Moral principles examples. Characteristics of the basic principles of morality

Each person is capable of different actions. There are rules that are established by the internal beliefs of people or an entire team. These norms dictate the behavior of an individual and the unwritten laws of coexistence. These moral frameworks, located within a person or an entire society, are moral principles.

Morality concept

The study of morality is carried out by a science called “ethics”, which belongs to the philosophical direction. The discipline of morality studies such manifestations as conscience, compassion, friendship, and the meaning of life.

The manifestation of morality is inextricably linked with two opposites - good and evil. All moral norms are aimed at supporting the first and rejecting the second. Goodness is usually perceived as the most important personal or social value. Thanks to him, man creates. And evil is the destruction of a person’s inner world and the disruption of interpersonal connections.

Morality is a system of rules, standards, beliefs, which is reflected in people's lives.

Man and society evaluate all events occurring in life through the prism of morality. Political figures, the economic situation, religious holidays, scientific achievements, and spiritual practices pass through it.

Moral principles are internal laws that determine our actions and allow or do not allow us to cross the forbidden line.

High moral principles

There are no norms and principles that are not subject to change. Over time, what seemed unacceptable can easily become the norm. Society, morals, worldviews change, and with them the attitude towards certain actions changes. However, in society there are always high moral principles that time cannot influence. Such norms become the standard of morality to which one should strive.

High moral principles are conventionally divided into three groups:

1. Internal beliefs completely coincide with the norms of behavior of the surrounding society.
2. The right actions are not questioned, but their implementation is not always possible (for example, rushing after a thief who stole a girl’s bag).
3. Implementation of these principles may result in criminal liability when they contravene the law.

How moral principles are formed

Moral principles are formed under the influence of religious teachings. Hobbies for spiritual practices are of no small importance. A person can independently formulate moral principles and norms for himself. Parents and teachers play an important role here. They endow a person with the first knowledge of the perception of the world.

For example, Christianity carries a number of restrictions that a believer will not cross.

Religion has always been closely connected with morality. Failure to follow the rules was interpreted as a sin. All existing religions interpret the system of moral and ethical principles in their own way, but they also have common norms (commandments): do not kill, do not steal, do not lie, do not commit adultery, do not do to others what you do not want to receive yourself.

The difference between morality and customs and legal norms

Customs, legal norms and moral norms, despite their seemingly similarities, have a number of differences. The table provides several examples.

Sometimes legal norms are absolutely identical and repeat moral ones. Great example- the “thou shalt not steal” principle. A person does not steal because it is bad - the motive is based on moral principles. And if a person does not steal because he is afraid of punishment, this is an immoral reason.

People often have to choose between moral principles and law. For example, stealing some medicine to save someone's life.

Permissiveness

Moral principles and permissiveness are radically opposite things. In ancient times, morality was not simply different from what exists today.

It would be more correct to say that it did not exist at all. Its complete absence sooner or later leads society to death. Only thanks to the gradually developing moral values human society was able to go through the immoral ancient era.

Permissiveness develops into chaos, which destroys civilization. The rules of morality must always be in a person. This allows us not to turn into wild animals, but to remain intelligent creatures.

IN modern world A vulgarly simplified perception of the world has become widespread. People are thrown to extremes. The result of such changes is the spread of radically opposite sentiments among people and in society.

For example, wealth - poverty, anarchy - dictatorship, overeating - hunger strike, etc.

Functions of morality

Moral and ethical principles are present in all spheres of human life. They perform several important functions.

The most important one is educational. Each new generation of people, adopting the experience of generations, receives morality as an inheritance. Penetrating into all educational processes, it cultivates in people the concept of a moral ideal. Morality teaches a person to be an individual, to perform actions that will not harm other people and will not be done against their will.

The next function is evaluation. Morality evaluates all processes and phenomena from the position of uniting all people. Therefore, everything that happens is viewed as positive or negative, good or evil.

The regulatory function of morality is that it dictates to people how they should behave in society. It becomes a way of regulating the behavior of each individual person. The extent to which a person is able to act within the framework of moral requirements depends on how deeply they have penetrated into his consciousness, whether they have become an integral part of his inner world.

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

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

Similar documents

The teachings of Hippocrates - the founder of ancient scientific medicine, the reformer of the medical school of Antiquity. A collection of medical treatises known as the Hippocratic Corpus. The Hippocratic Oath, principles of non-harm, medical confidentiality.

presentation, added 12/10/2015


Moral values ​​of Christianity in professional ethics doctors. Formation of monastic medicine. Activities of the Institute of Compassionate Widows, Holy Cross Community of Sisters of Mercy. Development of medicine in Soviet times. Doctor's oath and oath.

presentation, added 09.23.2013


Moral and ethical problems of medicine. Definition of quality medical care and its main constituent elements. The essence and significance of medical ethics. Features and principles of the relationship between doctor and patient, physician and patient. Medical confidentiality and euthanasia.

