosophical doctrine that is essentially the antipode of Confucianism. The creator of Taoism is considered to be a semi-legendary person named Laozi (translated meaning "old child"). "Tao" is primary in relation to a person, so he must lead a life that corresponds to this natural law. The main principle of Taoist behavior is the principle of "wu - wei" ("non-action"), which calls on a person to abandon vigorous activity directed against "naturalness", against a change in the natural order, dictating a person to improve the "tao" within himself, striving for selflessness, the ability to be content small.

Topic 4. Ethics of the Middle Ages

The ethics of the Middle Ages represented morality as an impersonal and transpersonal phenomenon. Moral requirements in it act as the commandments of God. Moral norms in this ethics are unconditional, absolute, and act as the only criterion for the moral significance of an individual's behavior. They are in principle hostility to earthly values: At the same time, Christianity gave a moral and aesthetic ideal to humanity in the form of a man-Christ, thereby giving a person a high lesson in morality.

Religious morality speaks of a universal community based on love for God, and is purely spiritual. Medieval ethical thinking is a denial of ancient moral philosophy. The idea of ​​God as a moral absolute sets rigid boundaries for the interpretation of all moral issues: human life and the values ​​of this life acquire meaning only in relation to divine legislation; God acts as an objective, unconditional, the only true source of morality. The center of the Christian ethical concept is the idea of ​​love "to God. Love is understood as a universal principle of morality (the moral attitude towards one's neighbor stems from it); allows one to give morality a universal status; sanctifies everything that exists. From the idea of ​​love for God, a new (unknown to antiquity) virtue is born - mercy, which involves forgiveness of offenses, readiness for compassion and active help to those who suffer. Against the background of the idea of ​​love, the "golden rule" of morality gets its expression: people have done to you, so do you to them."

Unlike stoicism, strong personality capable of finding everything within itself, Christianity is addressed to the "poor in spirit", to the "needy and burdened", to all those who need an external point of support. Christian morality offers consolation to the desperate - redemption of suffering and eternal bliss in the other world. The omnipotence of religion finds various forms of expression in medieval philosophizing. The idea of ​​subordinating morality to religion is most clearly reflected in the work of Augustine the Blessed (354-430 AD). The affirmation of God as the only source and criterion of morality; interpretation of evil in the context of the ineradicable sinfulness of man, which prompts him to deviate from divine prescriptions; the negative significance of activity and the discrediting of the moral usefulness of the individual - these are the foundations of the ethical views of one of the most significant representatives of the era of patristics. Augustine's ethics showed that "the principle that brings the origins and goals of moral behavior beyond the limits of the individual is just as one-sided as the principle that completely closes them to the individual."

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). Based on the ethics of Aristotle, comprehending it in the context of Christian doctrine, Thomas tried to synthesize morality into religion. Structurally harmonious and very ingenious ethics of Thomas Aquinas, nevertheless internally deeply contradictory, which is the result of the original installation. In fact, all the ethical constructions of Thomas refute his intention and prove the opposite - the impossibility of the harmony of religion and morality, the union of which can only be affirmed through subordination, and not equality.

Spiritual opposition in the Middle Ages tried to counter the official ethical doctrine with a set of ideas based on subjectivism. In this vein, the German mystic Meister Eckhart (1260-1328), who sought to prove the significance of individual moral choice, undertakes his studies of the state of the human soul. The inclination towards the individualization of morality is also characteristic of Pierre Abelard (1079-1142), who defended the role of reason and inner conviction in the moral being of a person, who affirmed conscience as the highest moral criterion. Such ideas were not only a protest against the absolutization of divine sanction in morality, but also a kind of anticipation of the subsequent fate of ethical consciousness at a new stage in history.

Topic 5. Ethical thought of renaissance and modern times

During the Renaissance (14-16 centuries) geocentric worldview orientation in Europe. culture is replaced by the anthropocenter. Humanism is proclaimed the system-forming principle in philosophy and ethics. However, the Renaissance interpretation of this idea differs both from Christian humanism and from modern ideas about humanity. The thinkers of that era implied that:

A person must express himself in creativity, which makes him similar to God the Creator;

A person in moral behavior should be guided by reason, which makes him similar to God - the highest Reason,

With the help of reason, a person can substantiate moral values ​​himself and be responsible for the moral meaning of his activity;

Morality regulates the behavior of a person among people, and not the relationship of a person and God;

The task of the individual is to maximize the expression of his human essence, thus, humanism is interpreted as the principle of a person's relationship to himself, his creative abilities;

Earthly pleasures have a moral justification.

The principle of humanism in the Renaissance was the basis for the liberation of the human person, a prerequisite for the formation of its moral autonomy. However, the specific interpretation of humanism became the source of some unbridled morals in this period.

The ethics of modern times seeks to comprehend morality both as an objective law and as a subjective-personal phenomenon. She is trying to create a system, to generalize what has been done before. This is due to the development of natural science, which gave rise to the conviction that an objective view of things can be extended to morality. Ethics can acquire scientific rigor and certainty if it borrows the methods of the natural sciences - physics and geometry. Otherwise, it will remain the subject of ordinary consciousness.

The idea of ​​the sovereignty of the moral subject, on which the spiritual opposition was based in the Middle Ages, becomes central, and reason acts as a universal means of its assertion, which also makes it possible to explain the general obligatory nature of morality.

In understanding the moral nature of man, philosophers were divided into two directions. Some of them (N. Machiavelli, T. Hobbes) believed that human nature is inherently corrupted; others (T. Mor, J. J. Rousseau, K. Helvetius) considered her kind. However, both those and others were unanimous in one thing - man is an egoistic being. Only the first regarded egoism as an expression of its natural nature, while the latter saw its cause in the historical conditions, the unreasonable organization of society.

According to Hobbes, morality, together with law, is a prerequisite for a person's exit from the "state of nature", i.e. pre-state. Nature has created humans to be the same mentally and physically. Equality of ability gives rise to equality of hopes for achieving goals. Since different individuals strive for the possession of the same things, mistrust arises between them and, as a result, war. There are three reasons for war in nature: rivalry, distrust, a thirst for glory, which force people to attack in the name of profit, security and considerations of honor. Thus, Hobbes understands the state of nature as a war of all against all, as an unrestrained play of egoistic inclinations. Egoism permeates the whole everyday life of the individual. The way out was found thanks to the basic law of nature - people should, by all possible means, strive for peace, and for the sake of peace, give up the "original right to things." In this sense, morality is directly related to legal laws, when individuals, by contract, by reasonable agreement, alienate some of the original rights in order to preserve society. According to Hobbes, morality is inconceivable outside of society and the state, which provide a criterion for distinguishing virtue from vice: morality acts as a set of norms designed to bring the actions of individuals under a common denominator. In this sense, morality is inextricably linked with law, it practically dissolves in law, because the legal system, through the system of rewards and punishments, is called upon to translate moral truths into the plan of individual behavior.

A different understanding of morality is present in the Dutch thinker B. Spinoza, who does not associate morality with politics and the state, but looks for them in human nature. According to the author of the Ethics, the essential feature of a person is the desire for self-preservation, which is the basis of human virtue. Benefit, calculation, benefit - that's what constitutes driving force human action. "Calculation of profit" constitutes "the lever and vital nerve of all human action." What is just is what is necessary to maintain and increase one's benefit, one's property. An individual protects someone else's interest insofar as it corresponds to his own interest. In a word, good is identical with the benefit of a person, and evil is that which prevents the achievement of personal benefit. But the egoism that drives behavior becomes moral only as rational egoism.

