Basic moral problems. Moral problems of literature What are moral problems?

As a form of art fiction reveals many moral, spiritual and social problems of an individual and society as a whole. This is the main guideline of literature, and its moral core is always in the spotlight.

Moral problems of literature

We can identify those moral problems that literature focuses on most often. Everyone knows about the eternity of the question of good and evil, about the question of human dignity and conscience; fiction of all times and peoples raises the question of justice, honor and virtue.

The problem of life choice always remains acute, which is not easy for literary heroes - just like for people in real life. The moral quests of a particular people are always reflected in the literature of a particular nation, and therefore a person’s ideals can be revealed from completely different moral aspects.

Whatever time period literature belongs to, it is always full of solutions to problems of a moral nature. And a problem of any nature - social or psychological - is considered from precisely this angle. The moral quests of the main characters reflect the main moral problems of a particular period.

The hero of a work of art, his character, actions

Most often, the definition of the hero of a work of art sounds like “the exponent of the plot action.” And it is through the hero that the key content of a literary work is revealed, since his character, his choices and actions indicate what side of morality the author wants to show us.

By revealing and drawing our attention to the character traits of the literary hero, the author shows the main idea of the work and emphasizes a certain theme, of which there may be several in the work. Thus, the main moral lessons that the author laid down in his creation become clear to us; using the example of the hero, we become more aware of them.

Techniques for creating character in epic, lyric and drama

The techniques used to reveal the personality and character of the main character in a work depend on the genre. In the epic, a person is portrayed to a greater extent through his actions and behavior. In this genre, the characterization of the hero by the author himself is also appropriate. This is not so typical for drama; drama reveals character through the actions and speech of the hero, through his differences from other people.

In this it is very different from the epic, which forms character in a completely different way. At the center of the drama there can be only one problem, which reveals the moral bottom of the hero. And his choice speaks for itself; it is one specific action or decision that will show the true character of the main character.

And in the lyrics, the hero is most often shown through feelings and experiences, through the filling of his inner world. Understanding what exactly the hero is experiencing, what emotions he shows, the reader realizes his true nature and recognizes his real face.

Modern society is in a global crisis. Every day there are media reports about political confrontation and military conflicts, terrorist attacks and environmental and man-made disasters, the bankruptcy of not only individual companies, but also entire countries. And it seems that there is no end to this. What's the matter? What is at the root of this global crisis? The answer to these questions should be sought neither in economics nor in politics. The roots of the crisis are much deeper - in the sphere of spiritual and moral life of society and each individual.

In what case does it become possible for a person to dump waste containing toxic substances into water bodies; produce products with harmful ingredients and counterfeit medicines that cannot help a person in a difficult situation; bomb civilian targets, knowing that there are civilians and children there? There is only one answer - in the case of a low level of morality. This is precisely the main reason for the global crisis, which has affected almost all countries of the world and all aspects of society.

The ideology of a consumer society, when the main value is money and power, leads to the replacement of universal human values that were professed in different eras, among different peoples, with false values, to the distortion of basic basic concepts. In a society dominated by the ideology of consumption, exorbitant desires, lying primarily in the sphere of material goods, and the thirst for pleasure are inflated. Profit becomes the main priority of people, and elementary concepts are interpreted with the opposite meaning. As a result, modern society is not so much evolving (in certain areas) as degrading as a whole.

Famous historians, political scientists and political figures V.E. Bagdasaryan and S.S. Sulakshin in his monograph examines the value factors that strengthen the Russian state, and also identifies factors that have a destructive impact on it, the so-called anti-values, which are focused not on the strengthening and life of any state, but, on the contrary, on its weakening and even death.

The conclusion that the authors came to is disappointing: “...Russia at the beginning of the 21st century. is in a state of not just a crisis, but a civilizational catastrophe. The erosion of the country's values is one of its factors. Many of them have reached historic lows. The way out, accordingly, is seen in the development of the country’s vital potentials, which... correspond to the highest values of the state.”

And not only scientists and politicians understand this. More and more ordinary people, citizens of Russia and other countries, understand the importance of increasing the level of morality in society, considering this process as an effective mechanism for the evolutionary development of society. There is a tendency to increasingly involve Russians and citizens of other countries in actions aimed at reviving morality in the world and overcoming the magic of anti-values. One such example is the activities of the International Public Organization “FOR MORALITY!”, which includes participants from 50 countries. Participants of the Movement “FOR MORALITY!” They didn’t just start with themselves and strive to lead a moral lifestyle, they meet with people, talk about moral problems in society, and also try to involve the leadership of their countries in solving this problem. In particular, the participants of the Movement developed a program document “The Doctrine of High Morality” (hereinafter referred to as the Doctrine), which represents a look at the causes of the current state of society, defines the main value guidelines, defines basic concepts, and suggests ways out of the ideological crisis. The doctrine contains the concept of the ideology of a highly moral society, which can serve as the basis for the formation of public policy, improvement of the legal framework, as well as for the development of targeted programs in the field of improving morality.

The existing deformations in the spiritual and moral sphere are clearly manifested when comparing the understanding of basic basic concepts such as God, man, the physical world, society, freedom, power and others presented in the Doctrine. Their consideration will help, in our opinion, to see a way out of the current crisis situation.

The concept of "God". In a consumer society, this concept ceases to be perceived as a source of absolute values that determine a person’s entire life. Instead, fetishism is implanted - religious worship of material values, and the cult of money dominates. The psychology of “fast food” also manifests itself in matters of faith. Often the worship of God is formal, associated only with the observance of rituals.
Objectively, God is the Supreme Law that governs the Universe. Everything is subject to this Law. Following it allows the individual to develop spiritually and morally.

The question of the existence of God is gradually moving from the area of religious and philosophical reasoning to the area of scientific research. Thus, in the world there are a large number of fundamental physical constants (gravity, electromagnetic force, nuclear interaction, the ratio of the Earth’s radius to the distance to the Sun, and others). Results of research by mathematicians, the Problem of Morality and the global crisis of the society of physicists and astrophysicists from different countries peace - I.L. Rosenthal, V.A. Nikitin, S. Weinberg, R. Breuer, F. Dyson, D. Polkinghorne, D. Barrow, F. Tripler, D. Jean and others - indicate that the slightest change in any of them would lead to the destruction of the Universe. Scientific research in this area allowed scientists to conclude that there is a Supermind that controls the Universe.