presentation, added 11/18/2014


Basic principles and rules of medical ethics, deontological attitude of the doctor towards the patient and his relatives, professional colleagues, society. Moral and legal aspects of deontology. Moral standards and principles arising from medical practice.

presentation, added 03/21/2019


Hippocrates as the great reformer of ancient medicine and materialist. The idea of ​​a high moral character and example of ethical behavior of a doctor. Rules of medical ethics formulated in the “Hippocratic Oath” and their value for the younger generation of doctors.

presentation, added 05/13/2015


The concept and principles of ethics, features of its manifestation in the medical field. Definition of the quality of medical care and its constituent elements. Basics of Counseling and interpersonal communication. The essence and significance of medical confidentiality, its necessity.

presentation, added 04/01/2014


Principles of medical ethics relevant to the role of health care professionals, especially physicians, in protecting prisoners or detainees from abuse. Medicine in emergency situations. Medical ethical problem in student teaching.

presentation, added 03/29/2015


Organizational principles and modern theories medicine and healthcare. Social and biological factors of health. Concept of healthy way life. The essence and methods of studying health. Organizational and legal foundations of medical activities.


Basic principles of morality.
Table of contents.
Introduction…………………………………….
Question 1. Morality……………………………
Question 2. The role of morality in human life…..
Question 3. Concept, essence of moral principles……
Question 4. Characteristics of the basic principles of morality.....
Conclusion……………………………………………
Literature………………………………………….

Introduction.

Ethics is the science of morality. It describes morality, explains morality, and “teaches” morality. And there are a number of difficulties along this path.
Firstly, why describe morality if everyone already knows what it is? Everyone imagines themselves to be experts and judges of morals. So ethics seems doomed to communicate something generally known, unless in a clarified and systematized form.
Secondly, ethics “teaches” morality, i.e. communicates not abstract, but practical knowledge that must be used before you truly understand it. This is knowledge that motivates action. However, no one likes lectures. The right to “read morality” is given only to people with impeccable personal lives, with unconditional moral authority, such as, for example, L.N. had for his contemporaries. Tolstoy. But all the preachers over thousands of years have not persuaded humanity to act according to their conscience. In general, no matter how much you say “halva”, your mouth will not become sweet; Talking about goodness does not improve morals. To the great sorrow of all moralists, it turns out that morality cannot be taught. But you can learn. You can develop a moral position yourself by studying the judgments of sages, the words and actions of people. Ethics provides every thinking person with his own methods and means of argumentation.
Third, it is difficult to explain anything in morality satisfactorily. Is it possible to accurately determine the reasons for the existence of injustice, the reasons why nobility is ridiculed and scoundrels triumph? As if our indignation at betrayal or rudeness will lessen if we clearly explain how and why it happens. Good deeds are even more difficult to explain. After all, people usually do good not for some reason, not because they explained to me what good is, but because I can’t do otherwise. There are moral evidences that are not supported by any evidence. Also F.M. Dostoevsky, using the example of his Raskolnikov, showed that even a crime can be rationally justified, but the theorem of good cannot be proven. Therefore, you have to get used to the fact that in ethics you cannot get the same answer as in mathematics: unambiguous, logically proven and experimentally verified. This is only for the “little son” in V.V.’s poem. Mayakovsky is so clear about “what is good and what is bad.” In fact, no judgment here is final. And just as an acrobat needs to quickly move his feet to maintain balance on a ball, so in ethics it is necessary to move from thesis to thesis, from one point of view to another, so that the overall complex picture of morality is presented in its true light.
Analyzing the theory of morality, we are faced with many problems, in their multitude it is difficult to find a central one. Once you start with one, you inevitably move on to all the others. Morality, like a tangled ball, is twisted from a thread of uninterrupted reasoning. The world of morality is like the Hermitage, where from each hall you can see the next, no less beautiful, and the prospect lures you further and further. but this world can also turn into a dark labyrinth, where in endless wanderings it is impossible to determine whether you are approaching the exit or walking in circles. The confusion is aggravated by the fact that any moral task can become this moment main Where we are, there is the center of consideration. To paraphrase Pascal, morality is an infinite sphere, the center of which is everywhere and the end is nowhere. And in this essay, in addition to considering the structure, functions and antinomies of morality, I decided to consider in detail only one of its problems, which seems to me the most important and interesting - the problem of the absolute in morality.