Virtue in its specific content is revealed as knowledge. The growth of a person's cognitive abilities, his ability to develop from the lower levels of knowledge to the higher ones acts as a process of moral improvement. It is knowledge that in Spinoza's ethics is the highest virtue, the highest, and the ultimate moral goal. The moral value of actions depends on how much they are based on reason, on correct knowledge about the world.

P. Holbach (1723-1789) and K. A. Helvetius (1715-1771) interpreted a person in a psychophysiological key ("man is a purely physical being" - Holbach). Overcoming his natural self-love, a person (as a rational subject capable of self-government) can and must become a "reasonable egoist", i.e. correctly understand their interests and be guided by the "compass of public benefit" for their implementation. Morality, which proposes a setting for the public good, turns out to be useful to the individual, since it allows him to realize his interest. ("Virtue is nothing but the benefit of people united in society" - Holbach). The guarantee of harmony between the personal and the general is a "reasonable society", whose legislation contributes to the implementation of human naturalness. The social predestination of such a position, connected with the affirmation of the spirit of bourgeois relations, is quite obvious. As for the theoretical foundations of the ethical research of materialists, here they make a methodological mistake, constantly reproduced in modern times: “Deriving, as it seems to them, a certain moral position from natural philosophy, they actually project their moral outlook on the structure of the universe, on the eternal human nature."

The ethical ideas of the French materialists, which contained a lot fruitful ideas, are limited by the naturalistic approach to morality. The ethical consciousness of the naturalistic type does not go beyond a logical circle: morality is built on value premises that themselves need to be proven. This "naturalistic error" was first convincingly described by I. Kant (although the term itself is of a later origin), offering a different vision of morality.

It is possible that it was precisely this circumstance that forced L. Feuerbach (1804-1872) to abandon speculative philosophy and turn to the natural immediacy of man. However, the naturalistic tradition, with which Feuerbach connects his hopes for the creation of a "life", concrete, effective ethics, has probably already exhausted its constructive possibilities, therefore Feuerbach's plan is not adequately implemented, but takes the form of preaching a morality based on love and rather indefinite in terms of content.

The originality of Feuerbach's ethical views is associated not only with the positive he proposed (the ethics of "tuism", the altruistic relationship between "I" and "you"), but also with a voluminous criticism of religious and idealistic ethics, a conviction in the priority of materialistic orientation in ethical research. You can find a lot of interesting ideas in him regarding individual ethical problems (arguments about egoism, including the features of group egoism, descriptions of the moral significance of love, etc.). Nevertheless, Feuerbach failed to offer a more constructive, in comparison with idealistic ethics, version of the harmonization of what is and what should be, the ideal, and reality.

Topic 6. Ethical views of modern times

In the development of European ethics, as well as philosophy in general, after Kant, Hegel and Feuerbach, a new stage has begun, which is most often called postclassical. It is characterized by at least two common features. Firstly, antinormativeism, understood as a rejection of independent and universally significant programs for the moral improvement of a person; it can also be called contextualism, meaning that in the knowledge of morality, the emphasis has shifted from general principles (universal principles) to particular, objective incarnations. Secondly, the new disposition of ethics in relation to morality as its subject. From a theory that legitimizes (clarifies, generalizes and continues) moral consciousness, ethics has become an instance that exposes and discredits it; it is no longer so much a theory of morality as its criticism. These features indicate a general trend present in various ethical teachings, a brief outline of which will be given in the second chapter of this section. But first, let us consider the teachings that embodied the break with the ethical classics of modern times.

Schopenhauer interprets human life as a continuous struggle between compassion, on the one hand, and the forces of egoism and malice, on the other: the latter prevail, although they are rooted in inauthentic being. The evil-egoistic forces in man are so great that the whole culture, in fact, performs the function of curbing and disguising them. Etiquette rules of politeness are nothing more than an attempt to hide the disgusting bestial appearance of a person under a fine mask.

First of all, it should be noted that the philosopher stands on the point of view of individual ethics, denying any moral value behind the society. He does not recognize the historical and social dimensions of morality, in whatever religious, national, political or other forms they may appear. Among the innumerable ills that befall man, one of the greatest misfortunes is that he is compelled to live in society; it is in society that selfishness becomes malice, natural inclinations acquire a sophisticated form that makes even more illusory the possibility of their satisfaction.

The fundamentally personal (more precisely, non-social) orientation of Schopenhauer's ethics turns into anti-normative. The ethical thought of modern times, considered in its main trend, has always been associated with legal consciousness and was primarily an ethics of abstract principles. Schopenhauer rebels against the rule of laws and norms over individuals. He does not accept Kant's categorical imperative, as well as all those philosophical foundations that lead to it. According to Schopenhauer, Kant borrowed the categorical form of his ethics from theological morality. He not only rejects a certain moral law, but calls into question the very rights of the legislative authority - the rights of reason.

Significantly different realities are hidden behind the word "morality", and therefore a more rigorous definition of the subject of analysis is required. Speaking about the morality that has spread in Europe and is so hated by him, Nietzsche emphasizes that this is “only one kind of human morality, besides which, before and after which many others are possible, primarily higher “morals.” There are many different moralities, the most common and the most important difference between them is that they are divided into two types: master morality and slave morality.

Nietzsche's non-moral morality is fully moral in terms of its role, place, and functions in human life. It can even be considered morality to a greater extent than the slavish morality of compassion and love for one's neighbor. It differs from the latter in at least two important functional features: a) it is organic to man; b) overcomes the hopelessness of the confrontation between good and evil. Let's briefly consider these features.

Marxism is a set of teachings that claim to be an integral worldview and offer a social reform program for the industrial era; it was developed by the German thinker and revolutionary K. Marx (1818-1883) in collaboration with his compatriot F. Engels (1820-1895), was developed in the works of their followers, among which V.I. Lenin. In Marxism, everything is focused on the struggle for communism as a bright future devoid of social antagonisms, the onset of which is associated with the revolutionary liberation struggle of the proletariat.

From the point of view of the relation to ethics and morality, the following forms (stages) can be distinguished in it: early Marx, classical Marxism, Engelsism (the term is not in circulation and was adopted to denote the new emphasis made by F. Engels in the course of systematizing Marxism as during the life of K Marx, and especially after his death), ethical socialism, Kautskyism, Leninism, neo-Marxism, Soviet ethics.

The life choice of K. Marx, who made him a communist revolutionary, as evidenced by the gymnasium essay "Reflections of a young man when choosing a profession" (1835), was largely stimulated by the pathos of moral self-improvement and heroic service to humanity. Moral motivation is felt in his work and actions throughout his life, but especially in early period. The position of the early Marx, most fully expressed in the "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844", is characterized by a humanistic criticism of capitalism, carried out from anthropological positions. Marx sees the deep basis of social antagonisms in the alienation of labor, which acts as the alienation of the products of labor, labor itself, the generic essence of man, and, as a result, as the alienation of man from man. He understands communism as "humanism mediated with itself through the removal of private property", "genuine appropriation of human essence by man himself and for man." In his analysis of capitalism and description of communism, moral assessments, motives and goals play an important role.

Classical Marxism, embracing the views and teachings of the mature Marx, above all materialistic understanding history and the doctrine of the world-historical role of the proletariat, is characterized by a radical denial of morality and ethics in their historically established forms.

Marx agrees with the previous philosophical ethics in its critical part, in a negative assessment of the mores existing in society, real forms of behavior, but unlike it, he does not believe that the imperfect world is once and for all a given and in principle unchanged set of objects, the shortcomings of which can be compensated only internal self-improvement or the hope of an afterlife. He understands being differently - as a social practice that can be transformed by human standards.

