How does Schopenhauer understand the thing-in-itself?
Schopenhauer is the metaphysics of will, understood as a “thing in itself,” stated but never revealed by Kant, the very possibility of knowing which he, Kant, denies. For Schopenhauer, will as a “thing in itself” is a blind vital impulse that lies at the basis of being, everything else is “representation,” that is, an objectified, objectified, illusively individualized world of phenomena. Schopenhauer's system, totally pessimistic, is characterized by a bright emotional coloring that denies the basic rule of traditional philosophizing - the attitude of detached, cold, “wise” understanding, the Spinozist “not to cry, not to laugh, but to understand.” Life, generated by the will, proceeds in suffering, hence the motive of Schopenhauer’s ethics - compassion, pity for the innocent fruits and at the same time victims of the blind existential instinct. Wisdom does not lie in abstaining from assessments and feelings, but in avoiding being itself, in denying will, in choosing Nothing, Indian nirvana. Existence is not something that should be loved, there is no love in it, and all these suns and luminaries are nothing.
Essence of Man
The problem of the essence of man is at the center of the philosophical doctrine of man. Disclosure of the essence is included in the very definition of any object, and without this it is generally impossible to talk about its functions, meaning, existence, etc.
In the history of the development of science, its representatives saw the difference between man and animal and explained its essence using various specific qualities of man. Indeed, a person can be distinguished from an animal by flat nails, by a smile, by intelligence, by religion, etc. and so on. At the same time, one cannot help but notice that in this case they are trying to determine the essence of a person not based on the person himself, but by appealing to those characteristics that distinguish him from the closest species, i.e. as if from the outside. However, from a methodological point of view, such a technique turns out to be not entirely legitimate, since the essence of any object is determined, first of all, by the immanent way of being of this object itself, the internal laws of its own existence. Moreover, not all distinctive features of a person are essential.
As modern science testifies, the basis of the historical existence and development of man, determining his essence, is labor activity, always carried out within the framework of social production. A person cannot produce and engage in labor activity without directly or indirectly entering into social relations, the totality of which forms society. With the development of social production and labor activity, social relations of people also develop. To the extent that an individual accumulates, masters and implements the entire set of social relations, his own development occurs.
Let us note that we are talking specifically about the entire set of social relations: material and ideal (ideological), present and past. This position has important methodological significance, because it follows from it that man must be understood not in a vulgar materialistic, not idealistic, not dualistic, but dialectical way. In other words, he cannot be reduced only to “economic man” or only to “reasonable man”, or to “playing man”, etc. Man is a being that produces, and is rational, and is cultural, and is moral, and is political, etc. .d. simultaneously. It accumulates in itself, to a greater or lesser extent, the entire spectrum of social relations and thus realizes its social essence. Another aspect of this issue is that man is a child of human history. Modern man did not come “out of nowhere”; he is the result of the development of a socio-historical process. In other words, we are talking about the unity of man and the human race.
However, man is not only the result of society and social relations, he, in turn, is their creator. Thus, he turns out to be at the same time both an object and a subject of social relations. The unity and identity of subject and object is realized in man. There is a dialectical interaction between a person and society: a person is a micro-society, a manifestation of society at the micro level, and society is “the person himself in his social relations.”
Morality is a conditional concept of rules, principles, assessments, norms based on the paradigm of assessments of evil and good, which was formed in a certain period of time. This is a model of social consciousness, a method of regulating the behavior of a subject in society. It develops both in individual and social forms of subjective relations.
The concept of morality from the point of view considered by psychologists is a fragment of the human psyche, formed at a deep level, responsible for assessing events occurring in various planes with the meaning of good and bad. The word morality is often used as a synonym for the word morality.
What is morality
The word "morality" originates from classical Latin. It is derived from “mos,” a Latin word meaning “character, custom.” Referring to Aristotle, Cicero, guided by this meaning, formed the words: “moralis” and “moralitas” - moral and ethics, which became equivalent to expressions from the Greek language: ethics and ethical.