Question 1. Morality.
This word came from France, but the concept of morality, i.e. about the rules of human behavior among other people existed long before this word appeared. Explanation in V. Dahl's dictionary: “rules for will, conscience.” But we can say it even simpler: morality is a generally accepted concept of what is good and what is bad. True, it is necessary to clarify: when and by whom it is recognized... The mores of society and the concept of moral behavior, morality are formed in specific historical conditions.
Let's just say: our modern morality suggests that children should be treated with care and kindness, and even more so - children who are sick or have some kind of physical disability. It’s shameful, it’s just mean to say “lame” to a boy who has a limp, or “bespectacled” to someone who has to wear glasses. This is generally accepted. These are the mores of today's society, these are the moral standards (that is, when taking care of a sick child, a person does not commit some kind of exceptional act of kindness, but behaves normally, naturally, as he should). But have these norms always been like this? No. For example, according to the law of Lycurgus, according to which ancient Sparta lived for more than one century, children were subjected to a special examination, and if a child was found to have a physical defect that prevented him from subsequently becoming a full-fledged warrior, he was killed by being thrown into Apophetes - a deep crevice in the Taygetos Mountains.
From books and films, we know about the feat of King Leonidas and the 300 Spartans led by him, who all died blocking the path of the Persian invaders near Thermopylae. Grateful descendants immortalized their feat in marble, inscribing on it that the soldiers died, “honestly fulfilling the law.” But the same law allowed the killing of children, without considering it something shameful.
Another example.
To shoot a person is a crime, murder. But during the war, the sniper not only shoots at the enemy, but also keeps count of those killed by him. In this situation, one person (the sniper) seems to pronounce a sentence on another person (the enemy soldier) and carries it out himself. The morality of war allows him to act as a prosecutor, judge and executor of the sentence, which is completely impossible in peacetime conditions. There are different norms of relations between people here. Only a court can pronounce a sentence on a criminal, and any lynching, no matter how fair, is punishable.
However, morality is not only a specific historical concept, but also a class one. From the point of view of official morality, the Russian officer Andrei Potebnya, a friend and like-minded person of Herzen, who took arms in his hands to the side of the Polish rebels and fought against the tsarist punitive forces, committed the gravest crime - he violated the oath and betrayed the fatherland. From the point of view of true patriots of Russia, whose voice in 1863 was barely audible and only decades later sounded in full force, Potebnya accomplished a civil feat in the name of saving the honor of Russia. Now his grave in the vicinity of Krakow is carefully guarded by the Poles - just as carefully as the graves of Soviet soldiers who died in the struggle for the liberation of Poland from the fascist yoke - and every Russian person, standing next to it, will bow to the memory of this Russian patriot who died from a bullet... Whose bullet? The bullets of a Russian soldier who considered himself, presumably, a defender of the “tsar, faith and fatherland” (otherwise he would not have shot at the rebels)…
Morality in words and morality in deeds are not at all the same thing.
The history of fascism provides an object lesson in the misadventures of morality. In the book and film “Seventeen Moments of Spring”, the characteristics from the personal files of the SS men are remembered: a good family man, an athlete, good friends with his workmates, no disreputable connections...
Of course, not a single fascist said about himself: I am a scoundrel, I am an executioner, I am immoral. Forming the ideology and morality of the “Third Reich,” the Nazis tried to create the illusion of imitation of the cruel and harsh morals of Ancient Rome, which they saw as the “First Reich.” And the camouflage worked. By throwing out their hand in a fascist salute, the Nazis copied the famous gesture of Julius Caesar; the symbolism of their banners, orders, and military emblems called to resurrect the times of the Roman legions, trampling foreign lands in a masterly manner; the revival of barbarism was shrouded in pompous phrases. But the very nature and logic of the savage system caricatured the morals and morals of the Nazis, giving rise to monstrous immorality and immorality, penetrating into all pores of society.

