What is “morality” in the modern sense?

What is morality?

Morality is a set of ideas about good and evil, as well as rules of behavior that are generally followed in a certain society based on these ideas. While compliance is encouraged, it is not strictly required. Moral rules are formed under the influence of generally accepted ideas about what is “good” and what is “bad”, and therefore depend on society, government, the dominant religion and other social factors.

Moral standards have the following features:

they are universal for everyone;
do not need legislative support (since they are considered obvious to any reasonable person);
justified by the prevailing ideas in society about justice, good and evil;
play the role of a behavioral guide for people;
non-compliance with moral standards is condemned in society.

The moral component of most actions can depend on the circumstances. So cooking is a neutral activity, but if a person prepares food for the homeless, it is a highly moral act. Laughter is normal, but if someone laughs at someone else's failure, it is immoral. You cannot harm another person. But if you do it in defense of your family, even this act can be justified.

Moral norms were formed long before legal norms. It was with their appearance that primitive societies began to emerge. Morality protected them from self-destruction, allowed them to organize, accumulate knowledge and build civilization. On the basis of established moral norms, the first laws were formulated - clearer, unambiguous and logically justified rules of behavior.

Principles of morality

The principles of morality are the starting point on the basis of which all ethics, all moral behavior of a person (humanity, justice, kindness, tolerance, etc.) are built.

There are principles of morality in addition to certain moral standards, such as “don’t steal” or “be merciful.” They are special in that they define more general formulas from which all other specific moral laws can be derived. They represent ideological attitudes that, on the basis of moral experience, consolidate the moral role of humanity, the so-called virtue. High moral principles develop as a result of family upbringing and in the learning process. Together they lead to the understanding and perception of such character traits as humanity, justice and rationality.

The ways and means of implementing any of all moral principles are very different and depend on the personal qualities of the individual, national and religious traditions, established in society and specific life situations. The most extensive and widely used are 5 principles: humanism, mutual respect, rationalism, courage and honor.

✔️ Humanism is one of the main principles of morality. These are positive qualities that represent a conscientious, benevolent and selfless approach to the people around us and to all living things in nature. A person is a being endowed with spirituality and intelligence, and in any, even the most difficult situation, he is obliged to remain a person in accordance with the high moral level of his development. Humanism is formed from daily selfless actions, support from loved ones, mutual assistance and the ability to compromise in controversial situations. Humanism is an act of goodwill that is based on full understanding, trust and mutual respect.

✔️ Mutual respect is a respectful and polite attitude towards the world around us, as if it were magic or a valuable gift. Such a law prescribes to treat people and the world around us with gratitude. Mutual respect is associated with such qualities as respect, kindness, and gratitude.

✔️ Rationalism is action based on moral experience. It contains principles such as wisdom and logic. Rationality, on the one hand, is the actions of reason, given to the individual from birth, and on the other hand, actions that correspond to experience and a system of moral values.

✔️ Courage and honor are categories that mean an individual’s ability to overcome difficult life obstacles and fears without losing a sense of dignity and respect for others. They are strongly interconnected and are based on the foundation of responsibility, commitment and perseverance.

Moral principles must be constantly present in human behavior to strengthen the moral spirit.

Having understood what moral principles there are, we can move on to studying moral norms.

How was the concept of morality formed?

It is impossible to say for sure when people first thought about what morality was. The most ancient source describing this concept is the parables of Solomon (mid-10th century BC). Confucius (VI-V centuries BC) wrote a lot about issues of morality and ethics, who considered mercy, philanthropy and integrity to be the most important universal values. He claimed that he did not create a new teaching, but collected together the knowledge received from the ancient sages.

The modern word “morality” comes from the Latin word mores (traditions, mores). It was used by ancient Roman authors to show the conformity of a certain act with good morals. Also, ancient Greek authors discussed a lot about the concepts of conscience, honor and virtue, starting from the 8th century BC. It is interesting that the word “morality” came into the Russian language through French (la morale) in the 18th century.

Cicero made a great contribution to the formation of the concept of morality. The thinker talked a lot about how ethics, morality and law relate to each other. He sought to show that it is impossible to separate the concepts of law and morality, since together they make it possible to rid society of chaos and create order. Of course, Cicero, who lived in the 1st century BC, was far from a pioneer on this topic. But it was he who introduced the definition of morality , which we still rely on today.

Morality is not just a philosophical concept. It traditionally serves as the basis for many religions. Key principles of morality are found in the teachings of Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and Buddha. Since the level of education in those days was different, many moral norms were incomprehensible and not obvious to ordinary people. But believing that “God wants it this way,” they accepted and observed these norms.

Basic principles

The morality of Modern society is based on simple principles:

1) Everything is permitted that does not directly violate the rights of other people.

2) The rights of all people are equal.