K. Marx embodied the idea of ​​moral transformation of reality in the doctrine of communism. Here he encountered the most difficult (until now unsolved) problem of the subjectivity of morality. In the language of K. Marx, it sounded like this: how can imperfect people build a perfect society, or how to educate the educator himself? The answer was that the revolutionary transforming and at the same time the morally purifying force of history would be the proletariat. The real state of the proletariat (its morals, intellectual and even physical development), which Marx and Engels assessed quite soberly, gave no grounds for such a conclusion. However, it was assumed that when it came to the revolution, along with the circumstances, people would also change, the proletariat from the class "in itself" would become the class "for itself", cleansed of all the "abomination of the old system", in a word, there would be some miraculous transformation of Cinderella into princess.

Topic 7. Ethics at the turn of the 20th - 21st centuries

In the XX century. with the greatest completeness, the essence of humanism was formulated by Albert Schweitzer (1875 - 1965). He believed that ethics is the "soul of culture" and is the main means of possible overcoming the spiritual crisis in the conditions of technogenic civilization. Schweitzer connects the degradation of modern society with the isolation of culture from its ethical foundation, excessive material concern. According to Schweitzer, the beginning of human existence is the universal desire to live, which asserts: “I am the life that wants to live among the life that wants to live.” From this follows the main ethical principle - "reverence for life." He also acts as a criterion for distinguishing between good and evil: everything that preserves, elevates life, is good; everything that harms her is evil. Throughout his life, A. Schweitzer showed an example of humanism in practice: he treated the poor in Africa, opposed the use of atomic weapons, was an opponent of fascism, racism and other forms of misanthropic ideology.

The principle of respect for life, developed by Schweitzer, is characterized by three points: first, this principle is comprehensive. Schweitzer does not consider reverence for life to be one of the principles, even one of the most important. He believes that this is the only principle underlying morality. Schweitzer believes that even love and compassion, although these are extremely important concepts, are only an integral part of the concept of reverence for life. Compassion, which is an interest in the suffering of a living being, is too narrow a concept to represent the whole essence of ethics. The ethics of reverence for life also considers the feelings of living beings, the conditions of their existence, the joys of a living being, his desire to live and the desire for self-improvement.

Secondly, this principle is universal. Schweitzer believes that the principle of reverence for life applies to all forms of life: people, animals, insects, plants. The ethical person does not ask to what extent a being is sympathetic or valuable, or to what extent he is capable of feeling. "Life as such is sacred to him," says Schweitzer. An ethical person does not tear a leaf from a tree, does not pluck a flower, and strives not to step on insects. In the summer, when working in the light, he prefers to keep the windows closed and breathe. stuffy air, but not to watch how one insect after another falls with scorched wings onto his table. If he walks down the road after heavy rain and sees earthworms crawling out of the depths, he is worried that they will dry out too much in the sun and die before they have time to burrow into the ground again. And he picks them up and lays them on the grass. If he sees an insect that has fallen into a puddle, then he stops and takes it out with a leaf or a blade of grass in order to save him. And he is not afraid that they will laugh at him because he is sentimental. Schweitzer says: "It is the fate of any truth to be ridiculed until that truth is generally accepted."

The third principle is infinity. Schweitzer does not enter into any discussions about how widely ethics applies, to whom it applies. He says: "Ethics is an unlimited responsibility towards everything that lives."

Ethics of existentialism. Existentialism delved into the problem of the essence and existence of man. Karl Jaspers (1883 - 1969), Martin Heidegger (1889 - 1976), Jean Paul Sartre (1905 - 1980, Albert Camus (1913 - 1960) and others defined morality as a reflection of inauthentic being, a means of public manipulation of a person. In such a being, a person loses its essence, becoming like others. Therefore, in general, it is hostile to man. In Camus, the world around him is a world of absurdity, with which a person is in constant conflict. He invites a person to overcome borderline situations through an attitude towards God, i.e. inauthentic existence, and be absolutely free.

Personalism- an existential-theistic direction in philosophy, recognizing the personality as the primary creative reality and the highest spiritual value, and the whole world as a manifestation of the creative activity of the supreme personality - God.

In personalism, one can single out a bright and actual trend of dialogical personalism, representatives of which are M. Buber, Nedonsel, N. A. Berdyaev. social side personalities, namely communication or dialogue, are declared in dialogical personalism as the basis for the constitution of the entire personality. Dialogical personalism, operating with new existential categories (I, YOU, WE), seeks to overcome the epistemological I-centrism of classical philosophy, bringing the problem of cognition to a new ontological level of the problem of creativity.

Topic 8. The concept of morality, its structural and functional analysis

Morality- this is a form of social consciousness that reflects the relationship of people in the categories of good and evil, justice and injustice and fixes in the form of moral ideals, principles, norms and rules of behavior the requirements imposed by society or a class on a person in his daily life.

moral functions. The specific essence of morality is specifically revealed in the interaction of its historically formed functions:

a) regulatory. Morality regulates the behavior of both the individual and society. The bottom line is that not only people control the lives of others, but everyone builds his own position, guided by moral values. There is self-regulation of the individual and self-regulation of the social environment as a whole;

b) value-oriented. Morality contains vital guidelines for a person. And even though they are not directly practical, they are necessary for our life to be human, and not just biological. These are ideas about the meaning of life, about the purpose of man, about the value of everything human. We do not think about it every day, and only when the values ​​of our life are in crisis, again and again we ask ourselves: why do we live? Thus, the task of morality is to give the everyday life of our existence the highest meaning, creating its ideal perspective;

c) cognitive. In morality there is knowledge about moral concepts, about the rules of the community of people, i.e. it is not knowledge in itself, but knowledge refracted in values. This function of morality gives the individual not just knowledge of objects in themselves, but orients him in the world of surrounding cultural values, predetermines the preference for those or others that meet his needs and interests;

d) educational. Morality sets the task of familiarizing the individual with its concepts, developing a stereotype of behavior, turning the foundations of ethics into a habit.

But morality does not so much teach one to observe a set of rules as it educates the very ability to be guided by ideal norms and "higher" considerations, i.e. teaches him to do the right thing while maintaining his autonomy.

The structure of morality

In different historical epochs there are different structures of moral consciousness. Nevertheless, one can speak of some general features of the structure of moral consciousness. Its main elements are the system of values ​​and value orientations, ethical feelings, moral judgments, as well as moral ideals. As items theoretical level moral consciousness, its structure includes a historically established system of categories of morality (categories are specifically historical in nature - evil is not always evil). These are the categories of goodness and related categories of the meaning of life, happiness, justice, conscience. Let's take a look at these elements.

moral standards- this is a stable, established in the public consciousness arrangement of nodal moral values, embodied - with some variations - in the individual consciousness. In moral norms, as regulators of social life, their special property, imperiousness (imperativeness), stands out especially clearly. The norms accumulate in the form of a command the useful socio-historical experience of many generations of people. A conscious set of norms and principles is usually defined as a moral code.

Conscience- one of the most ancient and intimate-personal regulators of human behavior. Together with a sense of duty, honor, dignity, it allows a person to realize his moral responsibility to himself as a subject of moral choice and to other people, society as a whole. Conscience is one of the expressions of moral self-consciousness and well-being of the individual. The variety of situations in which a person finds himself does not allow foreseeing a procedure for actions in each specific case, to give ready recipe moral outburst for each idiosyncratic situation. The moral regulator of behavior in all these cases is conscience. It is the moral guardian of the individual's behavior in a wide variety of situations, and especially in those where the control of public opinion is absent or difficult. Conscience is a moral lynching to which a person submits his inner world. It is a kind of fusion of rational awareness and sensory experience in the human psyche. It most sharply expresses a feeling of moral satisfaction or dissatisfaction (it is not for nothing that they speak of an “impure” and “pure” conscience), it acts in the form of deep emotional experiences of a person (remorse of conscience).