Question 2. The role of morality in human life.
Philosophers argue that morality has three tasks: to evaluate, regulate and educate.
Morality makes grades. All our actions, as well as all social life(economics, politics, culture) morality evaluates from the point of view of humanism, determines whether it is good or bad, good or evil. If our actions are useful to people, contribute to the improvement of their lives, their free development, this is good, this is good. They don’t contribute, they interfere – it’s evil. If we want to give a moral assessment to something (our actions, the actions of other people, some events, etc.), we, as you know, do this using the concepts of good and evil. Or with the help of other related concepts derived from them: justice - injustice; honor - dishonor; nobility, decency - baseness, dishonesty, meanness, etc. At the same time, when evaluating any phenomenon, action, deed, we express our moral assessment in different ways: we praise, agree or blame, criticize, approve or disapprove, etc. d.
Evaluation, of course, influences our practical activities, otherwise we simply would not need it. When we evaluate something as good, it means that we should strive for it, and if we evaluate it as evil, it should be avoided. This means that by assessing the world around us, we change something in it and, first of all, ourselves, our position, our worldview.
Morality regulates the activities of people. The second task of morality is to regulate our lives, people’s relationships with each other, to direct the activities of man and society to humane goals, to achieving good. Moral regulation has its own characteristics; it differs from government regulation. Any state also regulates the life of society and the activities of its citizens. It does this with the help of various institutions, organizations (parliaments, ministries, courts, etc.), normative documents (laws, decrees, orders), officials (officials, employees, police, police, etc.).
Morality has nothing like this: it is ridiculous to have moral officials, it is pointless to ask who issued the order to be humane, fair, kind, courageous, etc. Morality does not use the services of departments and officials. It regulates the movement of our lives in two ways: through the opinions of people around us, public opinion, and through the internal beliefs of the individual, conscience.
The person is very sensitive to the opinions of others. No one is free from the opinions of society or the collective. A person cares what others think about him. Consequently, public opinion can influence a person and regulate his behavior. Moreover, it is based not on the force of an order or law, but on moral authority, moral influence.
But there should not be a belief that public opinion, as the opinion of the majority, is always true, more true than the opinion of individuals. This is wrong. It often happens that public opinion plays a reactionary role, protecting outdated, outdated norms, traditions, and habits.
Man is not a slave to circumstances. Public opinion, of course, is great strength moral regulation. However, it should be remembered: one person can be wrong, and so can the majority. A person should not be a naive woodcutter, blindly and thoughtlessly submit to the opinions of others, the pressure of circumstances. After all, he is not a soulless cog in the state machine and not a slave to social circumstances. All men are born equal and have equal rights to life, liberty and happiness. Man is a free, active, creative being; he not only adapts to the world in which he lives, but also adapts this world itself to himself, changes circumstances, and creates a new social environment. Without individuals who are humane and brave, fair and courageous, selfless and independent-minded, society would simply stop developing, rot and die.
A person living in society must, of course, listen to public opinion, but he must also be able to evaluate it correctly. And if it is reactionary, protest, fight against it, go against it, defending truth, justice, humanism.
Inner spiritual beliefs of the individual. Where does a person get his strength when he speaks out against outdated public opinion, against reaction and prejudice?
Spiritual beliefs constitute the content of what we call conscience. A person is under constant control of others, but also under self-control of his internal beliefs. Conscience is always with a person. Every person has successes and failures, periods of rise and decline in life. You can free yourself from failures, but never from an unclean, stained conscience.
And a person constantly criticizes, remakes himself, as his conscience tells him to do. A person finds in himself the strength and courage to speak out against evil, against reactionary public opinion - this is what his conscience dictates. To live according to conscience requires enormous personal courage, and sometimes even self-sacrifice. But a person’s conscience will be clear and his soul will be calm if he acted in full agreement with his inner convictions. Such a person can be called happy.
The educational role of morality. Education always proceeds in two ways: on the one hand, through the influence of other people on a person, through a purposeful change in the external circumstances in which the person being educated is placed, and on the other hand, through the influence of a person on himself, i.e. through self-education. The upbringing and education of a person continues virtually all his life: a person constantly replenishes and improves knowledge, skills, and his inner world, because life itself is constantly renewed.
Morality has its own special position in the educational process.
Question 3. Concept, essence of moral principles.
The principle of morality is the principle of autonomous self-regulation by an individual of his relationships to himself and others, to the world, his behavior (internal and external).
Moral principles are one of the forms of moral consciousness in which moral requirements are expressed most generally. If the norm of morality prescribes what specific actions a person should perform, and the concept of moral quality characterizes individual aspects of behavior and personality traits, then o the principles of morality in general form reveal the content of this or that morality, express the requirements developed in the moral consciousness of society concerning the moral essence of a person , its purpose, the meaning of its life and the nature of relationships between people.
They give a person a general direction of activity and usually serve as the basis for more specific norms of behavior. In addition to the principles of morality, which reveal the content of a particular morality, for example, individualism and altruism, collectivism and humanism, there are also formal principles that reveal the features of morality. the fulfillment of moral requirements (for example, consciousness and its opposites - fetishism, formalism, dogmatism, authoritarianism, fanaticism, fatalism). Although these principles do not justify any specific norms of behavior, they are nevertheless closely related to the nature of this or that morality, showing to what extent it allows conscious a person’s attitude towards the demands placed on him.
Moral principles motivate human behavior, i.e. act as reasons and motivations that make a person want to do something (or, conversely, not to do something). As a result of education and self-education, people develop attitudes that force them - sometimes even against their will - to do actions that should be done in accordance with moral standards, and not to take any actions that they should not do, since they contradict these norms . An honest person simply cannot, say, steal something: he will not raise his hand to do so. Whenever any values ​​or regulations conflict with moral ones, a choice must be made in favor of the latter. The priority of moral principles over all others extends to all human relationships and actions. In this sense, all spheres of human life and activity are subordinated to moral principles. Immorality is unacceptable either in everyday life or in production; neither at home nor at school; neither in sports nor in science; neither in economics nor in politics. Morality, due to the priority of its principles, ensures the unity and consistency of the interaction of people in a wide variety of circumstances. The confidence that the person next to you adheres to the same moral principles allows you to foresee the general direction of his actions, rely on him and trust him. Even without knowing either the character of a person, or his habits, skills, abilities, you can determine in advance what should and should not be expected from him. People's adherence to common and universal moral principles makes their behavior predictable.
Question 4. Characteristics of the basic principles of morality.
Humanism (Latin himapis - human) is a principle of worldview (including morality) which is based on the belief in the infinity of human capabilities and his ability to achieve perfection. enction, the requirement for freedom and protection of personal dignity, the idea of ​​a person’s right to happiness and that satisfying his needs and interests should be the ultimate goal of society.
The principle of humanism is based on the idea of ​​respectful attitude towards another person, fixed since ancient times. It is expressed in the golden rule of morality “act towards others in the same way as you would like them to act towards you” and in Kant’s categorical impe motivator “always act in such a way that the maxim of your behavior can become a universal law.”
Once, it was possible to have an eliminate CYBECTICTICTIVENISTIONAL, ONE COME, what the way is the same for the same time for the release, YGIE.
Humanism, represented by its imperative side, acting as a practical normative requirement, undoubtedly comes from the priority of the individual over other values. Therefore, the content of humanism correlates with the idea of ​​personal happiness.