These principles stem from those trends described in the section "Progress of Morals." Since the main slogan of Modern society is “maximum happiness for the maximum number of people,” moral standards should not be an obstacle to the realization of the desires of a particular person - even if someone does not like these desires. But only as long as they do not harm other people.

It should be noted that from these two principles comes the third: “Be energetic, achieve success on your own.” After all, every person strives for personal success, and the greatest freedom provides the maximum opportunity for this (see the subsection “Commandments of Modern Society”).

Obviously, the need for decency follows from these principles. For example, deceiving another person is, as a rule, causing him harm, and therefore is condemned by Modern morality.

The morality of Modern society was described in a light and cheerful tone by Alexander Nikonov in the corresponding chapter of the book “Monkey Upgrade”:

From all today's morality, tomorrow there will be only one rule left: you can do whatever you want without directly infringing on the interests of others. The key word here is “directly”.
If a person walks naked on the street or has sex in a public place, then, from the point of view of modernity, he is immoral. And from the point of view of tomorrow, the one who pesters him with the demand to “behave decently” is immoral. A naked man does not directly encroach on anyone’s interests, he simply goes about his business, that is, he is in his own right. Now, if he forcibly undressed others, he would be directly encroaching on their interests. And the fact that it is unpleasant for you to see a naked person on the street is the problem of your complexes, fight them. He doesn’t order you to undress, so why are you pestering him to get dressed?
You cannot directly encroach on the lives of others: life, health, property, freedom - these are the minimum requirements.
Live as you know, and don’t meddle in someone else’s life if they don’t ask - this is the main rule of morality for tomorrow. It can also be formulated as follows: “You cannot decide for others. Decide for yourself." This largely works in the most progressive countries now. Somewhere this rule of extreme individualism works more (Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden), somewhere less. In advanced countries, “immoral” marriages between homosexuals are allowed, prostitution, smoking marijuana, etc. are legalized. There, a person has the right to manage his own life as he pleases. Jurisprudence is also developing in the same direction. Laws are drifting in the direction indicated by the thesis “no victims, no crime.”
...You know, I’m not a fool at all, I understand perfectly well that by applying cunning theoretical reasoning and bringing this already implemented principle of relationships between adults to the point of absurdity, it is probably possible to find a number of controversial borderline situations. (“And when they blow smoke in your face, is it a direct or indirect effect?”)
I admit that some issues may arise in the state-citizen relationship. (“And if I exceeded the speed limit and didn’t run over anyone, there were no injuries, that means there was no crime?”)
But the principles I declare are not the final goal, but a trend, a direction in the movement of social morality and legal practice.
Lawyers reading this book will probably be drawn to the keyword “directly.” Lawyers generally like to cling to words, forgetting about Gödel’s theorem, according to which all words cannot be defined anyway. And, therefore, there will always remain legal uncertainty, immanently inherent in the language system.
“And if a person walks naked down the street, violating public morals, he directly affects my eyes, and I don’t like it!”
Nikolai Kozlov, the author of numerous books on practical psychology, explains very instructively the question of what is direct and what is indirect. Kozlov is considered by current first-year psychology students to be the third greatest psychologist in the world after Freud and Jung. And for good reason. Nikolai Kozlov created a new movement of practical psychology and a whole network of psychological clubs throughout the country. These clubs are good and correct, which can be judged if only because the Russian Orthodox Church is actively fighting against them... So, when Kozlov is asked at workshops how direct impact differs from indirect impact, he answers with a nursery rhyme: “The cat is crying in the corridor, She has great grief, Evil people don’t let her poor pussy steal her sausages.”
People influence poor pussy? Undoubtedly! Pussy can even assume that they influence directly. But in fact, people just have their sausages. Just having sausages isn’t an invasion of someone else’s privacy, is it? As well as…
just have property (or not);
just live (or not live);
just walk the streets (naked or clothed).
Don't pry into someone else's personal life, gentlemen, even if you actively don't like it. And don’t do to others what you don’t want for yourself. And if you suddenly want to do something that, in your opinion, will improve a person’s life, first find out from him whether your opinions about life and its improvements coincide. And never appeal to morality in your reasoning: everyone has their own ideas about morality.
If we open the “Big Encyclopedic Dictionary” and look at the article “Morality”, we will see the following description: “Morality - see morality.” The time has come to separate these concepts. Separate the wheat from the chaff.
Morality is the sum of unwritten standards of behavior established in society, a collection of social prejudices. Morality is closer to the word "decency". Morality is more difficult to define. It is closer to the biological concept of empathy; to such a concept of religion as forgiveness; to such a concept of social life as conformism; to such a concept of psychology as non-conflict. Simply put, if a person internally sympathizes, empathizes with another person and, in connection with this, tries not to do to another what he would not like for himself, if a person is internally non-aggressive, wise and therefore understanding, we can say that he is a moral person.
The main difference between morality and ethics is that morality always presupposes an external evaluative object: social morality - society, the crowd, neighbors; religious morality - God. And morality is internal self-control. A moral person is deeper and more complex than a moral person. Just like an automatically operating unit is more complex than a manual machine, which is driven by someone else’s will.
Walking naked on the streets is immoral. Splashing with saliva, yelling at a naked person that he is a scoundrel is immoral. Feel the difference.
The world is moving towards immorality, it is true. But he goes towards morality.
Morality is a subtle, situational thing. Morality is more formal. It can be reduced to certain rules and prohibitions.