The term “morality” is mainly used to designate the type of behavior of society as a whole, but there are exceptions, for example, Christian or bourgeois morality. Thus, the term is used only in relation to a limited group of the population. Analyzing the attitude of society in different eras of existence to the same action, it should be noted that morality is a conditional value, variable in connection with the accepted social structure. Each nation has its own morality, based on experience and traditions.
Some scientists have also noted that different moral rules apply to subjects not only of different nationalities, but also to subjects belonging to an “alien” group. The definition of a group of people in the vector “friend”, “stranger” occurs at the psychological level of the individual’s relationship with this group in various senses: cultural, ethnic, and others. By identifying himself with a specific group, the subject accepts those rules and norms (morality) that are accepted in it; consider this way of life more fair than following the morality of the whole society.
A person knows a large number of meanings of this concept, which is interpreted from various points of view in various sciences, but its basis remains constant - this is a person’s definition of his actions, the actions of society in the equivalent of “good or bad.”
Morality is created on the basis of the paradigm adopted in a particular society, since the designations of “good or bad” are relative, not absolute, and the explanation of the morality or immorality of various types of acts is conditional.
Morality, as a combination of rules and norms of society, is formed over a long period on the basis of traditions and laws adopted in a particular society. For comparison, you can use the example associated with the burning of witches - women who were suspected of using magic and witchcraft. In a period such as the Middle Ages, against the background of adopted laws, such an action was considered a highly moral act, that is, good. In the modern paradigm of adopted laws, such atrocity is considered an absolutely unacceptable and stupid crime against the subject. At the same time, you can put such incidents as holy wars, genocide or slavery. In their era, in a particular society with its own laws, such actions were accepted as the norm and were considered absolutely moral.
The formation of morality is directly related to the evolution of various ethnic groups of humanity in its social key. Scientists who study the social evolution of peoples consider morality to be the result of the influence of the forces of evolution on the group as a whole and on individuals individually. Based on their understanding, behavioral norms prescribed by morality change during the evolution of humanity, ensuring the survival of species and their reproduction, and guaranteeing the success of evolution. Along with this, the subject forms in himself a “pro-social” fundamental part of the psyche. As a result, a feeling of responsibility for what was done, a feeling of guilt, is formed.
Accordingly, morality is a certain set of behavioral norms that is formed over a long period of time, under the influence of environmental conditions at a certain moment it forms a set of established ideological norms that contribute to the development of human cooperation. It is also aimed at avoiding the individualism of the subject in society; formation of groups united by a common worldview. Sociobiologists consider this point of view in a number of species of social animals; there is a desire to change behavior aimed at survival and preservation of one’s own species during the period of evolution. Which corresponds to the formation of morality, even in animals. In humans, moral norms are more sophisticated and diverse, but they are also concentrated on preventing individualism in behavior, which contributes to the formation of nationalities and, accordingly, increases the chances of survival. It is believed that even such norms of behavior as parental love are consequences of the evolution of human morality - this type of behavior increases the level of survival of offspring.
Studies of the human brain conducted by sociobiologists determine that the parts of the subject's cerebral cortex that are involved when a person is preoccupied with moral issues do not form a separate cognitive subsystem. Often, during the period of solving moral problems, areas of the brain are activated that localize the neural network responsible for the subject’s ideas about the intentions of others. To the same extent, the neural network responsible for the individual’s representation of the emotional experience of other individuals is involved. That is, when solving moral problems, a person uses those parts of his brain that correspond to empathy and compassion, this indicates that morality is aimed at developing mutual understanding between subjects (an individual’s ability to see things through the eyes of another subject, to understand his feelings and experiences). According to the theory of moral psychology, morality as such develops and changes as the personality develops. There are several approaches to understanding the formation of morality at the personal level:
– cognitive approach (Jean Piaget, Lorenz Kohlberg and Eliot Turiel) – morality in personal development goes through several constructive stages or areas;
– biological approach (Jonathan Haidt and Martin Hoffman) – morality is considered against the background of the development of the social or emotional component of the human psyche. Interesting for the development of the doctrine of morality as a psychological component of personality is the approach of psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, who suggested that morality is formed as a consequence of the desire of the “superego” to get out of a state of guilt.