True happiness presupposes completeness and emotional richness of life. It can be achieved only in the process of self-realization of the individual, one way or another carried out on the basis of goals and values ​​shared with other people.
It is possible to identify three main meanings of humanism:
1. Guarantees of basic human rights as a condition for preserving the humane foundations of his existence.
2. Support for the weak, going beyond the usual ideas of a given society about justice.
3. Formation of social and moral qualities that allow an individual to achieve self-realization on the basis of public values.
Current trends in the development of humanistic thought include the attention of scientists, public figures, and all sensible people to the fate of human development "The Emergence of Globes" "real problems are the real basis for uniting all currently existing forms of real humanism, regardless of differences in worldviews, political, religious and other beliefs."
In the modern world, the ideas of non-violence have had enormous success, making it possible in practice to liberate many peoples from colonial dependence, to overthrow totalitarian regimes, to awaken social oe opinion is against the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the continuation of underground nuclear tests, etc. The focus of humanistic thought is also on environmental problems, global alternatives associated with a certain reduction in the pace of production development, and limitation of consumption. research, development of waste-free production. By means of a formal principle it is impossible to resolve specific questions about the humane relationship of one person to another, and real humanism, apparently, represents a certain balance c in a combination of different principles, the degree of combining the freedom of self-expression of an individual with the requirements for her behavior set by the culture of a given society.
MERCY is compassionate and active love, expressed in readiness to help everyone in need and extending to all people, and ultimately to all living things. The concept of mercy combines two aspects - spiritual-emotional (experiencing someone else’s pain as if it were your own) and concrete-practical (impulse for real help): without the first, mercy degenerates into coldness. this philanthropy, without the second - in vain sentimentality.
The origins of mercy as a moral principle lie in the Arxaic tribal solidarity, which strictly obligated, at any cost, to rescue a relative from trouble, but excluding “strangers.” True, family solidarity can partially extend to those who are outside the circle of “insiders”, but are somehow connected with it (obligations to the guest, prescribed in the Old Testament regarding attitude towards unfree persons and “aliens”, etc.).
However, we can talk about mercy only when all the barriers between “us” and “strangers”, if not in everyday practice, then in idea and in individual heroic moral acts, have been overcome and alien suffering ceases to be only a subject of cold condescension.
Religions such as Buddhism and Christianity were the first to preach mercy. In Christian ethics, a caring attitude towards one's neighbor is defined as mercy and is one of the main virtues. The significant difference between mercy and friendly love-affection is that, according to the commandment of love, it is mediated by the absolute ideal - love of God. Christian love for one's neighbor is not limited to loved ones, it extends to all people, including enemies.
Even if property inequality is pushed aside, loneliness, old age, illness and other suffering will remain that require not only public concern, but also more delicately of individual mercy. Nowadays, the process of the full return of the term “mercy” into the vocabulary of our society is gradually taking place, and activities aimed at specific assistance to people in need are being intensified. those who live in mercy.
PABEHCTBO (in morality) - a relationship between people, within which they have the same rights to develop creative abilities for happiness, respect for their personal dignity. Along with the idea of ​​the need for fraternal unity between people, equality is the key idea of ​​morality, historically emerging as an alternative to consanguineous secrecy and society the separateness of people, their actual economic and political inequality. The most adequate expression of the principle of equality in morality is the golden rule, from the formulation of which follows the universality (universality) of moral requirements, their prevalence for everyone people, regardless of their social status and living conditions, and the universality of moral judgments, which lies in the fact that when assessing the actions of others people proceed from the same grounds as when assessing their own actions.
The idea of ​​equality receives normative expression in the principle of altruism and the corresponding requirements of compassion (pity), mercy, and participation.
As historical experience shows, moral equality can be practically realized only with a certain socio-political and cultural status of people who are characterized by economic omical and political independence, the opportunity to increase the educational and professional level, spiritual development with the indispensable responsibility of each person lena of the company for the results of its activities .
ALTPUISM (from Latin alteg - other) is a moral principle that prescribes compassion for other people, selfless service to them and readiness for self-denial in the name of their good and happiness. The concept of “Altruism” was introduced into the theory of morality by Comte, who placed this principle as the basis of his ethical system. Comte linked the moral improvement of society with the education in people of a social sense of altruism, which should counteract their selfishness.
As a requirement for equality and humanity, altruism is one of the normative foundations of morality and humanism. At the same time, being addressed to the individual as a bearer of private interests, altruism in fact certainly presupposes self-denial, because in conditions of mutual isolation of interests that about the interests of one's neighbor is possible only if one's own interests are infringed. Specific forms of realization of altruism in behavior are beneficence and philanthropy.
Justice is a concept of moral consciousness that expresses not this or that value, good, but their general relationship between themselves and the specific distribution between individuals; the proper order of human society, corresponding to ideas about the essence of man and his inalienable rights. Justice is also a category of legal and socio-political consciousness. Unlike the more abstract concepts of good and evil, with the help of which a moral assessment is given to certain phenomena as a whole, justice characterizes the relationship between several phenomena from the point of view of disposition division of good and evil between people.
Justice does not contradict either mercy, kindness, or love. Love includes both of these concepts. A just judge is obliged to punish the criminal, however, moved by love and in accordance with the circumstances, he can at the same time show mercy in order to mitigate the punishment, which must always be humane. For example, a judge should not bully the accused, deprive him of a lawyer, or administer an unfair trial.
According to Aristotle, the main task of the prudent (prudent) is to make the right decisions regarding the good and benefit for oneself as a whole - for a good life. With the help of prudence, a person is able to choose the right means for this purpose in a particular situation and implement it in action. Aristotle emphasizes that to be prudent means not just to know, but to be able to act in accordance with knowledge. If scientific and philosophical knowledge deals with extremely general definitions that do not allow justification, then prudence presupposes knowledge not only of the general, but even to a greater extent of the particular, since it deals with making decisions and performing actions in specific (private) circumstances. And a prudent person, as a person capable of making decisions, knows how to achieve the highest possible benefit in a specific action. If wisdom is gained through the mind, then prudence is gained through experience and a special feeling similar to conviction.
Subsequently, I. Kant separated prudence from morality. He showed that the moral law is not determined by any goal external to it. Prudence is aimed at the natural goal - happiness, and a prudent act is only a means for it.
The rehabilitation of prudence in modern moral philosophy involves restoring its meaning as practical wisdom, that is, as the ability to act in the best possible way in specific circumstances. In the best way - it means focusing, if not on a morally sublime, then at least on a morally justified goal.
Prudence is determined by one of the key (along with justice and benevolence) principles of morality. This principle is formulated in the form of the requirement to take equal care of all parts of one's life and not to prefer the immediate good to the greater good that can only be achieved in the future.
LOVE OF PEACE is a principle of morality and politics, based on the recognition of human life as a higher social and moral value and affirming the maintenance and strengthening of peace as an ideal in relation to decisions between peoples and states. Peacefulness presupposes respect for the personal and national dignity of individual citizens and entire nations, state sovereignty, human rights and the people in their own right a given lifestyle choice.
Peacefulness contributes to the maintenance of social order, mutual understanding between generations, the development of historical and cultural traditions, the interaction of various social groups, ethnicities, nations, culture typ. Peacefulness is opposed by aggressiveness, belligerence, a penchant for violent means of conflict resolution, suspicion and distrust in relations between people, nations, social and political European systems. In the history of morality, peacefulness and aggressiveness, hostility are opposed as two main trends.