The greatest physicist of the 20th century, Arthur Compton, Nobel Prize laureate, says: “Faith begins with the knowledge that the Supreme Mind created the Universe and man. It is not difficult for me to believe this, because the fact of the existence of a plan and, therefore, Reason is irrefutable. The order in the Universe, which unfolds before our eyes, itself testifies to the truth of the greatest and most sublime statement: “In the beginning is God.”

With similar statements in different time speakers: Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Charles Darwin, C. Flammarion, N.I. Pirogov, Jules S. Duchesne, F. Crick, A.D. Sakharov, P.P. Garyaev and many other scientists of the world.
The concept of “Physical world”. In modern society, there is an idea that there is only a physical world that can be seen, touched, studied, broken down into its component parts, therefore all activity is limited to this world.
However, scientists have proven that the physical world is only the “tip of the iceberg.” Nobel Prize winner, Italian physicist C. Rubbia, claims that visible matter makes up only one billionth of the entire Universe. The Universe is much wider, and scientists provide evidence of new levels of life in it. Discovery by Russian scientist S.V. Zenin of the information-phase state of matter, the development by the English physicist D. Bohm of the theory of the holographic nature of the Universe, the discoveries of Russian scientists G.I. Shipov and A.E. Akimov in the field of the theory of physical vacuum and torsion fields indicate multi-level nature and the existence of intelligent control of the Universe.
The concept of "Man". In a consumer society, a person is seen as part of the material world. It has a “beginning” (birth) and an “end” (death) - just like any object or process in the physical world has its origin and destruction. And since, according to the majority, a person lives once, then he must live his only life in enjoying all its benefits. It is impossible to become perfect in one life, so there is no point in striving for high morality, which involves internal restrictions and self-discipline.

However, if we take into account that the Universe is a complex multi-level system of existence of different planes of existence, therefore, such a complex living organism as a person is also multidimensional. Computer GDV-graphy technologies developed by K.G. Korotkov and based on the Kirlian effect, clearly show the presence of an energy component in a person - a biofield, which reflects his thoughts and feelings.
The Problem of Morality and the Global Crisis of Society

In addition to the mortal part, man also has an immortal part, which evolves over many incarnations. Over the course of many of his lives, a person accumulates experience, develops his best qualities, and, according to a cause-and-effect relationship, reaps the consequences of his actions committed not only in one life, but in all previous existences. If a person knew that he lives more than once, he would think deeply before committing an immoral act. He would understand that if he offended and humiliated, deceived and killed someone in a previous incarnation, then in the subsequent rebirth he himself would be offended and humiliated, deceived and killed.

The scientific approach to the study of reincarnation, which has been developing since 1960, and the organization in 1980 of the International Association for the Study of “Past” Lives, which includes scientists from Great Britain, Germany, the USA, Russia and other countries, have made it possible to document thousands of cases of memories of past lives. For example, the American doctor, Professor I. Stevenson, spent 40 years studying 3,000 cases of children’s memories of past lives.

Teaching in kindergartens and schools only two Laws of the Universe: about the cause-and-effect relationship and about the rebirth of the immortal part of man - in one or two generations would radically change society and direct it along the moral path.

Having examined the first three concepts in detail, we will briefly consider the rest.
“Society” - in a consumer society, inequality is assumed to be racial, property, religious and others. In a highly moral society, humanity is a brotherhood of peoples.
“Freedom” - in a consumer society is manifested in non-compliance with the Supreme Law. Permissiveness, abuse to satisfy desires and obtain pleasure. In a highly moral society, freedom is the conscious need to follow the Supreme Law that exists in the Universe. Unlimited freedom to act within the framework of this Law.

“Power” - in a consumer society, power is aimed at keeping the masses in obedience, follows the political situation, gives rise to corruption and the struggle for power. Positions are bought. In a highly moral society, power is an honorable duty. The best representatives of society occupy leadership positions in accordance with their moral qualities.
“Finance” - in a consumer society, acts as a means of management, manipulation, control, enslavement. In a highly moral society, finance is a temporary phenomenon at a certain stage of social development (as an equivalent of exchange, a means of accounting and distribution).

“Labor” – in a consumer society is a way to earn money. In a highly moral society, work is the highest joy, a way of creative self-realization of a person.
“Wars” - in a consumer society, are a means of struggle for power, control, wealth and natural resources. In a highly moral society there is a world without wars. Implementation of the principle of non-violence in international, social and interpersonal relations.
“Medicine, healthcare” - in a consumer society, treatment and medicines are used as a means of profit. There is no interest in the person being healthy. In a moral society, their goal is the health of every person. The basis of health is harmony with Nature.

“Education” is in a consumer society a means of reproducing the labor force and instilling in citizens the qualities necessary for the state. In a moral society, every person should receive the most comprehensive education as a means of revealing the inner potential of the individual.

“The media” – in a consumer society, this is a source of manipulation of mass consciousness. They fulfill the social order of those in power. They contribute to the stupidity of the population. In a moral society, they contribute to broadening the horizons of every member of society. Expand and deepen knowledge.

“Art” – in a consumer society is considered as a commercial product of mass consumption. Reflects the immorality of society. In a highly moral society, it provides examples of high morality and morality, elevates the consciousness of people.

“Science” – in a consumer society, serves the interests of financial elites. Scientific discoveries are used for profit and for military purposes. In a moral society, science studies the laws of the universe and helps humanity follow them. All scientific achievements and developments are aimed at improving human life.

“Family” - in a consumer society, there is a degeneration of the family: same-sex marriages, single-parent families, sexual perversions. In a moral society, the family is the pillar of society and the state.
“Free time” – in a consumer society, it is used for pleasure and entertainment. In a moral society it is used for education and self-improvement.
The authors of the Doctrine of High Morality believe that the revival of morality should become a national program, a national ideology, promoted at all levels, by all possible ways. Only in this case is it possible to overcome the global moral crisis of modern society.

States built on moral principles have always had social, economic and political advantages, which led them to prosperity and increased well-being. Therefore, the only way out of any crisis is to improve the morality of the people. When a person becomes more and more moral, he himself automatically begins to abandon what is immoral.