What are moral standards
Fulfillment of moral norms is the moral duty of the subject; violation of these measures of behavior represents a feeling of moral guilt.
Moral norms in society are generally accepted measures of subject behavior that arise from formed morality. The totality of these norms forms a certain system of rules, which in all respects differ from the normative systems of society such as customs, rights and ethics.
In the early stages of formation, moral norms were directly related to religion, which prescribes the meaning of divine revelation to moral norms. Each religion has a set of certain moral norms (commandments) that are mandatory for all believers. Failure to comply with prescribed moral standards in religion is considered a sin. In various world religions, there is a certain pattern in accordance with moral standards: theft, murder, adultery, and lies are undeniable rules of behavior for believers.
Researchers studying the formation of moral norms put forward several directions in understanding the meaning of these norms in society. Some believe that compliance with the rules prescribed in morality takes precedence over other norms. Followers of this direction attribute certain properties to these moral norms: universality, categoricalness, immutability, cruelty. The second direction, which is being studied by scientists, suggests that the attribution of absolutism, generally accepted and obligatory moral norms acts as someone.
In terms of the form of manifestation, some moral norms in society are similar to legal norms. So the principle “thou shalt not steal” is common to both systems, but by asking the question why a subject follows this principle, one can determine the direction of his thinking. If a subject follows a principle because he is afraid of legal liability, then his act is legal. If the subject confidently follows this principle, because theft is a bad (evil) act, the vector of direction of his behavior follows the moral system. There are precedents in which compliance with moral standards is contrary to the law. A subject, considering it his duty, for example, to steal medicine in order to save his loved one from death, acts morally correctly, while absolutely breaking the law.
Studying the formation of moral norms, scientists came to a certain classification:
– norms affecting questions about the existence of an individual as a biological being (murder);
– norms on the independence of the subject;
– norms of trust (loyalty, truthfulness);
– norms relating to the dignity of the subject (honesty, justice);
– norms about other moral norms.
Functions of morality
Man is a creature with freedom of choice and he has every right to choose the path of following moral standards or vice versa. This choice of a person who puts good or evil on the scales is called a moral choice. Having such freedom of choice in real life, the subject is faced with a difficult task: to follow personal or blindly follow what should be. Having made a choice for himself, the subject bears certain moral consequences, for which the subject himself is responsible, both to society and to himself.
Analyzing the features of morality, we can extract several of its functions:
– Regulation function. Following moral principles leaves a certain mark on the consciousness of the individual. The formation of certain views of behavior (what is allowed to be done and what is not allowed) occurs from an early age. This kind of action helps the subject to adjust his behavior in line with usefulness not only for himself, but also for society. Moral norms are capable of regulating the individual beliefs of the subject to the same extent as the interaction between groups of people, which favors the preservation of culture and stability.
– Evaluation function. Morality evaluates actions and situations occurring in a social society in terms of good and evil. The actions that have taken place are assessed for their usefulness or negativeness for further development; after this, each action is given an assessment from the moral side. Thanks to this function, the subject forms the concept of belonging to society and develops his own position in it.
– Function of education. Under the influence of this function, a person develops an awareness of the importance of not only his own needs, but also the needs of the people who surround him. A feeling of empathy and respect arises, which contributes to the harmonious development of relationships in society, understanding the moral ideals of another individual, contributes to a better understanding of each other.
– Control function. Determines control over the use of moral norms, as well as condemnation of their consequences at the societal and individual levels.
– Integration function. Following moral standards unites humanity into a single group, which supports the survival of man as a species. It also helps maintain the integrity of the spiritual world of the individual. The key functions of morality are: evaluative, educational and regulatory. They reflect the social significance of morality.