Conclusion
Nothing can happen outside of morality, i.e. outside the circle of values ​​that determine human life. Each individual, each group, each society is a certain system of norms, ideals, prohibitions that allow the individual to gradually improve in the chosen direction. Morality, therefore, is an obligatory dimension of human existence. The ultimate goal of morality is human happiness, the most harmonious development of the individual and all people.
One of the necessary signs of true morality is eternity, the immutability of its principles and categories, including the categories of good and evil, which are the most general and fundamental concepts of ethics.
Material things, especially those created by man, are prone to change. Moreover, they must change and improve. Human genius constantly invents better things. This forms part of the progress towards which man naturally strives in his creativity.
But moral principles and values ​​are of a different order. Some of them are relative, while others are absolute and unchanging. They are unchangeable because, among many other things, they do not allow us to commit actions that are directed against our dignity.

Literature
1. Guseinov A.A., Apresyan R.G. Ethics. M.: 1998. - 472 p.
2. Zelenkova I.L., Belyaeva E.V. Ethics: Textbook. - Mn.: published by V.M. Skakun, 1995. - 320 p.
3. Milner-Irinin A.Ya. Ethics or principles of true humanity. M., Interbook, 1999. - 519 p.
4. Mitashkina T.V., Brazhnikova Z.V. Ethics. History and theory of morality. Minsk, BSPA "VUZ-UNITY", 1996. - 345 p.
etc.................