Now modern media adapt to the lowest desires of people, promoting low examples: rudeness, smoking, violence, sexual abuse and perversion, and others. The problem of Morality and the global crisis of society However, the state found the strength at the highest level to launch a campaign against smoking and alcoholism of the population. The next step should be the penetration on television screens, on the radio, on the pages of publications of higher, more moral, beautiful examples of art and culture, which should gradually displace (not by banning) vulgarity, rudeness and violence from the consciousness of the people, and therefore from all areas of state life. It is necessary to instill in the consciousness of the people the understanding of God as the Supreme Moral Law that exists in the Universe. It is necessary at the state level to promote moral concepts such as honor, sincerity, kindness, modesty, benevolence and others. Russia must become a stronghold of morality in the world!

UDC 316.62:17.02

I. A. Mironenko

Problems of morality in modern Russian psychology: search for guidelines

The article is devoted to the analysis of the current state of a new, rapidly developing field of psychological science - the psychology of moral regulation of behavior. According to the author, the main problem that generates, guides and divides the flow of modern research into morality is the problem of finding moral guidelines. The article analyzes the main directions in the search for guidelines in matters of morality, discusses their inherent difficulties and contradictions, as well as prospects for the development of research in this area.

The article dwells upon the problems of a rapidly developing area in Russian psychology - ethical psychology. It is discussed that its" development is mainly determined by a search for ethical orientations which bares a controversial character. The perspectives of the development are analyzed.

Key words: moral regulation of behavior, sociocentric paradigm, humanistic psychology, Christian psychology, sociobiology.

Key words: ethical psychology, humanistic psychology, Christian psychology, sociobiology.

Today we are witnessing a genuine boom in the field of research into the moral regulation of behavior. If until recently few psychologists dared to touch upon this area, over the past decades dozens of specialists have turned to its development. Thus, at a conference in memory of S.L., which had a record number of participants. Rubinstein, which took place on October 15-16, 2009 at the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the section devoted to problems of morality turned out to be the most numerous. This section lasted two days, in the format of three meetings, and the materials presented at it almost completely occupied one of the six volumes of conference materials, and this volume turned out to be the thickest.

What are the reasons for such popularity of this topic?

Two reasons seem obvious. The first is the logic of the development of psychological science itself in the post-Soviet period, the turn of most scientists to personality research from the study of mental processes that dominated in the Soviet period. The second is the vital, practical relevance of this issue.

The sharp turn to personality problems from research on mental processes was caused both by the fact that opportunities opened up to conduct research that was not previously supported by official policy in the field of science and education, and by a reduction in funding for laboratory research, without which work in the field of processes turned out to be almost impossible .

The vast majority of publications and defended dissertations in psychology today are addressed specifically to the sphere of holistic aspects and manifestations of human existence, which naturally leads to the formulation of questions of value-moral-psychological regulation of human behavior. The development of the human personality, the meaning of human life, no matter what position we adhere to, no matter in what discourse we discuss the issue - whether in the discourse of self-realization or in the discourse of serving something - it is impossible to consider outside the system of value-moral coordinates.

A.L. Zhuravlev (2007) notes the growing interest of researchers in the role of moral and psychological phenomena (factors) in group activity, various forms of social behavior, etc. The most promising today, according to A.L. Zhuravlev, are studies of social responsibility and responsible behavior, justice, commitment and integrity in relations between people and appropriate behavior, respect towards people and respectful behavior, truthfulness and honesty in interpersonal and inter-group relations and truthfully-sincere behavior (and not only studies of lies, untruths, deception, disinformation, manipulative behavior, etc.) and many other properties of moral consciousness, self-awareness and moral social behavior of an individual and a group.

There is no doubt about the vital relevance of this issue and the practical significance of its development for modern society. The vast majority of research carried out in this area consists of empirical work that claims direct practical significance and relevance. The leitmotif of most of these works is the call: “it’s time to realize that in

In Russia, moral education, spiritual revival are a matter of survival of the nation and one of the necessary prerequisites for improving the economy” (Bogomolov, 2008, p. 20, cited in: Yurevich, Ushakov).

In scientific and popular literature, passions run high and catastrophic forecasts dominate. A fairly popular point of view is that we are witnessing a landslide decline in morals, “a complex and systemic moral degradation of our society” (Yurevich, Ushakov). Critics of modern morality appeal to statistical data1 and especially note not only such phenomena themselves, but also society’s tolerance towards them, their perception by Russians as familiar and irresistible, as the norm of our life, and not as something out of the ordinary. “This is how tolerance towards evil and humility in front of it are formed, contributing to its establishment in increasingly inhuman forms” (Yurevich, Ushakov).

A.V. Yurevich and co-authors proposed a method for calculating the Index of Moral Consciousness of Society (INSO) (Yurevich, Ushakov, Tsapenko, 2007), which is based on statistical data. In accordance with calculations, the INSO of Russian society decreases like an avalanche in 1990-1994, after which it fluctuates slightly around the value achieved by 1994.

Perestroika and the social reforms that followed it are cited primarily as the reason for the moral degradation of Russian society:

“At the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st centuries, Russian society, plunged by the state first into “perestroika” and then into “radical reforms,” constantly experienced moral deviations and a deficiency not so much of social, economic and political, but of moral guidelines, values and patterns of behavior.” (Levashov, 2007, p. 225, quoted from: Yurevich, Ushakov).

“Among the components of the exorbitant social price that had to be paid for radical economic reforms in

Every year, 2 thousand children become victims of murder and suffer serious bodily harm;

Every year, 2 million children suffer from parental cruelty, and 50 thousand run away from home;

Every year, 5 thousand women die from beatings inflicted by their husbands;

Violence against wives, elderly parents and children is recorded in every fourth family;

The rate of increase in child crime is 15 times faster than the rate of increase in general crime;

(Analysis of the situation of children in the Russian Federation, 2007, cited by: Yurevich, Ushakov).

Russia - neglect of the moral and psychological world of man, intensive eradication of the moral and ethical component from social existence" (Grinberg, 2007, p. 588, cited in: Yurevich, Ushakov).