Morals and ethics
The term ethics is of Greek origin from the word "ethos". The use of this word denoted actions or actions of a person that were powerful to him personally. Aristotle defined the meaning of the word "ethos" as the virtue of a subject's character. Subsequently, it was customary that the word “ethicos” is ethos, meaning something related to the temperament or disposition of the subject. The emergence of such a definition led to the formation of the science of ethics - the study of the virtues of the character of the subject. In the culture of the ancient Roman Empire there was a word “moralis” - defining a wide range of human phenomena. Later, a derivative of this term “moralitas” appeared - relating to customs or character. Analyzing the etymological content of these two terms (“moralitas” and “ethicos”), it should be noted that their meanings coincide.
Many people know that such concepts as “morality” and “ethics” are close in meaning, and they are also often considered interchangeable. Many people use these concepts as extensions of each other. Ethics, first of all, is a philosophical direction that studies moral issues. Often the expression “ethics” is used to designate specific moral principles, traditions, and customs that exist among subjects of a limited group of society. The Kantian system views the word morality, using it to denote the concept of duty, principles of behavior and obligations. The word "ethics" uses Aristotle's system of reasoning to denote virtue, the inseparability of moral and practical considerations.
The concept of morality, as a system of principles, forms a set of rules that are based on many years of practice, and allows a person to determine the style of behavior in society. Ethics is a section of philosophy and theoretical justification of these principles. In the modern world, the concept of ethics has retained its original designation as a science in the ranks of philosophy that studies human properties, real phenomena, rules and norms, which are moral norms in society. 
If you judge yourself, you will always judge with bias, either more towards guilt, or towards justification. And this inevitable hesitation in one direction or another is called conscience.
M. M. Prishvin
Morality regulates people's relationships by beliefs: internal - through conscience, and external - through the opinions of others, public opinion.
Let's consider the internal regulator of moral behavior: a person's conscience.
Conscience is a fundamental moral category that determines human behavior in almost all life situations. It is impossible to imagine the normal life of a person without conscience. A person who acts contrary to his conscience places himself, as a rule, outside society - both in the moral, physical, and legal sense (the range of this “outside society” is large: from the loss of normal human relations with others to boycott and, further, to prison isolation and even physical death). If the number of people who act contrary to their conscience exceeds a certain critical mass, then expect great troubles and misfortunes in the form of wars, genocide, terrorism, an epidemic of drug addiction, a decrease in the birth rate and an increase in mortality...
It was said above that conscience plays a regulating role in relations between people. This regulation double kind. Conscience can encourage a person to commit good deeds, approve of those already committed, or it can discourage a person from committing bad deeds and disapprove of them. In some cases they say “a clear, calm conscience.” In others - “bad conscience,” “torment, remorse.” “A clear conscience,” wrote L. Feuerbach, - is nothing more than joy over the joy caused to another person; a bad conscience is nothing more than suffering and pain over the suffering caused to another person.”
In some cases they say: “conscientiousness”, “do it conscientiously”, “judge according to conscience”, “not for fear, but for conscience”, “conscientiousness”. In others - “to have a conscience”, “to lose one’s conscience”, “it’s time to know one’s conscience”.
The philosopher I. A. Ilyin wrote: “A person who has suppressed his conscience will not distinguish good from evil: for conscience is the right organ, the right act for the perception of these objects.” In fact, conscience helps a person to distinguish good from evil and, moreover, I dare say that it helps him make a choice in favor of good.
There are no people who do not have a conscience. The facts of individual immoral acts indicate only that the human conscience is tested and that a person can be morally sick, as it happens to him physically and mentally.
The pangs of conscience can be so great that they exceed a person’s strength and lead him to self-destruction. Our great poet A.S. Pushkin brilliantly conveyed this in the image of Boris Godunov:
Ah, I feel: nothing can do us
In the midst of worldly sorrows, to calm;
Nothing, nothing... is there only one conscience!