Duty- a high moral duty, which has become an intrapersonal source of voluntary subordination of one's will to the tasks of achieving, preserving certain moral values. It expresses awareness of the moral decision by the individual of the question of the relationship between his own and public interests. Understanding one's duty is associated with social class positions, with a preference for certain values ​​of life, it implies a conscious choice by a person of one or another worldview system, one or another set of values ​​and norms. In this respect, duty is closely related to the ideal. That is why a person is also responsible for choosing those principles, norms and values, the implementation of which he considers his internal duty.

Happiness cannot be regarded as a state of unclouded peace of mind. No matter how a person protects himself from anxiety, it still invades his life. Moreover, happiness is not a state of continuous joy. It includes the opposite states - sadness, sadness, regrets. Absolute satisfaction is nothing more than an empty abstraction. Happiness, paradoxically as it may seem, lies in the ability to go through individual misfortunes, overcoming them, in the readiness and ability not only to endure minor troubles, cope with negative emotions, or refuse to satisfy some needs, but also to take risks, to remain faithful to their ideals. Happiness- in the ability to deal with one's own weakness, selfishness. That is, happiness is a self-assessment of all life activity in its entirety, or in other words, it is a special psychological state, a complex set of human experiences associated with a positive assessment of his life as a whole.

Topic 9. Morality: essence and content

So, morality is the main subject of ethics, which it has been comprehending throughout the history of its development. Nevertheless, as already noted, a generally valid definition of morality has not yet been developed, which is explained by a number of reasons: the complexity, content variability, and multidimensionality of this phenomenon; differences in the methodological attitudes of various areas of ethical reflection, etc. Understanding the problematic nature of any definitive experiments, one should nevertheless offer a working definition of morality, which may look like this: morality is a special way of regulating relationships between people, based on the distinction between good and evil. It is clear that such a definition cannot be considered exhaustive, but it is quite acceptable as an initial point of support for further research and specification.

It is advisable to re-fix the "regulatory idea" or the meaning of morality (stabilization of the human community and the assertion of the self-worth of a person), which, probably, should be constantly present "behind the scenes" of the structural and functional analysis of this peculiar phenomenon of spiritual existence. In addition, it is necessary to make a reservation once again that the concepts of "morality" and "morality" are used in the book as identical, although in the history of ethics there have been attempts (where there were linguistic possibilities for this) to separate them.

The problem of the specificity of morality (debatable and incomplete, like most ethical problems) is associated, first of all, with such specific features of morality as its non-institutional nature and the lack of a clear localization. The last, i.e. a kind of "omnipresence" of morality, its solubility in all types of human relations, especially complicates attempts to strictly scientific study of it. Comprehension of the specifics of morality also involves the study of the characteristics of its structural components and the originality of its functioning, which, taken together, makes it possible to understand its uniqueness.

Before highlighting any functions of morality, it is necessary to think about the question: why, for what purpose does it actually function? A constructive answer to this question is probably associated with the above-mentioned sense of morality. It turns out that the most common goal of the functioning of morality is to maintain the integrity of the human community and, at the same time, the intrinsic value of the individual in this community. The answer to the naturally arising following question: how does this happen? - predetermines the possibility of specifying the "regulative idea" of morality in the context of designating the directions of its functioning, i.e. individual functions.

Of the many points of view that exist in ethics on this issue, the simplest model has the greatest heuristic potential, into which, if desired, other classifications can be "packed". According to this model, the most common and significant are the following functions of morality: regulatory, epistemological, educational, cognitive, communicative, humanizing. In other words, morality realizes its meaning on the basis of a special form of reflection of the world, a special way of regulating relations between people, special settings for educating a person. At the same time, the specifics of morality should be associated not with the presence of these or some other functions, but with originality, with the form of reflection, regulation, education. It is clear that the selection of these functions is to a certain extent conditional: they are intertwined with each other in a complex way, manifesting themselves in reality together and simultaneously. With this circumstance in mind, let's try to consider these functions in a little more detail.

The regulatory function manifests itself in practice quite spontaneously and contradictory, which is largely due to the lack of a special institution that would deal with this important matter. The specificity of moral regulation is that it is carried out by means of exclusively spiritual influence, is not of a rigid nature, suggests "self-legislation of the will" (Kant), i.e. free choice by a person of certain moral orientations. External (public opinion) and internal (intentions of individual consciousness, defined as duty, conscience, etc.) components of the mechanism of moral regulation are correlated as means and goals, in other words, self-regulation is a full-fledged form of moral regulation. Concretizing the regulatory function, it is possible to single out a number of subfunctions in it. So, for example, the orienting subfunction, as it were, aims a person at certain ideals, at such an image of what is due, which is capable of spiritualizing being in existence. The motivating subfunction is related to the fact that moral requirements act as motives for people's actions, and the corrective subfunction is related to the ability to change one's behavior under the influence of self-esteem or assessment by public opinion. These and other manifestations of moral regulation are united by a high degree of voluntariness of the individual, since too hard pressure on him from the outside (even if "with good intentions") inevitably distorts the meaning of morality. Thus, morality is the most humane and most universal regulator in the human community.

The specificity of the epistemological function is determined by the normative-evaluative form of information obtained as a result of moral reflection. In other words, the world in morality is not reflected in a mirror, but by correlating it with some proper model and correspondingly evaluating it through the prism of good and evil.

The educational function of morality is aimed, in case of harmonious manifestation, at stimulating the process of moral self-education of the individual, i.e. all possible external educational influences in this area should be carried out with great care so as not to “crush” the full-fledged self-determination of the individual.

The cognitive function of morality is a means of understanding the inner world of a person, giving him ethical knowledge, helping to solve moral issues, manage his behavior, feelings, etc.

The communicative function of morality consists in the ritualization of human communication, the humanization of communication, the desire to make communication as pleasant as possible for all parties. Orients a person to good in communication.

The humanizing function lies in the desire of morality to improve a person.

Topic 10. Historical development of morality

Morality has gone through a rather long, complex path of development from the most primitive norms and ideas to the highest aspirations of modern preachers of holiness and purity.

When solving the problem of the origin of morality, researchers face great difficulties. And this is not accidental, because in this case, the output on the problem of the essence, or rather the Mystery, of the person himself is inevitable.

In the question of the origin and development of morality, the most common are three approaches: religious raising morality to the divine principle, naturalistic, which derives morality from the laws of nature, in particular, biological evolution, and social, considering morality as one of the social, sociocultural mechanisms that ensure the stability of society. In the first case, the concepts of good and evil are defined in their relation to the deity, in the second - to nature and in the third - to society. This does not mean that the content of good and evil is necessarily understood differently. Of course, when considering the source of morality in public life, good and evil can be made dependent on the interests of some social groups. But this means that good and evil are ideologized, morality is used to justify private public interest. More often, more precisely, in the overwhelming majority of moral teachings, good is understood as that which contributes to the good of people, moreover, of all people and every person.

Religious interpretation of the problem of the origin of morality. Christian theologians traditionally speak of the divine nature of morality. The individual receives it both in the form of a “natural moral law” (internal law) and in the form of a divinely revealed (external) law. The moral law cannot be considered a consequence of experience, education, habit, because it does not take into account what happens in earthly life, but only indicates what should happen. Likewise, human nature is not a source of morality, for human natural inclinations often contradict the inclinations of morality, and well-bred people are forced to suppress them.