They also blame modern government policy: “It seems that not a single developed country in the world now has such free propaganda of vices aimed at the moral and physical degradation of the people” (Semyonov, 2008, p. 172).

It can be concluded that the Russian psychological literature is dominated by the assessment of the current state of society as a decline in morality and moral degradation.

However, it should be noted that not all authors regard the processes taking place in our society as a decline in morality. From the point of view of a number of scientists, there is no reason to say that now the moral standards of society are lower than they were before. Thus, the author of the concept of techno-humanitarian balance A.P. Nazaretyan (Nazaretyan, 2008) notes that much of what people of modern society perceive as gross acts of violence was not at all qualified as such by people of traditional (especially archaic) culture. The everyday background of the life of our not very distant ancestors was ordinary and everyday violence. Regular beating of wives by husbands and children by parents, public executions and floggings on the streets, everyday conflicts, mass fights on holidays (which, although they followed certain rules, left behind the dead and maimed). Household sketches of this kind abound in the works of L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.N. Ostrovsky, N.S. Leskov, M. Gorky and other writers.

If the assessment of the current situation in the sphere of morality as a decline is not unambiguous, there is still every reason to talk about a crisis of morality. This is evidenced by the very fact of acute feelings about the moral foundations of society, which are reflected in the flow of psychological works devoted to this topic.

In our opinion, the essence of this crisis is the loss of moral guidelines caused by the divergence of ideas about values in a situation of complex diversity and the growing intensity of interaction between cultures in modern society. The first reason for this crisis should be the confusion regarding ideals and values (including, above all, moral ones), which we are witnessing in modern world, aware of itself in its multiculturality, plurality

ties of civilizations based on different systems of value orientations. As N.K. wrote Mikhailovsky1: “We cannot evaluate social phenomena otherwise than subjectively, i.e. through the ideal of justice,” and with regard to this ideal there are large differences. At the same time, there is a lack of psychological readiness of people to adequately understand each other and interact in a situation of multiple and uncertain value orientations.

Each culture is an integral system, and as such, resists the destruction of its integrity. One can agree with S. Moscovici when he calls the division into friends and foes as a fundamental, initial manifestation of sociality and emphasizes the importance of religion as a mechanism of such division (Moscovici, 1998). Language itself, as the main mechanism of culture, performs not only a unifying function, providing its speakers with the opportunity to understand each other, it is also a way of isolating cultures, ensuring protection of culture from external influences: language is also a means of limiting the circle of those who understand each other. It is known that the close proximity of heterogeneous cultures, as, for example, in the Caucasus region, leads to linguistic divergence. This dividing function of language was especially emphasized and considered fundamental by P.F. Porshnev (2007).

The tendency to increase the intensity of interaction between different cultures in the modern world leads not only to the unification of a number of psychological characteristics of people, but also to differentiation, even polarization, of other characteristics - like any interpersonal interaction. This tendency is fraught with the danger of social and intrapersonal conflicts, which are given the character of moral conflicts.

Traditionally, domestic researchers of the Soviet period considered the moral sphere as a result of socio-historical development and substantiated its social conditionality and connection with human activity. The most influential research paradigm moral development was the cultural-historical theory (L. S. Vygotsky) and the activity approach developed on its basis (A. N. Leontiev, D. B. Elkonin, L. I. Bozhovich). In line with this paradigm, moral development is considered as the child’s appropriation of moral norms, their internalization and further implementation in moral behavior. Morality is considered as a form of social consciousness, in a sociocentric context:

“The little son came to his father and the little one asked:

What is good,

And what is bad?

Today we can state the rejection of the sociocentric paradigm by almost all researchers who address the problems of moral and psychological regulation of behavior. And is it possible to focus on norms that are socio-cultural in origin in a multicultural world?

If socio-cultural norms can no longer be the basis of morality in a dynamically changing multicultural world, where to look for these foundations?

Psychological science itself, as it becomes obvious, is very heterogeneous in relation to value orientations, both terminal and instrumental. The concepts of different schools have significantly different ideas about what is the main function of the psyche, why and why the psyche arose in evolution. Ideas about the essence and ideal of the human personality differ.

In the process of integration of world science, the axiomatic foundations of various theories are revealed - essentially value-moral, correlated with the ideals of the culture in the context of which this or that theory was created. Explicitly or not explicitly, psychological theories and specifically psychological research proceed from a certain philosophical concept, version of a person, confirm or refute some ideas about the essence of a person and his purpose.

No less acute is the problem of divergence of values in psychological practice. Thus, for a number of years now the need for a psychologist to declare goals has been discussed -

consultant so that the client can consciously choose the type of psychological assistance offered.

Thus, it seems to us that the main problem that generates, guides and divides the flow of modern research into morality is the problem of finding moral guidelines. Most modern Russian researchers of moral problems today are looking for lost guidelines and foundations of morality in one of three directions:

Existential-humanistic psychology (A. Maslow, G. Allport, K. Rogers, W. Frankl, etc.);

Christian religion and the works of domestic philosophers of the early twentieth century (V.S. Solovyov, I.A. Ilyin, N.A. Berdyaev, M.M. Bakhtin, N.O. Lossky, G.I. Gurdjiev, etc.);

Sociobiology (D.S. Wilson, R. Dawkins, etc.).

Each of these three directions of search in Russian science arose, as often happens in the history of science, as a kind of protest against the Marxist sociocentric paradigm,

dominant in the previous period. During the years of perestroika, domestic psychology, like a sponge, absorbed the ideas of Western existential-humanistic psychology (A. Maslow, G. Allport, C. Rogers, V. Frankl, etc.). It was humanistic psychology that was primarily opposed to the previous Marxist methodological traditions. Humanistic psychology builds its position on the understanding of man as an integral natural being, which is endowed with the ability for free development, creativity, search for life meanings, the ability to make conscious and responsible choices in a variety of life situations

And an immanent desire for so-called universal human values, which, in line with this approach, are considered as a universal measure of morality. Anthropocentrism was opposed to sociocentrism. The keyword “self” became the “banner” of the new theory.