So, healthy, she will triumph
Over malice, over dark slander;
But if there is only one spot in it,
One thing started up accidentally,
Then trouble: like a pestilence
The soul will burn, the heart will fill with poison,
Like a hammer, it hammers in your ears with reproach
And everything feels nauseous and my head is spinning,
And the boys have bloody eyes...
And I’m glad to run, but there’s nowhere... terrible!..
Yes, pitiful is the one whose conscience is unclean!
Appeal to conscience . It was said above that conscience is internal a regulator of a person’s moral behavior, i.e., thanks to conscience, the person himself decides what is moral and what is immoral in his behavior. However, conscience also plays a certain role in external ways of regulating a person’s moral behavior, when it is not he himself who is the source of this regulation, but other people. For example, when they appeal to a person’s conscience, when they ask him the question “do you (you) have a conscience?”, when they reproach him, saying “it’s time to know your conscience,” etc. Of course, this appeal to conscience can be ignored. Nevertheless, it is not useful, since it reminds a person that he must live according to his conscience. Any approval or disapproval (censure) of a person’s actions by other people in one way or another affects his behavior as a whole. After all, a person cannot ignore how other people evaluate his actions. Because living among people, a person cannot basically ignore people, do not take into account their attitude towards him. In another way it means: the person is simply mentally abnormal. And, therefore, his place is at Kanatchikova’s dacha.
— From the handwritten work “Conscience”
Moral values are imperative and obligatory. The imperativeness of morality is expressed in the concept of “duty”.
Moral duty as a concept of ethics means morally reasoned compulsion to act. Moral duty requires not coercion, but self-coercion. Debt is recognized as an internal urge, as a need to perform some action.
Debt is a manifestation of necessity, therefore fulfilling a duty puts a person in front of the need to give up his own choice. Duty carries a moral principle only when its fulfillment is voluntary. Moral duty is conscious and free submission to the requirements of moral behavior. Following duty, we realize the priority of a higher principle than our own interests.
Human duty is divided into two types: empirical and strictly moral. Empirical duty: parental, friendly, to the homeland, professional, etc. Moral duty (universal) is a disinterested, indiscriminate reverence for all living beings. Empirical duty may conflict with universal human duty. (For example, between the corporatism of the principles of professional morality and universal morality.)
Historically, the content of moral duty has changed. In pre-class society there was “talion law” (retribution equal in force to crime). It read: “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” Talion acted only in relation to another community. It did not imply individual duty and individual responsibility.
In early class society, the talion was replaced by the “golden rule of morality”: (don’t) act towards others as you would (not) want others to act towards you.
Medieval Christian ethics considers the golden rule of morality in the context of the Sermon on the Mount: “So, in everything, as you want people to do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.” The duty dictated in this case is already a moral law. L.N. Tolstoy considered the golden rule of morality as an ethical option inherent in all religions, most consistently formulated in the teachings of Jesus Christ.
I. Kant developed the idea of the golden rule. The categorical imperative requires a person to act in such a way that the maxim (a short saying of a moral, ethical nature; a rule of behavior that guides a person in his actions) of his will could serve as the basis for universal legislation. This means that moral behavior is one that will ensure harmony between people.
A man doing his duty:
- fulfills his requirements without external coercion;
- treats the requirements of duty as if he himself had established them;
- I am convinced that the requirements are correct;
- performs duty selflessly.
A person's moral duty presupposes:
- contribute to the good of other people;
- resist evil;
- virtue;
- do not allow depravity in yourself.
Date of publication: 2015-02-03; Read: 335 | Page copyright infringement
Studopedia.org - Studopedia.Org - 2014-2018 (0.001 s)…
give an example of moral duty?
- Tribute is a moral duty, obligation (in the expressions “tribute to memory” and similar). example - Respecting the older generation is a high moral duty of youth... example - “if I clean up the table, I will get candy”))) Nothing valuable can be born from ambition or a sense of duty. Values arise through love and devotion to people and the objective realities of this world... BUT NOW ON THE TOPIC. Conscience, Honor and Duty. Three related concepts. The concept of honor is brought up in a person from childhood. So in the story by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin “The Captain's Daughter” we see how this happens and what results it leads to. Shvabrin is valuable and indifferent to the suffering of these people. He treated ordinary people with contempt and thought only about how to save his own life at any cost. Senses of duty and honor were not developed in him.