The religious interpretation of the origin of morality has a number of advantages. First of all, it emphasizes the universal, universal nature of morality. Divine prescriptions apply to all people without exception. Before morality, as before God, everyone is equal. Within certain limits, religion is able to limit the scope of subjectivism, arbitrariness in moral assessments and judgments: God himself ordered to respect elders, not to steal, not to kill, etc.

With religious views on nature, the origin of morality, the views of representatives of objective idealism (Plato, Hegel) largely intersect. Hegel considered morality, along with law, religion, philosophy, as one of the stages in the development of the objective spirit. Thus, representatives of this philosophical trend, like theologians, take the origins of morality beyond the boundaries of society and clearly underestimate the role of an individual human person in the formation of moral consciousness.

The next direction in the search for the origins of morality, we will conditionally call naturalistic, because it somehow derives morality from human nature and from the previous evolution of the animal world.

Naturalistic approaches to morality have a number of serious arguments at their disposal. However, it should still be recognized that in this case we meet with a clear manifestation of reductionism (returning back), with the reduction of the higher to the lower.

Morality is not a set of the simplest forms of behavior, but includes striving for higher values, freedom, and creativity.

Various directions have also become widespread, which in one way or another emphasize social nature morals. The sociological approach to morality was already known to the thinkers of antiquity (the sophists, Aristotle, etc.). The Marxists were especially active in defending it. E. Durkheim, M. Weber and their followers should be referred to the same direction. Among them it is not difficult to find materialists, idealists, and those who declare morality the result of an agreement, those who spoke about the priority of religious and moral values. But they all noted the social nature of morality. These thinkers tried to rely on specific historical data - certain historical events, facts, customs, traditions, mores. They also tried to identify public interests, comprehend society as a whole and emphasized the closest relationship between the individual and society, with the priority, as a rule, of the latter. Finally, they emphasized the human nature of moral values.

In sociological theories of morality, moral values ​​are replaced by the interests of society as a whole, and more often by the interests of various social groups, which, of course, change from century to century, from people to people.

In sociological theories of morality, moral values ​​are almost directly connected with the current interests of people and social groups.

Moral principles are rooted in the deepest antiquity, in the very foundations of human existence. The initial among them should be considered the recognition human life the highest value, the background of which is still in the animal world, where representatives of the same species do not destroy each other, do not bring conflicts to a tragic ending.

The sociological approach to morality does not adequately take into account the deep sources of morality, the closest connection of social life with nature, the Cosmos.

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 lair, a bird's nest. Subsequently, it began to predominantly denote the stable nature of a phenomenon, custom, disposition, character; thus, in one of the fragments of Heraclitus it is said that the ethos of man is his deity. Such a change in meaning is instructive: it expresses the connection between a person's social circle and his character. Starting from the word "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 the character, temperament of a person, they are also called spiritual qualities. They differ, on the one hand, from the affects as properties of the body and, on the other hand, from the 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 ​​knowledge and to highlight this knowledge itself as a special science, Aristotle introduced the term "ethics".

For an accurate translation of the Aristotelian concept of ethical from Greek into Latin, Cicero constructed the term "moralis" (moral). He formed it from the word "mos" (mores - plural) - the Latin analogue of the Greek "ethos", meaning character, temperament, fashion, cut of clothes, custom. Cicero, in particular, spoke of moral philosophy, understanding by it the same field of knowledge that Aristotle called ethics. In the IV century AD. in Latin, the term "moralitas" (morality) appears, which is a direct analogue of the Greek term "ethics".

Both of these words, one of Greek, the other of Latin origin, are included in the new European languages. Along with them, in a number of languages, their own words appear, denoting the same reality, which is generalized in terms of "ethics" and "morality". This is "morality" in Russian, "Sittlichlkeit" in German. As far as one can judge, they repeat the history of the emergence of the terms "ethics" and "morality": from the word "nature" (Sitte) the adjective "moral" (sittlich) is formed, and from it already - a new noun "morality" (Sittlichkeit).

IN original meaning"ethics", "morality", "morality" are different words, but one term. Over time, the situation is changing. In the process of cultural development, in particular, as the identity 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 (morality) - the subject studied by it. There are also various attempts to breed the concepts of morality and ethics. According to the most common of them, dating 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 what the actions of an individual see in his subjective assessments, intentions, feelings of guilt, and morality is what a person's actions really are in the real experience of the life of a family, people, state. It is also possible to single out a cultural and linguistic tradition, which understands morality as high fundamental principles, and morality as mundane, historically changeable norms of behavior; in this case, for example, the commandments of God are called moral, and the instructions of a school teacher are called moral.

On the whole, attempts to assign a different meaningful meaning to the words "ethics", "morality", "morality" and, accordingly, to give them a different conceptual and terminological statue did not go 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 with the same right be called moral norms or moral norms. In a language that claims scientific rigor, significant meaning is given mainly to the distinction between the concepts of ethics and morality (morality), but even this is not fully maintained. So, sometimes ethics as a field of knowledge is called moral (moral) philosophy, and the term ethics (professional ethics, business ethics) is used to refer to certain moral (moral) phenomena.

Within the framework of the academic discipline, "ethics" is 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 (morality)? This question is not only the original, the first in ethics; throughout the history of this science, covering about two and a half thousand years, it has remained the main focus of its research interests. Different schools and thinkers give different answers to it. There is no single, indisputable definition of morality, which is directly related to the originality of this phenomenon. Reflections on morality are in various ways morality itself is not at all accidental. Morality is more than a collection of facts to be generalized. It acts simultaneously as: a task that requires, among other things, also theoretical reflection. Morality is not just what is. She is what she should be. Therefore, the adequate relation of ethics to morality is not limited to its reflection and explanation. Ethics also has to offer its own model of morality: moral philosophers in this respect can be likened to architects whose professional vocation is to design new buildings.

We will look at some of the most general definitions(characteristics) of morality, widely represented in ethics and firmly entrenched in culture. These definitions are largely consistent with commonly held views of morality. Morality appears in two interrelated, but nevertheless different guises: a) as a characteristic of a person, a set of moral qualities, virtues, for example, truthfulness, honesty, kindness; 6) as a characteristic of relations between people, a set of moral norms (requirements, commandments, rules), for example, “do not lie”, “do not steal”, “do not kill”. Accordingly, we will reduce the general analysis of morality into two headings: the moral dimension of the individual and the moral dimension of society.

lat. - temper, custom) - a branch of philosophical knowledge that explores the nature of morality and morality, the laws of their historical development and role in public life. Ethics considers the norms of human life from the standpoint of good and evil. Morality can be based on different ideas: religious moral sanction, eudemonism as an egoistic pursuit of happiness, class interests, etc. There is a Christian ethics based on the moral ideals of the Bible, on the recognition of the Sermon on the Mount and the three holy virtues - faith, hope and love, ideas sin and redemption. There is also professional ethics, in particular, pedagogical. Ethics plays a huge role in human life. This is a kind of system of protection against complete willfulness and normative norms of conflict-free interaction.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

ETHICS

lat ethica, from Greek etmke tech-ne - science and the art of morality), the doctrine of morality, morality ) He considered the center of E to be the doctrine of virtues as morals. qualities of the individual, in his system there were already many "eternal questions" about the nature and source of morality, about free will and the foundations of morality. deeds, the highest good, justice, etc.