In modern Russian moral psychology, this direction, however, is no longer the most popular. Most Russian researchers now turn in their search for moral guidelines to religious teachings (primarily the teachings of the Orthodox Church) and to Russian idealistic spiritual and moral philosophy. The emphatically materialistic natural science orientation of psychology of the Soviet period is contrasted here with an idealistic humanitarian orientation.

The theoretical research of B.S. lies in this direction. Bratusya, I.P. Volkova, M.I. Volovikova, V.I. Zatsepina, V.V. Kozlova,

V.E. Semenova, A.I. Subetto, N.P. Fetiskina, V.N. Shadrikov and others. Many authors and methodological developments, and empirical research. It can be said that in the empirical field the choice of moral guidelines is especially acute. The development of any tools here necessarily requires certain foundations. Thus, one of the few existing questionnaires that claims to assess moral development, “Friend-Advisor”, developed by E.K. Veselova (2007) is directly based on the use in

As a measure of the morality of choice in the hypothetical situation offered to the respondent, the compliance of the chosen action option with the recommendations of the contemporary Christian church.

The third direction, oriented towards sociobiology, whose followers in Russia are not so numerous, deserves attention due to its strong representation in Western science and the theoretical elaboration of the models.

Sociobiology arose in the second half of the 70s as a result of the discovery by geneticists of the mechanisms of so-called group or related inheritance. The fact that the carrier of an integral complex of genes is not an individual, but a group connected by family ties, made it possible to explain as biologically appropriate those types of behavior that were traditionally opposed to biologically determined individual egoistic behavior - various manifestations of altruism and self-sacrifice. In the light of new discoveries, things became clear that Darwin himself could not explain and considered paradoxical - cases quite common in the animal world when individuals refrain from having their own offspring, creating their own in return. Better conditions to raise the offspring of their relatives. Thus, the existence of worker ants was inexplicable to Darwin. The presence of genes that ensure manifestations of altruism in a community is undoubtedly biologically expedient and provides the community as a whole with better conditions for survival, compared to groups whose members do not help each other.

Sociobiology1 claims to explain the biological expediency of all types of social behavior of animals and a significant share in human social behavior. In line with sociobiology, an interpretation of sociality was proposed that is directly opposite to the theoretical and methodological foundations of the approach developed during the Soviet period, when it was traditionally believed that the phenomenon of mutual assistance and understanding between members of a community arises only at the level of the human psyche. So, A.N. Leontiev, in his classic monograph “Problems of Psychic Development” (Leontiev, 1972), speaking about the difference between the psyche of an animal and a person, proves that an animal always acts on its own, alone, even when several individuals act together, perceiving others as elements of the environment. environments, objects. In the context of sociobiology, the problem of morality is actually

1 Wilson E. O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, 1975 Wilson E. O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, 1975

is literally removed, replaced by the problem of biological expediency, and turns out to be subordinate to the problem of the survival of the species. In this vein, the problem of morality, in our opinion, is posed in the concept of techno-humanitarian balance by A.P. Nazaretyan (2008). The need for the moral development of humanity here acts as a condition for its survival in a situation of increasing technical power and increasing the destructive potential of civilization.

Modern Russian researchers of morality, leading in the above three directions (spiritual and moral - humanistic - sociobiological) the search for moral guidelines lost along with the theoretical and methodological unity of Russian psychology, as often happens today, do not at all conduct heated discussions among themselves. On the contrary, as for sociobiology, this direction simply claims to absorb the subject area of both humanities, which in turn simply ignore the research of sociobiologists. Despite the claims of humanistic psychology to the natural basis of “universal human values,” no attempts are made to prove the natural roots of these values, or to seek support in the territory of sciences involved in the study of nature, the natural sciences.

Among the humanitarian trends in the triad, the desire for unifying compromise schemes is dominant. An obvious example of such a desire is the approach of B.S. Bratusya (1997). In his concept, the understanding of morality (“moral psychology” in his terminology) is based on the provisions of humanistic psychology (“humanitarian psychology” in his terminology) and, in turn, continues “the line of Christian psychology, implying the recognition of the absolute foundations of morality, a conscious orientation on the Christian image of a person, a Christian understanding of his essence and consideration of development as a path to follow, approaching this image” (Bratus, 1997, p. 9). Humanistic psychology and the spiritual and moral direction are considered by him in line with the eclecticism popular in modern Russian science, “not as hostile, opposing each other, but as, in a certain sense, successive, where the subsequent does not destroy the previous, but absorbs it, adding a new principle consideration, elevating, building up to a whole image of a person” (Bratus, 1997, p. 9).

How not to remember the words of L.S. Vygotsky about the danger of building scientific systems that claim to be generalizing in relation to individual schools and disciplines: “In such attempts, one simply has to turn a blind eye to contradictory facts,

omit enormous areas, capital principles and introduce monstrous distortions into... brought together systems” (Vygotsky, 1982, p. 330).

After all, existential-humanistic psychology proclaims the person himself, his self, his inner essence, self-realization as the terminal value. You have to try hard not to see that the very idea of self-realization is completely contrary to the basic Christian principle of self-denial. Indeed, in the context of a theistic worldview, a person is “short-lived and full of sorrows,” he is by nature imperfect and doomed to suffering. Measure of the value of a human person

Her aspiration for God, love for God and boundless faith. The purpose of human life is the transition to another life - eternal life in God, through the trials of earthly, temporary life, which has no independent value.

But what, if not the sin of pride, does humanistic psychology preach? In the context of its provisions, monasticism and same-sex marriage are parallel phenomena. In both cases, we can talk about the embodiment of one’s inner essence. Wouldn’t such a juxtaposition be offensive to Orthodoxy? Yes, you can find special cases where the differences in the views of these two systems are not glaring - but these will be only special cases, only projections from a certain angle. In general, the moral guidelines of Christianity and humanistic psychology lie on different planes and do not merge in any way.

The Scripture says: No one can serve two masters. ...You cannot serve God and mammon. [Matthew 6:24].

Thus, it should be recognized that the principles of moral assessment are in line with the above three directions:

Quite clearly defined;

Significantly different.