He broke his oath and went over to the side of the rebels, but not because he sympathized with them and shared their views, but only to save his life. And he also had a plan, having dealt with Grinev, to force Masha to marry him. In his grandiose work “War and Peace,” L. N. Tolstoy pays main attention to the problem of moral purity of the soul. A sense of honor and duty, spiritual generosity and purity are the key to peace and happiness of people on earth. Showing what troubles war brings to the world, Tolstoy concludes that only self-improvement, the desire of each person individually to become better, kinder, will save peoples from destruction and death. A sense of shame is closely intertwined with a sense of duty. A feeling of shame invariably covers a person in all those cases when he does not fulfill his duty. In fiction, a sense of duty often comes into conflict with some strong desire of the character. In the drama “The Cid” by Corneille, the heroine Jimena is distinguished by a very strong sense of duty. Her beloved Rodrigo kills Jimena's father in a duel, but she cannot blame Rodrigo for this: his self-esteem demanded that he accept the challenge. But Ximena also knows her filial duty. We observe a lack of consciousness of duty in Racine's Phaedrus. Phaedra, seized by a passion for her stepson Hippolytus, allows her confidante to slander a young man in front of her father who did not meet Phaedra’s love advances, i.e., in fact, the stepmother becomes the culprit of Hippolytus’ death. And in Euripides’ tragedy “Hippolytus,” Phaedra goes even further: before committing suicide, she herself slanderes Hippolytus in a letter to her husband. In the play “The Thunderstorm” by A. N. Ostrovsky, the aggravated struggle between feeling and duty ends with the unfortunate woman publicly, on the city boulevard, repenting to her husband. The denouement of the drama soon occurs: the suicide of the heroine, who showed her desperate, albeit powerless protest against the “dark kingdom.” In the story “The Man on the Clock,” Leskov makes you think about what is more important: a person’s life or loyalty to the oath. Sentinel Postnikov stood at his post. And suddenly he heard that the man had fallen into the wormwood and was drowning. The sentry faces a problem. He thinks whether to save the drowning man or remain at his post. After all, Postnikov is a soldier. This means that he cannot break his oath. If they find out about his violation, the hero could be sent to hard labor and even shot. Nevertheless, Postnikov decided to save the drowning man. And he was punished with flogging. Debt is a category of morality that denotes the moral responsibilities of an individual (group of persons, people) performed in accordance with the requirements of conscience. The fulfillment of a certain task becomes a duty when generally accepted moral requirements in specific social conditions turn into internal requirements of morality, and the task itself becomes a personal task of a specific person, group of persons, people. The category of duty is closely related to other concepts that characterize the moral activity of an individual: responsibility, self-awareness, honor, conscience.” But all the same, for everyone these words have their own, special meaning.
Morality- a form of social consciousness, determined by a set of norms and beliefs regarding human behavior in society.
The structure of morality is built on the following components:
- Code of Conduct(egoism, mutual assistance, collectivism)
- Personal qualities(benevolence, loyalty, responsiveness, etc.)
- Moral values(human purpose, desire for freedom and awareness of life)
- Generally accepted categories of morality(duty, conscience, goodness, justice)
Morality starts from such historical forms as:
- Taboo(characteristic of the tribal system of society) - the strictest, categorical prohibition. For example, for mixing of blood or murder within the same family.
- Custom- an activity accepted by the majority, possible in specific circumstances in a particular society.
- Tradition- a certain norm of behavior that presupposes forms of activity that are feasible in specific circumstances in a certain society (in contrast to custom, it can be individual or family).
- Standards of modern morality.