Universal Moral Principles exist in addition to specific moral norms, such as “don’t steal” or “be merciful.” Their peculiarity is that they set most general formulas, from which all other specific norms can be derived.

Talion principle

Talion rule considered the first universal principle. In the Old Testament the talion formula is expressed as follows: "an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth". In primitive society, talion was carried out in the form of blood feud, and the punishment had to strictly correspond to the harm caused. Before the emergence of the state, the talion played a positive role by limiting violence: a person could refuse violence out of fear of retribution; Talion also limited retaliatory violence, leaving it within the limits of the harm caused. The emergence of the state, which took over the functions of justice, turned the talion into a relic of uncivilized times, crossing it out of the list of basic principles of moral regulation

Principle of morality

Golden Rule of Morality formulated by the first civilizations independently of each other. This principle can be found among the sayings of the ancient sages: Buddha, Confucius, Thales, Christ. In the most general view this rule looks like this: "( Do not act towards others as you would (not) want them to act towards you" Unlike talion Golden Rule relies not on fear of revenge, but on its own ideas about good and evil, and also abolishes the division into “us” and “strangers,” presenting society as a collection of equal people.

Commandment of love becomes the basic universal principle in.

In the New Testament, Jesus Christ expressed this principle this way: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. The second is similar to it: Love your neighbor as yourself.

New Testament ethics is an ethics of love. The main thing is not formal obedience to laws and rules, but mutual love. The commandment of love does not cancel the ten commandments of the Old Testament: if a person acts according to the principle of “love your neighbor,” then he cannot kill or steal.

The principle of the golden mean

The principle of the golden mean presented in works. It reads: Avoid extremes and observe moderation. All moral virtues are a mean between two vices (for example, courage is located between cowardice and recklessness) and go back to the virtue of moderation, which allows a person to curb his passions with the help of reason.

Categorical Imperative - a universal formula of morality proposed by Immanuel Kant. It reads: act in such a way that the reasons for your action can become a universal law,; in other words, do so that your actions can become a model for others. Or: always treat a person as an end, and not just as a means, i.e. never use a person only as a means to your ends.

The Greatest Happiness Principle

The Greatest Happiness Principle utilitarian philosophers Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) proposed it as a universal. It states that everyone should behave in such a way that to provide the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Actions are assessed by their consequences: the more benefit an action brings to different people, the higher it is rated on the moral scale (even if the act itself was selfish). The consequences of each possible action can be calculated, all the pros and cons can be weighed, and the action that will bring more benefit to the greatest number of people can be chosen. An action is moral if the benefit from it outweighs the harm.

Principle of justice

Principles of justice American philosopher John Rawls (1921-2002) proposed:

First principle: Every person should have equal rights to fundamental freedoms. Second principle: Social and economic inequalities should be so arranged that (a) they can reasonably be expected to benefit everyone, and (b) access to positions and positions is open to everyone.

In other words, everyone should have equal rights in relation to freedoms (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, etc.) and equal access to schools and universities, to official positions, jobs, etc. Where equality is impossible (for example, in where there are not enough goods for everyone), this inequality should be arranged to the benefit of the poor. One possible example of such a redistribution of benefits would be a progressive income tax, where the rich pay more taxes, and the proceeds go to the social needs of the poor.

Each universal principle expresses a certain moral ideal, which is mainly understood as philanthropy. However, not all principles are compatible: they are based on different values ​​and different understandings of the good. Based general principles One must first determine the degree of applicability of a particular principle to a situation and identify possible conflicts between different principles. A decision will be clearly moral only if all applicable principles are consistent with the decision made. If there is a serious conflict of principles, it is worth considering other factors, for example, the requirements of professional codes, expert opinions, legal and religious norms accepted in society, understand the degree of your responsibility for the decision, and only then make an informed moral choice.

Moral principles play a dominant role in moral consciousness. Expressing the requirements of morality in the most general form, they constitute the essence of moral relations and are a strategy for moral behavior. Moral principles are recognized by the moral consciousness as unconditional requirements, adherence to which is strictly obligatory in all life situations. They express the main
requirements relating to the moral essence of a person, the nature of relationships between people, determine the general direction of human activity and underlie private, specific norms of behavior.
Moral principles include such general principles of morality as:

1 .The principle of humanism. The essence of the principle of humanism is the recognition of man as the highest value. In ordinary understanding, this principle means love for people, protection of human dignity, people's right to happiness and the possibility of self-realization. It is possible to identify three main meanings of humanism:

Guarantees of basic human rights as a condition for preserving the humane foundations of his existence;

Support for the weak, going beyond the usual ideas of a given society about justice;

Formation of social and moral qualities that allow an individual to achieve self-realization on the basis of public values.

2. The principle of altruism. This moral principle, prescribing selfless actions aimed at the benefit (satisfaction of interests) of other people. The term was introduced into circulation by the French philosopher O. Comte (1798 - 1857) to capture the concept opposite to the concept selfishness. Altruism as a principle, according to Comte, says: “Live for others.”