That is why, in our opinion, all three named directions for the search for moral guidelines have no prospects, because do not correspond to the reality of the modern multicultural world. After all, each of them offers a very specific and, most importantly, “the only correct” system of views on morality, a system for issuing moral assessments. World development in the 20th and 21st centuries has already shown that attempts to impose common cultural standards on the whole world - including, first of all, standards of moral assessments, the idea of globalization as the universal spread of a single type of culture - are not viable. We should look for other ways of coexistence and interaction

cultures that would ensure the preservation and development of each of them, the possibility of integration in a single context of human civilization.

Morality arises with the advent of human society and culture, and its essence is in the contradiction between the natural and the proper. Morality exists as a specific socio-psychological phenomenon, which necessarily arises precisely when culture and nature come into conflict, when social norms require behavior to be “unnatural”, require inhibition of both immediate natural impulses and instincts, and social skills that have become automatisms. . It is this contradiction that gives rise to moral issues as a specific conflict, which serves as the subject of psychological research. Therefore, it seems to us, the task of searching for moral guidelines is not solved either in the plane of a single natural principle in a person, or in the plane of cultural analysis.

Today, the search for guidelines in resolving moral conflicts by modern Russian researchers is mainly carried out in the sphere of two fundamental socio-psychological phenomena: community and personality. However, in this case, the nature of the conclusions turns out to be unambiguously determined and culturally mediated, tied to a certain cultural norm, the bearer of which is a person or a community. Therefore, in our opinion, in a situation of a dynamically changing multicultural world, in a situation of coexisting different ideas about what should be, neither the individual nor the community is suitable for the role of support in the search for moral guidelines.

If not biological, not social, not personality and not community, then what can serve as support in the search for moral guidelines?

Perhaps the path outlined in the works will be fruitful

S.L. Rubinstein, who wrote that the specific character of morality consists “in the universal, universal, human correlative nature of moral principles that do not exist only in relation to the life of one this person"(Rubinstein, 2003, p. 78). Perhaps in the situation of a multicultural world we should add: do not exist in relation to the life of one given community? Perhaps it will be fruitful to turn in the search for moral guidelines not to the individual and not to the community as a whole, initially endowed with these guidelines, - and to another phenomenon basic for social psychology - to the phenomenon

well, communication in which the result is not fundamentally determined by the characteristics of either party, but is born from the counter current of their activity?

To understand the nature of morality as it appears in a multicultural world, the moral conflict that arises in the situation of communication between people who belong to cultures that embody incompatible moral guidelines acquires special significance. This situation is not new and unknown.

previously. As an example of this moral conflict, we can cite the plots of Vazha Pshavela’s poems “Guest and Host” and “Aluda Ke-telauri”, known to us from the film “Prayer” by Tengiz Abuladze. In such a situation, the interests and norms of the community, both cultural and biological, to which the hero belongs are opposed, and those norms and interests that are generated by the situation of communication with a “stranger”, which unexpectedly highlights the truly human nature of a moral act as a free choice, as an act free from the dictates of the norm of morality dictated by both social community and instinct.

The situation of communication between people belonging to communities hostile to each other in ideological terms is not new in the history of people, but only today it is becoming:

Ubiquitous, whereas previously relatively constant contacts of communities with different cultural and moral orientations were limited to certain areas of compact residence of various cultures;

Relatively constant, while previously it was limited in time, since even in those places where different cultural communities lived compactly, “intercultural” communication of people was strictly limited to certain types of interaction;

Universal, whereas previously such contacts were limited and trusted to specially trained people.

If earlier in every culture there were rules and norms for communicating with strangers, and contacts of this kind were controlled by the community and were generally known, today intercultural communication occurs everywhere, constantly, and everyone is involved in it, while there are no rules.

In such a situation, it can be expected that the greater the confidence of people in the irrespective nature of the moral values that they adhere to, the more often and with increasingly grave consequences intercultural conflicts will occur. The biggest danger of a multicultural world is the slide from dialogue to

confrontation and conflict. And the unshakable confidence of one of the parties in their own knowledge of moral truths and the right to judge those who do not share these truths leads exactly there.

The problem of moral guidelines, which modern psychologists address, is truly a vital problem for modern society. Therefore, it seems to me extremely dangerous to have a bias in the approach to the study of morality, a “class” approach to this problem, the replacement of scientific research with faith in the infallibility of one’s own ideals, an objective analysis of the nature of morality with missionary appeals, and intellectual search with a search for justifications and accusations, which, as it seems to me, , modern Russian psychology often sins.

Bibliography

1. Bogomolov O. T. Economy and social environment // Economy and social environment: unconscious mutual influence. - M., 2008. - P. 8-26.

2. Bratus B.S. Psychology. Moral. Culture. - M.: Rospedagentstvo, 1994.

3. Bratus B.S. To the problem of man in psychology // Questions of psychology. - 1997. - No. 5. - P. 3-12.

4. Veselova E.K. Method for studying the moral sphere of personality // Health diagnostics. Psychological workshop / ed. prof. G.S. Nikiforova. - St. Petersburg: Rech, 2007. - P. 359-374.

5. Vygotsky L.S. Historical meaning of psychological crisis. // Collected works - M., 1982. - T. 1.

6. Zhuravlev A.L. Main trends in the development of psychological research at the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Report at the anniversary scientific conference dedicated to the 35th anniversary of the IP RAS and the 80th anniversary of the birth of B.F. Lomov, January 31, 2007.

7. Leontyev A.N. Problems of mental development. - M., 1972.

8. Moscovici S. The machine that creates gods. - M., 1998.

9. Nazaretyan A.P. Anthropology of violence and culture of self-organization: Essays on evolutionary-historical psychology. 2nd ed., rev. - M., 2008.

10. Porshnev B.F. About the beginning of human history (problems of paleopsychology). - St. Petersburg, 2007.

11. Rubinshtein S.L. Man and the world. - M., 2003.

12. Semenov V. E. Russian polymentality and socio-psychological dynamics at the crossroads of eras. - St. Petersburg, 2008.

13. Yurevich A.V., Ushakov D.V. Morality in modern Russia// Sociological journal. - 2009. - No. 1. - P. 70-86.

14. Yurevich A.V., Ushakov D.V., Tsapenko I.P. Quantitative assessment of the macropsychological state of modern Russian society // Psychol. magazine - 2007. - No. 4. - P. 23-34.