Central functions of morality:
|
Functions |
Explanation |
Examples |
|
Regulatory |
Provides regulation of social relations, interaction between man and society. |
Vladimir does not take candy from small children, because children are the flowers of life and they cannot be offended. |
|
Motivational |
Serves as an incentive to perform actions. |
Lyudmila stopped a fight in the school corridor, because fighting in school is prohibited. |
|
Value-oriented |
Sets certain guidelines for the desired behavior that a person strives for. |
One day on the bus, Pavel did not give up his seat to an old woman, after which he became an object of general contempt. Since then, Pavel always gives way to the old women. |
|
Educational |
Forms principles and norms of behavior in a person. |
Alexey gives up his seat to older people on public transport. |
|
Prognostic (coordination) |
Allows you to predict the possible behavior of people in society (allows you to coordinate and coordinate the actions of people). |
Wife Anya confidently shouted at her husband Andrei, because she knew that morality would not allow Andrei to hit her. |
Morality must be distinguished from morality. Morality is a set of norms of behavior accepted by the majority, while moral represents the degree to which an individual has assimilated moral values.
Debt concept
The concept of debt in the modern sense is quite broad. First of all, it should be noted that we constantly enter into relationships with the people around us and thus acquire objective responsibilities. Due to the fact that modern man lives an active social life, he is constantly burdened with responsibility.
And it doesn’t matter who exactly you work for or what your status is. Responsibility manifests itself even in simple actions - if you go on a trip, then in any case you need to buy a ticket, provide documents, board a train or plane, follow the rules of conduct in a public place...
Every person has close people, family, colleagues - and we are connected with all of them by a certain duty and objective responsibilities. The latter means that these duties do not depend on our desire.
It’s hard to imagine life in society any other way; in any sphere it is necessary to act according to duty and conscience.
Social and moral duty
Often, the concept of duty distinguishes between two sides - moral and social. Public duty name the objective duties that a person needs to perform. This type of debt manifests itself in all areas of a modern person’s life - at school, at home, at work, among friends and in society.
Moral duty should be understood a little differently. This means that a person independently turns the requirements of morality and duty into a personal task. There can be no instructions from superiors or parents here; this is an individual choice of a person. Then a person is not only aware of the laws of morality, he himself sets himself the goal of following them - making such a demand for himself.
It often happens that such a view is difficult for a person for a long time - he experiences many internal contradictions and does not know which duty to follow in the first place. But when a moral duty is formed and it becomes an integral part of the individual’s consciousness, strength and courage are manifested, which only a person with a moral duty is capable of.
The highest manifestation of moral duty is the process of overcoming one’s internal conflicts and discord, and choosing in favor of morality and conscience. Then a person boldly and confidently moves towards his goal.
Conscience
Most of the choices in our lives are internally checked by our conscience. Duty and obligation are of great importance to a civilized man, but it is conscience dictates to the individual what to do correctly. Therefore, conscience is defined as a deep knowledge of one’s responsibility and duty, as internal moral self-control.
It is believed that conscience is a personal feeling of each person; it cannot be attributed to the arguments of reason. And a person is not always able to soberly realize for what reasons his conscience allows him to do certain things, and why certain actions are strictly prohibited. It is internal moral self-control that allows a person to feel harmonious and calm, because when he is guided by his conscience, he is sure that he acted honestly and fairly.
Need help with your studies?
Previous topic: The role of morality in human life: moral assessment as a regulator of activity
Next topic: Marriage and family: the moral duty of a man and the moral duty of a woman in the family
History provides many examples of the heroic service of doctors to their people and the patriotic performance of their professional duty. Thus, doctors S.I. Andrievsky and D.S. Samoilovich, back in the 18th century, while studying the nature of infectious diseases, including the plague, conducted medical experiments on themselves, thereby proving the ways of transmitting a terrible infection, and developed based on the results these experiments are methods for its prevention. In 1886, N. F. Gamaleya tested on himself the effectiveness of the rabies vaccine manufactured by Louis Pasteur. This heroic activity of the doctor-scientist played a positive role in the promotion and dissemination of a reliable method of preventing rabies in people throughout Russia.