Throughout its history, E has acted simultaneously as a practical (moral) philosophy, that is, with the doctrine of a correct and worthy life, and as knowledge of morality (about its nature, origin, etc.). Thus, E performed two socially significant functions - moral-educational and cognitive-enlightenment Relative independence, the mismatch of these functions caused the gradual separation of two interrelated parts in the composition of E - normative E and theoretical. E, oriented respectively to life teaching and to the knowledge of morality. requirements related to the organization of the teaching of E in educational institutions (schools, colleges, universities, etc.) The inclusion of E in the teaching programs is a trend characteristic of all developed countries. The course of E can be introduced in order to have a positive impact on morals. the consciousness of the trainees, on their value orientations, in this case the content of the course is mainly the normative components of ethical. teachings, if the accentuated goal is to increase the worldview-zrench of the culture of students, their obtaining knowledge about society, the mechanisms of its regulation (morality is one of them), and so on, then the emphasis is on scientific. - will explain the aspects of E Although the expected educational or cognitive. the result of teaching this subject depends on the mn method and contain factors, the initial choice of normative or theoretical. E as the basis of the teaching course is of decisive importance. For example, morals planned by the teacher. - educate. the effect of the course E developed by him is often not achieved due to the fact that students are presented with mostly descriptive and explanatory (theoretical) material. morality) in itself is beneficial for the individual, morally elevates it, and t and To avoid such mistakes in teaching e, it is necessary to clearly distinguish between its normative and theoretical. issues

Normative ethics is a system of moralistic reasoning aimed at maintaining the foundation of morality in society. values ​​It is designed to formulate answers to questions about good and evil, about the correct behavior of a person in everyday life situations Normative and ethical. doctrine proclaims and defends a certain moral position, expressing it in the form of morals. ideals, principles, rules and norms of behavior Unlike naked moralizing, which is characterized by edification, suggestion, reference to authorities and role models, normative E appeals to reason, its methods are proof, argument, argument. If moralizing as ped. technique is appropriate in relation to an undeveloped (childish or uncultured) consciousness, then normative E. is addressed to a critically thinking person who is able to question any postulates. Reasonable arguments in favor of certain provisions of morality contribute to the transformation of a social imperative (moral norm) external to the individual into an internal one. impulse (sense of duty, moral motivation of behavior). Normative-ethical. reflections and proofs form one of the means of forming morals. beliefs.

Being a philosopher. discipline, normative E. is not directly involved in proving specific, particular moral assessments and prescriptions. Development and substantiation of morals. imperatives in relation to single or typical situations, with which people face in their personal and societies. life, - the field of activity of preachers, moral writers, teachers, creators of prof. ethical codes (“medical E.”, “E. business”, etc.), i.e. general educators in the broadest sense of the term. All this activity is concretization and practicality. the use of certain general ethical. principles; thus, the educator relies, ultimately, on one or another philosophical normative-ethical. position.

The peculiarity of normative E. as a philosophy of morality is that it provides a rational basis for fundamental values, which serve as a guide for the educator-practitioner. Ch. philosophical task. substantiation of morality - to give them a supra-individual status and to affirm the unconditionality of moral requirements. The moral philosopher, as a rule, does not act on his own behalf, not on behalf of Ph.D. social institution (in these cases, his judgments would bear the stamp of arbitrariness, optionality), but as a conductor of some higher idea. Moral imperatives and evaluations acquire such an indisputable status by giving them either a sacral-over-natural (mystical, divine) or natural-objective meaning. In the first case, the categorical nature of the principles and norms of morality is ensured by the absolute authority of God, in the second case, by belonging to an objective world order, with the inevitable laws that a person has to reckon with. These two ways of substantiating morality determine the general directions of normative and ethical. thoughts, inside to-rykh there are numerous. branches.

In the religion teachings, the leading motive for the authoritarian justification of morality is the understanding of God as the personification of Good, and the norms of morality as deities, commandments, due to which these norms in the mind of the believer receive a positive and unconditionally binding meaning. Often God acts as an omniscient guardian of his commandments, inevitably repaying according to the sins and merits of a person. In this case, morality is reinforced not so much by the sacred authority and inherent value of the Good, as by the threat of punishment or the promise of a reward, and therefore the proper moral meaning of such justification disappears. However, the authoritarian approach was not dominant in the history of E. The second method, associated with the objectification of moral values, occupied a much greater place, as a result of which they became uncontested and, in this sense, absolute. Proving the objectivity of good, duty, etc., the philosopher thereby substantiates these values, forces a reasonable individual to accept them and agree with them. So, in the teachings of Plato, good, or good, is an objectively existing “idea”, embodying in its pure form the integral highest value as such. Such values, one has only to recognize their objectivity, immediately acquire a normative goal-designating meaning. Plato, following Socrates, believed (with some reservations) that a person, knowing objective goodness, thereby becomes virtuous. The philosopher interpreted the objectivity of morality differently. rationalism of the new time, dissolving normative-ethical. problems in the theory of knowledge. For R. Descartes, G. V. Leibniz, I. Kant, the objectivity of a certain judgment (including moral) meant its logical. necessity, compulsion for reason. It was the famous categorical imperative that represented such a necessary proposition (maxim), with which, as Kant believed, everyone could not but agree. sentient being, and therefore the formulation of this maxim in itself is already its rational substantiation. A similar position was taken by representatives of intuitionism of the 18th-20th centuries. (R. Price, J. E. Moore and others); according to their views, "moral truth" is perceived directly (intuitively) as self-evident, which serves as its justification. These concepts recognized the autonomy of morality, i.e. it was assumed that the the foundations of morality are objective, absolute, and do not need extraneous reinforcement.

The concepts of heteronomous ethics make the principles of morality dependent on other, deeper and more solid foundations that give these principles contain, certainty, and compulsion. As such bases are various. philosophy provisions in which certain characteristics of the world, society, and man are fixed. Thus, the idea of ​​world necessity, the objective predestination of all events, their insubordination to man served as the basis for a life teaching that preaches humility, self-restraint, wise dispassion, etc. [directions in Chinese (Taoism) and other Greek. (Stoicism) philosophy]. From ideas about the objective "legislation" of nature, imperatives such as "live in harmony with nature", "everything natural is good", etc. (the teachings of other Greek philosophers - cynics, sophists, etc.) have developed. If this meant not external, but human nature, then these imperatives were transformed into calls: “listen to the voice of one’s own nature”, “follow one’s natural aspirations”, etc., which formed the basis of normative and ethical. naturalism, represented by the teachings of hedonism, eudemonism, the theory of egoism.

In the 19th and 20th centuries conceptions are widely used, in which morality is justified by reference to the objective laws of the development of nature or society, i.e. actions that were consistent with the direction of natures were recognized as proper or justified. evolution (evolutionary E.) or corresponding to the objective course, trends, “objective needs” of history (Marxist E.). A special line is formed by concepts in which non-moral values ​​play the role of the objective foundation of morality. The "objectivity" of these values ​​is often identified with their social, i.e. supra-individual or supra-group status, and in this case morals. the imperative addressed to an individual or a group is justified as follows: something is good or proper, since it serves the public (universal) good, social progress, the establishment of a just system, the interests of a state or nation, or is aimed at achieving the most. happiness for Naib. number of people (utilitarianism), etc. In other cases, objective non-moral values ​​are understood as "non-human", absolute, higher (deities, self-will, standing "above" good; cosmic goals, etc.), so that the moral the dignity of actions, the binding nature of the relevant prescriptions is determined by their subordination to the highest. values-goals (teleology, the doctrine of the expediency of the world order).