15. Wilson E. O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, 1975.

The concepts of “morality” and “spirituality” are not static. Centuries change, people’s way of life, lifestyle, and mentality change. At the same time, the idea of morality, its limits and priorities is changing. This is a completely normal process. Evolution commands him. But what we are seeing now is not just evolution. This is a real crisis of morality in our once spiritually rich country.

The biggest problem in education is the lack of interest of society in the spiritual and moral education of children. Lack of interest in culture and morality in families cuts off the process of educating morality and spirituality in the younger generation. The loss of moral guidelines has led to the search for artificially created false values. The problem of moral education of children lies in the education of their parents.

How did we get here

When any political system collapses, ideals, goals, and social guidelines fall down the chain behind it. This has already happened in our country. Suffice it to remember the first time after the 1917 revolution. Everything they believed in collapsed overnight. The country did not need spirituality– we needed workers, strength, teamwork. The country experienced a severe spiritual crisis until it became stronger, old guidelines were replaced by new ones. Society began to see a new person- as an honest, hard-working, kind, selfless - patriot of his Motherland.

The fall of the USSR and the events of the 90s led the people along a similar scenario. But unlike the post-revolutionary times, people were not given anything to replace the fallen ideology. Nothing but rivers of information garbage pouring towards us from under the raised “Iron Curtain”. Our country has never experienced anything like this before - young people were ashamed of their roots, their folk culture. Children's folklore groups were empty. Propaganda of American culture and the Western way of life rained down from televisions. “American fight, I’ll go with you,” the then popular group “Combination” sang, they also sang “Once, I went for a walk with a foreigner.” They sang and we sang along. “Mom, don’t cry, I love a Russian,” is the text of the singer Carolina. It's just a small part of a huge problem, the one that befell our society. Survival, race for profit, mafia clashes. Gang leaders instead of Robin Hood, jeans instead of a dress, pumped up breasts instead of a modest blush. Children grew up with this. It’s not their fault, but the imprint of the era in the soul is like a brand. Today these children are the parents of those whom we see in kindergartens and schools. Are you still asking where is morality?

Problems of spiritual and moral education of children

Moral education of children begins with the family, since birth. No matter how great the role of educational institutions is, the foundation of morality and spirituality is laid by parents from the very moment of birth. Family mentality, cultural level, religious affiliation and the depth of its beliefs are what a small citizen of his country will carry with him throughout life.

The desire for everything beautiful is inherent in us by nature. No one is born evil - that's a fact. Every baby is initially kind, open and ready to embrace the whole world. He does not know what money is, he is not interested in expensive clothes along with the wonders of technology. All a child needs is food, warmth, drink, a soft bed, mother, loving people around. You cannot find a more moral and spiritual creature than a 3-year-old child. He already has everything: love of humanity, desire for beauty, healthy modesty and a desire to care. All you need is Don't let your child get spoiled, show by your own example the correct guidelines. But what do children see at home:

Embittered at life and at each other, parents;
Holidays, the crown of which is alcohol in the company of an abundance of food;
Obscene language;
Television promoting violence, consumerism, illiteracy;
Priority of the material over the spiritual.

Moral education is an external process. Spirituality is born and develops within. The core of human qualities, already laid down from birth, is wrapped like a ball of experience, experiences from what is seen and heard. Despite the fact that junior schoolchildren underlies educational work, but not all teachers fully understand what “morality and spirituality” are. Not all teachers (to be honest) are the best examples of morality.

If we talk about example, it can become both a powerful tool in moral education and its first main enemy. Who sets an example for the child? Parents, teachers, relatives, high school students, popular personalities, movie and cartoon characters. You don't need to be a psychologist to analyze what our children see and hear.

Moral problems among young people

The consumer age has given rise to a consumer society. Everything is bought and sold, even what should be immutable and priceless. Young people find themselves at the epicenter of this consumer whirlpool. Modern problems of moral education originate in everything that surrounds adolescents:

A television. An endless stream of information with a minus sign flows from the TV screens. From simple cartoons and TV series to full-fledged feature films. No matter how noble the plot, the following runs in the background:

violence;
sex;
aggression;
selfishness;
consumerism;
thirst for power.

Superheroes, seemingly positive characters, have a number of shortcomings, bad habits, and sometimes use obscene language. The image of women in modern (teenage) films is a completely anti-feminine figure. The image of a woman as a mother and wife is always distorted to the point of disgrace. The maternal figure is often presented as unkempt, ugly, and almost always shapeless. In place of femininity, sexuality and promiscuity are put on display. Being sexy, looking sexy and driving you crazy is what the movie conveys. This is what girls want to become.

Press. All kinds of women's magazines pay so little attention to true women's problems, but so much advertising (income comes first). Each page, directly or indirectly, offers products without which, it is claimed, we cannot be beautiful, loved, desired, successful and famous. Intimate secrets of stars come to light, the press applauds scandals, divorces, and intimate affairs. The press provides what people want to read, yes, but it is the press that “hooked” the people on yellow and dirty gossip.
Experience from childhood. Today's student youth are almost all children of those who survived the collapse of the USSR at a young age. Loss of reference points, fall of culture, collapse of values. People have had the ground cut out from under them. There was no stability, no confidence. When starting families, young parents no longer knew what to teach their young children. There was no time to raise them - the struggle for survival set harsh conditions - the children were left to anyone - parents had to work. Today these are our student youth. They are kind and good, but there is a gap in their childhood past - they did not see a full upbringing in the family, so they cannot feel the value of the family.

Problems of spiritual and moral education from the point of view of the church

The atheistic views of the post-revolutionary Soviet period changed the spiritual and moral state of society. The Orthodox Church sees the future of Russia in children and youth, which means that the problems of educating young people should be considered as global problems.

Despite the fact that the Russian people, generation after generation, were brought up in the spirit of morality, high culture, a sense of honor and mercy, an orientation towards Western culture is increasingly common among young people. Not even on the culture itself, but on the modern paraphernalia of ostentatious European life.