Great patriot of our Motherland,the world famous scientist and physiologist I. P. Pavlov wrote:“Whatever I do, I constantly think that I am serving, as far as my strength allows me, first of all, my fatherland.”
These and many other examples show how leading Russian medical scientists understood their social duty, how, without fear of an immediate threat to their health and even life, they courageously developed ways and methods to combat infectious diseases, achieved success and emerged victorious in the struggle for people’s health.
A striking manifestation of the highly moral performance of their professional duty is the selfless work of medical workers during the Great Patriotic War (1941 -1945).
Doctors, paramedics, nurses and other medical workers provided medical assistance to soldiers and commanders of the Soviet Army and Navy under heavy enemy fire. Exposed to mortal danger, they pulled the wounded from the battlefield under enemy bullets and saved their lives. Only thanks to the dedicated work of doctors at the forefront of military operations and in the rear of the country, 72% of the wounded were returned to the active army. For their heroism at the front, 47 physicians were awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union, 283 were awarded the Order of Lenin, and 600 were awarded the Order of the Red Banner. In total, 115 thousand doctors were awarded government awards, including many paramedical workers.
The country's average medical workers perform their professional duty no less selflessly in peacetime.
Hundreds and thousands of paramedics, midwives, nurses, sparing no effort and their own health, in the most difficult conditions of the Far North and Far East, in the Pamir mountains and the sands of Central Asia, with a medical bag over their shoulder, come to the aid of people who are sick and in trouble, selflessly serve the cause of restoring and strengthening the health of the builders of communism.
“Ethics and deontology of paramedical workers”,
A.L. Ostapenko
Answer from Yergey[guru]
Conscience is such an accommodating old woman :)
Answer from 2 answers[guru]
Hello! Here is a selection of topics with answers to your question: What is conscience???
Answer from ..............
[guru]
Answer from Ўnona[guru]
For some reason, it seems to me that conscience is the voice of our Guardian Angel, who instructs us, so when you do something bad, your conscience torments you so much.
Answer from Inna[guru]
Conscience is a person’s ability to exercise moral self-control, independently form moral responsibilities for himself, demand that he fulfill them, and make a self-assessment of his actions. Conscience can manifest itself not only in the form of a rational awareness of the moral significance of the actions performed, but also in the form of emotional experiences, for example, in a feeling of remorse or in the positive emotions of a “quiet conscience.”
Answer from User deleted[expert]
conscience is what is left in us from God
Answer from Ksyu[active]
Conscience is an illusion created by the weak to counter the strong. 🙂
Answer from Olga Grushetskaya[guru]
Fazil Iskander in one of his works says, “We can prove the existence of God by the fact that we have a conscience.”
Answer from User deleted[guru]
Human internal self-control. Inner voice, internal moral control. Love, duty, responsibility encourage a person to act. But inside, every step he takes is checked by his conscience: the man himself is conscious! analyzes his duties, consciously demands that he fulfill them, and he himself consciously criticizes himself and evaluates his actions. Conscience is a personal, deep awareness of one’s duty and responsibility, that is, a person’s internal moral self-control and self-esteem. In many European languages, the word “conscience” means “shared knowledge.” In Russian it has the same meaning and comes from the words “so” (i.e. jointly) and “vest” (i.e. know-know). This means that conscience is consciousness, shared knowledge. A person may not even be fully aware of why his conscience tells him to act this way and not otherwise. This means that conscience is not only consciousness! , but also, perhaps, above all, sympathy! , with your deep inner feeling, with hidden spiritual sensations. Guided by conscience, a person judges good and evil in the deepest recesses of his soul. When internal self-control tells a person that he acted honestly, correctly, that is, he did not do anything bad or evil, and acted on the side of good, the person’s conscience is clear and calm. Some believe that conscience is the voice of God within a person, others argue that it is the result of a long development of human experience.