Theoretical ethics is a science that describes and explains morality as a special social phenomenon. This science answers the questions: what is morality, how does it differ from other societies. phenomena; what is its origin, how it has changed historically; what are the mechanisms and patterns of its functioning; what is its social role, etc. All these problems began to take shape explicitly only in the 18th century. Kant saw the specificity of morality in self-sufficiency, unconditional obligation and universality of its imperatives (formalism, absolutism). A. Shaftesbury, D. Hume and others saw a difference, a sign of moral assessments and prescriptions in their special mental. substrate - “morals. feelings" (psychologism). Hume also noted the logical the originality of moral statements (“judgments of what should be”), their inability to be deduced from statements about facts (“judgments of beings”). The development of this thought was the idea of ​​the impossibility of scientific. substantiation of morality (neopositivism), the presence of a special ("deontic") logic of moral reasoning, etc. For representatives of intuitionism, the specificity of morality meant the irreducibility of a moral motive to any other, the uniqueness of the content of moral concepts (good, duty), their irreducibility to any then other content. So, Moore qualified any definition of good through other concepts as “naturalistic. mistake"; this error, in his opinion, is characteristic of the entire trs., “shch. E. Mn. philosophers of various directions (Aristotle, Kant, A. Schopenhauer, etc.) necessary sign moral consciousness recognized free will, without which, they believed, moral choice is impossible, and therefore moral responsibility of the individual is impossible. At the same time, free will was opposed either to natural (including mental) determination, or beyond natural predestination (voluntarism, determinism, fatalism). The problem of free will was also posed in a different context - in connection with the clarification of the source of morality, its origin. Free will was considered in this case no longer as a prerequisite for a morally responsible choice between good and evil, but as a person’s ability to arbitrarily set their own values, establish a criterion for good and evil (existentialism, personalism).

In the 19th and 20th centuries theoretical problem. E. more and more passed into the jurisdiction of specific sciences, for which morality was part of their subject area. Thus, sociology (including social psychology) elucidates the phylogeny of morality and its societies. functions, the content of its principles and norms, correlation with other social phenomena, etc. Personal psychology studies the ontogeny of morality, its mental. substrate and mechanism. Ethology seeks the premises of human morality in the behavior of animals. Logic and linguistics explore the language of morality, rules and forms of normative and ethical. reasoning. Theoretical E. brings together all these scientific. data concerning the essence, origin and functioning of morality; it covers a wide array of knowledge, including philosophy. explain concepts and ideas, to-rye constitute methodological. scientific base. moral knowledge.

Practical theoretical value. E. consists in the fact that the knowledge produced by it about the laws and conditions for the formation and change of morality can be used for consciousness. intervention in this process in order to achieve desired result, for example, fixing certain morals in the mind of an individual. installations. Theoretical E. in itself, of course, does not contain specific methods of moral education, but it serves as a methodological. the basis for the corresponding practically oriented discipline (the theory of moral education). If normative E., substantiating moral values, can affect morals. the position of the individual directly by its very content, then the influence of the theoretical. E. affects indirectly - through the development of methods and techniques of morality. activities. Therefore, teaching theoretical E. has its own characteristics: as an account. discipline, it is designed for an audience not of "educated", but of educators; it is advisable to include it in the training and advanced training programs for teachers.

Lit .: Moore J. E., Principles of Ethics, M., 1984; Huseynov A. A., IrrlittsG., A Brief History of Ethics, M., 1987; Maksimov P.V., The problem of justification of morality, M., 1991. L.V. Maksimov.

Great Definition

Incomplete definition ↓

The main provisions of the concept of Dynamic Psychiatry:

a) initially constructive aggression is organically characteristic of a person;

b) that a person should be understood as a creature that lives in groups and contributes to these groups - a person at any age is fundamentally able to change and develop, illness should be understood as a limitation, and not as the disappearance of the ability to develop, illness and symptoms also denote a call for help to the patient's environment in order to regain his ability to develop;

c) that the self-identity of a person (and thus his health) always includes the pursuit of the above goals, imply an ethics that is in the traditions of humanism.

Psychodynamic human-structural therapy is guided by the image of a socially active person "homo politicus", who is in relationship with other people, with nature, with the cosmos and possesses religiosity in the etymological sense of re-ligio. (re-creation - re-creation of I-identity *).

Dynamic psychiatry does not recognize the polarizing mindset and its consequences, violence, and advocates the introduction of group dynamics in order to humanize institutions and politics. She tries to connect with the roots of history and spirituality. Therapy always has a spiritual aspect, the development of identity and thus the recovery of the patient cannot be imagined without the ethical integrity of the therapist. Like social psychiatry, Dynamic Psychiatry defines itself as a humanistic science of treatment that promotes communication between people and thus the world.

ETHICS

ethics; Ethik) - a system of moral attitudes and requirements.

Jung believed that the moral law of an individual expresses a psychic fact that may or may not have been subjected to reflection and "judgment" by his own unconscious judgments. The development of consciousness requires consideration of things, including religious contemplation, both from a generally significant and from a personal point of view. According to Jung, this is the realm of ethics.

ETHICS

1. The doctrine of morality as one of the forms of social consciousness - about its essence, role, laws of development. One of the forms of ideology. 2. The totality, the system of norms of moral behavior of an individual, social or professional group.

Ethics

A notion of acceptable or correct behavior in achieving a particular personal or academic goal. The study of ethics has traditionally been more of a branch of philosophy than science, but given the ever-increasing responsibility of scientific research, it is clear that the morality of an undertaking must be considered on an equal footing with practical considerations. In human experiments, ethics becomes especially important. Most psychologists share a relativistic view of ethical responsibility, believing that the end justifies the means. The publication of clear ethical principles (for example, in the publications of the British Psychological Association) provides certain guidelines and allows experimental research to be carried out in a way that does not violate the interests of the participants and is morally justified from the point of view of the experimenter. The psychologist must be aware of the importance of informed consent and not mislead participants unless absolutely necessary. Simply following the rules is not always sufficient for the ethical correctness of research. From the point of view of many sociopsychologists, the experimental scientist should have a broad responsibility in the social context, and not just be responsible for the well-being of the research participants. The use of animals in experiments has led to a particularly heated discussion in this area (see Animal Experimentation).

ETHICS

A branch of philosophy that studies what is considered acceptable in human behavior, what is good or bad, right or wrong in human behavior, pursuing some goals and objectives. There is a tendency to use this term for theoretical treatises, studies of the ideal; when considering actual human behavior in social and cultural settings (especially in relation to the creation and adoption of ethical norms), many authors use the term morality and related terms. For a more detailed discussion, see Morality and the following.

ETHICS

Reading this work clearly shows that the practice of hypnosis raises ethical issues, and these issues are very different for traditional and new hypnosis. It should not be forgotten that many consider hypnosis to be immoral and dangerous.

Henri Ey (1963, foreword) puts forward the moral problem of "hacking the personality, enslaving the patient through his relation to the hypnotist master." If such expressions may now cause laughter, then the very problem of invasion is a pitfall that we must learn to get around. The wild practice of suggestion, which is not alien to any form of hypnosis, raises legal problems, even if it is well-intentioned.

Clinical practice of hypnosis does not provide reliable prescriptions. As Orne (1972) points out, the therapist using hypnosis must, like other therapists, act in alliance with the patient's healthy desires and aspirations, but there is a clear danger for the inept therapist to integrate with the destructive aspects of the patient's personality and reinforce his destructive behavior.

In view of all this, it becomes clear that hypnosis should be the property of qualified professionals: physicians, psychologists and some paramedical practitioners within the strict ethical framework of the profession where they are officially recognized. Respectable hypnotic societies enshrine ethical principles in their charters.