The church identifies the main problems in the implementation of spiritual and moral education:

The absence in the country of a system of public spiritual and moral education and a structured educational course that includes components of Orthodoxy;
The problem of limited representation of folk culture and tradition;
Lack of methodology of Orthodox culture;
Destruction of the traditional way of life, distortion of the family model;
Unpreparedness of the majority of Russian residents to accept the spiritual part of traditional culture;
Political problem. Penetration of elements of Western ideology into spiritual and moral culture;
Economic problem. Lack of funds for the development and creation of educational methodological products on the spiritual education of children (adolescents).

For some reason, modern man is rarely guided in his actions by common sense. All decisions are made solely on emotions, which can create the impression of a person’s bad manners or disrespect for others. In fact, not many people understand such concepts as morality and morality, considering them to be outdated norms that do not bring benefit to a person in modern life. In this article we want to talk exactly about this topic.

If you consider yourself to be one of the civilized people who in life are not guided only by animal instincts and biological needs, then you can be called a moral person with a sense of high morality.

However, morality and ethics are in a sense the same categories - they have the same meaning, but there are also differences that need to be clearly understood. What is meant:

Morality is a broader concept that covers a person’s moral views. This includes the feelings and principles of a person, and his position in life, justice, mercy and other qualities that determine whether he is evil or good.
In addition, morality is considered an objective unit in philosophy, because it cannot be changed, it is completely built on the laws of nature. If a person adheres to it throughout his life, then he grows spiritually, develops, and gets a sea of positive energy from the Universe, otherwise he simply degrades.
Morality helps a person to be peaceful, to avoid conflict situations, and not create them intentionally, which is often done by people for whom the concept of morality is alien.
Morality is something that should be instilled in a person from the early years of his life. However, it is worth noting here that every family has a different understanding of morality. Therefore, people are not the same. Many may be kind and sympathetic, but everyone will still have different life principles and orientations.

What is morality? If we consider this issue from the point of view of Hegel, who argued that morality is the sphere of the ideal, the proper, then morality in this case means reality. In practice, the relationship between morality and morality is reflected as follows: people often take many things for granted, but they are guided in their actions exclusively by what exists - by what has been instilled in them since childhood (morality).

Based on this, it follows that morality is:

the inner beliefs of every person that guide him in life;
rules of behavior instilled in a person by parents since childhood;
these are value judgments of a person, with the help of which he can build relationships with other people in society;
this is a person’s ability to change his ideal ideas about life under the influence of the non-ideal reality of the world around him;
a category that determines how capable a person is of coping with life’s difficulties and other circumstances that happen to him in life.

It turns out that morality is inherent only in everything human and social. Nothing living in this world anymore has moral qualities, but every group of inhabitants of our planet clearly has morality.

If you carefully analyze the above rules of morality and ethics, the following simple and understandable conclusions will arise:

Morality reflects how spiritually developed a person is, and morality is the category that a person most often guides in solving social issues.
Morality instilled in a person from an early age never changes, but morality can change under the influence of society and life circumstances.
Morality is a common category for everyone, having only one meaning, but everyone can have their own morality, and it depends on the moral education of the individual.
Morality is an absolute category, and morality is relative, because it can change throughout a person’s life.
Morality is an internal state that a person simply cannot change, but morality is a person’s desire or predisposition to constantly conform to some model.

The doctrine of morality and morality is a complex area in philosophy. There are a number of scientists who are convinced that morality and morality are synonymous, because they have one source, they are studied by one science - ethics. Morality and ethics are similar in that their origins come from the Bible. These are the concepts that are preached by our Orthodox faith, this is what Jesus taught to all his disciples. We, of course, due to our busy lives and our burden of personal problems, always forget that our whole life is built on golden rules developed not by scientists, but by religion.

If we turned to its canons more often, we would perhaps suffer less spiritually, we certainly would not have problems that cause us discomfort and inconvenience in life. It turns out that in order to change your life for the better, it is enough to simply follow the norms of morality and morality, not just from time to time, but always.

The problem of morality and ethics in modern society

Unfortunately, you and I happen to live in a world in which there has long been a decline in morality and ethics, because modern people They are increasingly disconnecting their lives from God’s commandments and laws. This all started:

evolutionists in 1920, who began to argue that a person should manage his life himself, that some invented laws and principles should not be imposed on him;
world wars, which simply devalue human life, because people suffered, suffered, and all this only gives rise to evil and the decline of moral principles;

the Soviet era, which destroyed all religious values - people began to revere the commandments of Marx and Lenin, but the truths of Jesus were forgotten, because faith was prohibited, morality was determined only by censorship, which was quite strict in the Soviet era;
at the end of the twentieth century, because of all this, even censorship disappeared - films began to show explicit sex scenes, murders and bloodshed, what can we say if pornographic pictures began to appear in wide access for everyone (although this happened to a greater extent under the influence of Western culture );
pharmacologists began to market contraceptives, which allowed people to be promiscuous without fear of having children;
Families have stopped striving to have children, because for each spouse, career and personal ambitions are of primary importance;
receiving a diploma, red medal or certificate of merit- this is the aspiration of losers who will not achieve anything in life if they do not use arrogance, rudeness and other qualities with which they can carve out a place in the sun for themselves in the modern cruel world.

In general, everything that was previously strictly prohibited has become permitted. Because of this, we and our children live in a world of bad morals. It is difficult for us to understand the morality of our grandparents, because they grew up in a different era, when traditions, rules, and culture were still respected and valued. Modern man is generally not aware of the role of morality and morality in people's lives. How else can we explain what is happening today in the world of politics, culture and science.

Nobody today, except scientists engaged in the professional study of philosophy, thinks about the origin of morality and morality and their future. After all, the democracy in which we live has completely freed our hands and our tongues. We can say and do whatever we want, and it’s unlikely that anyone will punish us for it, even if our activities openly violate someone else’s rights.

You don’t have to go far, it’s enough to analyze your own professional ethics and ethics - will you move up the career ladder with honest and hard work, spending your time and best years so that your children have a carefree future, or will you use a dubious and vile scheme that will help you quickly take a high position? Most likely, you will choose the second, and this is not because you are a bad person, because you cannot say that about someone who cares about the future of the family, but because life experience has taught you so.

We hope that deep down, each of us is still an individual for whom such concepts in life as goodness, love, respect and honor are important. We wish you that your soul is pure, open, that your thoughts are kind, that love lives in your heart. Fill your life with morals and ethics to feel like a harmonious person.