3. The principle of collectivism. This principle is fundamental in uniting people to achieve common goals and carry out joint activities; it has a long history and is fundamental to the existence of humanity. The team presents itself in the only way social organization people from primitive tribes to modern states. Its essence lies in the conscious desire of people to contribute to the common good. The opposite principle is the principle of individualism. The principle of collectivism includes several particular principles:

Unity of purpose and will;

Cooperation and mutual assistance;

Democracy;

Discipline.

4.Principles of justice proposed by the American philosopher John Rawls (1921-2002).

First principle: Every person should have equal rights to fundamental freedoms.

Second principle: Social and economic inequalities must be adjusted so that:

They could reasonably be expected to benefit everyone;

Access to positions and positions would be open to everyone.

In other words, everyone should have equal rights in relation to freedoms (freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, etc.) and equal access to schools and universities, to official positions, jobs, etc. Where equality is impossible (for example, in an economy where there is not enough wealth for everyone), this inequality must be arranged to the benefit of the poor. One possible example of such a redistribution of benefits would be a progressive income tax, where the rich pay more taxes, and the proceeds go to the social needs of the poor.

5. The principle of mercy. Mercy is compassionate and active love, expressed in readiness to help everyone in need and extending to all people, and ultimately to all living things. The concept of mercy combines two aspects:

Spiritual-emotional (experiencing someone else’s pain as if it were your own);

Concretely practical (impulse for real help).

The origins of mercy as a moral principle lie in the Arxaic clan solidarity, which strictly obligated, at the cost of any victims, to rescue a relative from trouble.

Religions such as Buddhism and Christianity were the first to preach mercy.

6. The principle of peacefulness. This principle of morality is based on the recognition of human life as the highest social and moral value and affirms the maintenance and strengthening of peace as the ideal of relations between peoples and states. Peacefulness presupposes respect for the personal and national dignity of individual citizens and entire nations, state sovereignty, human rights and the people in their own right a given lifestyle choice.

Peacefulness contributes to the maintenance of social order, mutual understanding between generations, the development of historical and cultural traditions, the interaction of various social groups, ethnicities, nations, culture typ. Peacefulness is opposed by aggressiveness, belligerence, a penchant for violent means of conflict resolution, suspicion and distrust in relations between people, nations, social and political European systems. In the history of morality, peacefulness and aggressiveness are opposed as two main trends.

7. The principle of patriotism. This is a moral principle, in a general form expressing a feeling of love for the Motherland, concern for its interests and readiness to defend it from enemies. Patriotism is manifested in pride in the achievements of one’s native country, in bitterness because of its failures and troubles, in respect for its historical past and in a caring attitude towards people’s memory, national and cultural values. cultural traditions.

The moral significance of patriotism is determined by the fact that it is one of the forms of subordination of personal and public interests, unity of man and the Fatherland. But patriotic feelings and ideas only morally elevate a person and a people when they are associated with respect for the peoples of other countries and do not degenerate into the psychology of the nation natural exclusivity and distrust of “outsiders”. This aspect of patriotic consciousness has become especially relevant recently, when the threat of nuclear self-destruction or environmental catastrophe required the patriot to reconsider ism as a principle commanding everyone to contribute to their country's contribution to the preservation of the planet and the survival of humanity.

8. The principle of tolerance. Tolerance means respect, acceptance and proper understanding of the rich diversity of our world's cultures, our forms of self-expression and ways of expressing human individuality. It is promoted by knowledge, openness, communication and freedom of thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is a virtue that makes peace possible and helps replace the culture of war with a culture of peace.

The manifestation of tolerance, which is consonant with respect for human rights, does not mean tolerating social injustice, abandoning one’s own or yielding to other people’s beliefs. This means that everyone is free to hold their own beliefs and recognizes the same right for others. This means recognizing that people by nature differ in appearance, attitude, speech, behavior and values ​​and have the right to live in the world and maintain their individuality. This also means that one person's views cannot be imposed on others.

Morality and law.

Law, like morality, regulates the behavior and relationships of people. But unlike morality, the implementation of legal norms is controlled by public authority. If morality is an “internal” regulator of human actions, then law is an “external” state regulator.

Law is a product of history. Morality (as well as mythology, religion, art) is older than him in its historical age. It has always existed in human society, but law arose when the class stratification of primitive society occurred and states began to be created. The sociocultural norms of a primitive stateless society concerning the division of labor, distribution of material goods, mutual defense, initiation, marriage, etc. had the force of custom and were reinforced by mythology. They generally subordinated the individual to the interests of the collective. Measures of social influence were applied to their violators - from persuasion to coercion.

Both moral and legal norms are social. What they have in common is that both types serve to regulate and evaluate the actions of an individual. Various things include:

• law is developed by the state, morality by society;
• law is enshrined in state acts, morality is not;
• for violating a rule of law, state sanctions are expected; for violating a moral rule, public condemnation, criticism and, in some cases, state sanctions.