ETHICS

from the Greek ethike, from ethos - custom, disposition, character) - a philosophical science that studies morality, morality. The term was introduced by Aristotle. From the Stoics comes the traditional division of philosophy into logic, physics, and E., which was often understood as the science of human nature, that is, it coincided with anthropology. Spinoza's "Ethics" is the doctrine of substance and its modes. E. is the science of due in the system of I. Kant, who developed the ideas of the so-called. autonomous E. as based on internal self-evident moral principles, opposing it to E. heteronomous, coming from some kind of l. external to morality conditions, interests and goals. In the twentieth century M. Scheler and N. Hartmann, in contrast to Kant's "formal" E. of duty, developed the "material" (content) E. of values. Central to ethics has been and remains the problem of good and evil, moral conflict, moral choice.

Ethics

Greek ethos - custom; character) - 1. philosophical doctrine of morality, the causes and conditions for the emergence of moral norms, essence, as well as its conceptual and imperative forms. The subject of normative ethics is the moral ideal, values ​​and requirements, features of their functioning; social ethics - morality from the point of view of social life; individual ethics - the moral life of individuals; 2. a system of norms of moral behavior of an individual, a social group, for example, medical ethics. The most striking and involuntarily admirable is the fact that the ethics of the doctor, which apparently arose even in pre-literate antiquity, is still the highest achievement of the human mind, in contrast to countless variants of narrowly professional corporate ethics; 3. biomedical ethics is an interdisciplinary field of research that has as its subject the value aspects of the medical community, the ethical problems of the relationship between the doctor and the patient, issues of social policy in the field of health care, as well as organ transplantation, the use of new technologies for childbearing, cloning, genetic engineering, the use of blastomeres ( stem cells) medicinal purposes and etc.; 4. general cultural factors of the social environment.

THE CONCEPT OF ETHICS

Ethics is a field of philosophical knowledge that studies the universal prerequisites and forms of moral relations of people in the system of their historically given spiritual and practical activity. The subject of ethics is morality as a set of historically defined norms, ideas, rules of human behavior that are realized in their moral actions and deeds.

The concepts of "ethics", "morality", "morality" are etymologically and meaningfully similar, identical. The ancient Greek word "ethika" (from ethos) is analogous to the Latin concept "moralis" and Russian "morality". All of them imply some stability, internal ordering of mores, customs of people. In the course of the development of the spiritual culture of mankind, these concepts began to acquire relatively independent semantic shades. Since the time of Aristotle, the concept of "ethics" began to denote that area of ​​philosophical knowledge that studies human virtues. All ethical teachings of the past and present have as their goal the rational substantiation of morality, the identification of its general, essential meaning, expressed in a system of norms, laws, values, principles, categories. In this sense, ethics in theoretical form acts as an expression of higher moral values. Morality and ethics, respectively, determine the meaning of ethical knowledge in the individual and the particular. This is the sphere of psychological, sensory-emotional perception of ethical norms, the area of ​​freedom of moral choice, practical actions of people.

Since ancient times, no human community has been able to exist and develop without observing certain mutual obligations, rules, and norms of behavior. This need to harmonize the interests of people served as a condition for the survival, preservation public structures, their relative harmony and sustainable development dynamics. These mutual obligations gradually became the property of moral consciousness. Acquiring a stable character, they lost their direct connection with the historically determined conditions of people's lives, turned into stable norms of moral behavior, habits, traditions, mores and customs of people.

As an essential condition of human life, social self-organization, morality precedes knowledge. At the same time, the moral principle, perceived for a long time as unaccountably due, requires, sooner or later, its rational substantiation, theoretical understanding. The first historically known examples of ethical teachings arise relatively late, within the framework of the ancient Eastern philosophical traditions and in the era of Antiquity. They only conditionally correspond to the modern understanding of the theoretical problems of morality and are mainly in the nature of practical moralizing, philosophical discussions about the good and virtue, about the comparative value of words and deeds, intentions and actions, the nature of good and evil. Mature ethical teachings, in a systematic form, substantiating the goals of cognition, universal principles, norms and rules of morality, are formed only within the framework of the philosophy of the New Age.

The theoretical, rational substantiation of morality least of all serves the task of increasing scientific knowledge. Ethics can only conditionally be called the science of morality. Yes, this is not necessary. It forms ideal ideas about the morally proper. Morality is not about what was, is and will be. Based on a generalization of the practice of human behavior, it speaks of what should be. Morality is closed to the person. She is an attribute of his existence, an indicator of his sociality. Morality is by nature subjective. The purpose of ethics, according to Aristotle, is not knowledge in general, but the content and evaluation of actions. It is no coincidence that he called ethics practical philosophy.

The relations of people in society are infinitely diverse and at the same time concrete. They are always built around something. Morality, in contrast to specific, objectively conditioned actions, is universal. She-- a universal social form of human relations that exists from the very beginning and is a condition for the possibility of these relations. Otherwise, morality manifests itself as public beginning in a person. It binds people together before all their other connections. This is the only possible condition for the mutual coexistence of people, the space within which human existence unfolds precisely as human.

As a social form of relations, morality does not belittle or level the diversity of specific, objectively determined relations between people, between man and nature. Any individual attitude, action, deed is initially moral. This is far from always obvious. Most often, the moral principle is hidden, veiled by other layers of actions, characters of people, objectively given by the conditions of personal and social life. In addition, the moral choice of a person directly depends on his natural predestination and personal parameters. Selfish, utilitarian aspirations often push a person to acts that are incompatible with moral norms, give rise to the phenomena of self-interest, greed, hatred, envy, make his behavior immoral. These tendencies can be exacerbated by personal moral bad manners, the real conditions of life. But even immorality is also a manifestation of morality, only with a minus sign. This is a necessary condition for the comparability of actions, moral assessment.

The countless zigzags and intricacies of human history and the accompanying moral predestination of all social activity do not overshadow the virtuous principles of the coexistence of people, their actions. The freedom of human will and moral choice make it possible to transform the morally general, universal into personal data, into the area of ​​specific deeds and actions, into the practical plane of life. Love, justice, compassion and other moral virtues determine a person's behavior, connect him with other people, and are the ultimate reasons for the integrity and continuity of the historical process. This conceals the highest meaning of the practical significance of morality and the essential principles of ethical teachings expressing it.

By its nature, ethics is designed to solve practical moral problems. Its task is not only a theoretical description and explanation of morality, but above all, the rationale for moral ideals, exemplary models of human relations and ways to implement them. Formalized values ​​of these ideals in the form of a system moral standards, commandments, traditions, class and professional moral codes serve as a condition and tool for moral education, normative moral regulation of people's relations in society, and assessment of their actions.

Ethical knowledge, expressed in the system of moral norms and values, does not exist by itself, but only in connection with a person, his consciousness and activity. Ethics endows a person with the status of the creator and bearer of morality, defines him as the original value and ultimate goal of the functioning of the moral system. Already the earliest ethical teachings regard man as the sole and highest criterion for determining the practically given social nature of morality. It is morality that serves as a universal way and means of self-knowledge and self-improvement of the individual. It provides the highest social and personal expediency, maintaining the harmony of man and society, the stability of all links of social life.

The task of the ethics course is to form a conscious attitude to life, to pass on the moral values ​​developed by mankind to new generations. The development of a new type of morality, corresponding to a post-industrial society, involves a critical analysis of existing ethical systems, a dialogue with various ethical schools and trends, the justification of modern morality as an ideal and norms of people's moral behavior.