How is morality formed?

The concepts of “good and evil”, “bad and good” are relative. In every society they are formed historically and bear the imprints of all significant events. Morality is created on the basis of these concepts, so it is also quite conditional, characteristic of a particular society or social group. In addition to the concepts of “good and evil,” morality incorporates centuries-old traditions and customs, so it may look quite strange to representatives of other cultures.

About negative consequences

All of the above reasoning is actually aimed at expanding the individual choice of people, but does not take into account the possible negative social consequences of such a choice.

For example, if society recognizes a homosexual family as normal, then some people who currently hide their sexual orientation and have heterosexual families will stop doing so, which may negatively affect the birth rate. If we stop condemning drug use, the number of drug addicts may increase at the expense of those who currently avoid drugs for fear of punishment. Etc. This site is just about how to ensure maximum freedom and at the same time minimize the negative consequences of a possible wrong choice.

The freedom of people to choose their own sexual partners, to create and dissolve marriages can also lead to negative consequences, for example, the growth of a woman’s independence has a negative impact on the birth rate. These trends are analyzed in the Family and Demographics sections.

The concept of Modern Society is based on the fact that in such matters it is necessary to prevent injustice and discrimination. For example, if we want to fight low birth rates, then all childless people should be blamed and punished, not just homosexuals. (Fertility issues are discussed in the Demographics section).

Freedom of speech leads to the publication of pornography and scenes of cruelty. Many people believe that this, in turn, negatively affects family values and encourages violence. On the other hand, according to Internet Freedom founder Chris Evans, “60 years of research into the impact of media on society has found no link between violent images and violent actions.” In 1969, Denmark lifted all restrictions on pornography, and the number of sex crimes immediately went down. Thus, from 1965 to 1982, the number of such crimes against children decreased from 30 per 100 thousand inhabitants to 5 per 100 thousand. A similar situation is observed with regard to rape.

There is reason to believe that hazing in the army instills in a person a habit of violence to a much greater extent than the bloodiest action movies.

(If you feel the strength to write sections for this site about freedom of speech and the problem of crime, write to me at [email protected] truemoral.ru and grateful humanity will not forget you.

The change in moral standards is interpreted by some people as “decay” and “decay”, which will lead to the “collapse of our civilization.” Historical experience shows that collapse awaits precisely those who are frozen in place and do not change. More details about this can be found in the sections “Progress of Morality” and “Cultures and Civilizations”.

Morality in modern society

If you want to understand how the morality of modern society works, you will find mainly such values as:

Respect for others' personal space, beliefs and faith;
The desire to be successful, strong and energetic;
Development and self-education for the benefit of all humanity;
High incomes, wealth and a life of abundance.

But just a few centuries ago, much of this was considered immoral. In those days there were completely different views on what morality was. People were told to be humble and not to strive for great achievements. Wealth was considered a terrible sin, forever closing the path to Paradise, and the imposition of one’s religion and other views was encouraged in every possible way.

Probably, a representative of the Middle Ages would harshly criticize modern morality, saying that these norms pander to “base instincts.” At the same time, he would not have noticed that the main guideline for modern society is universal prosperity. And the well-being of the entire society depends on the success of an individual. At the same time, the norms of medieval morality were too primitive and did not imply at all that anyone should be happy.

Modern morality requires us to constantly work on ourselves. We must develop and be successful, and everyone must find their own path to success on their own. In return, we receive an inspiring sense of our own uniqueness - we ourselves find our calling and build our own success with our own hands. The feeling of self-development and self-realization is inspiring, and moral standards push us towards this.

An important difference between modern morality and medieval morality is the removal of many meaningless prohibitions and restrictions (for example, related to sexual life). Having received greater freedom in the sphere of personal life, we have not lost anything, and life has become much more pleasant and interesting. At the same time, modern morality requires that a person restrain such primitive instincts as aggression, thirst for revenge, desire for dominance and chauvinism.

Every person should feel as free as possible in terms of self-development and self-realization. At the same time, he must treat others with respect and never allow himself to infringe or humiliate anyone - this is what morality is in the modern world. And the main difference from the Middle Ages is that now no one is forbidden to be happy. On the contrary, the pursuit of happiness and well-being of one's family should be the goal of every person.

Moral assessment

A person’s conscious activity is determined by intentions and actions that can be justified and their moral value identified through moral assessment.

Moral evaluation allows you to express an opinion that reflects approval or disapproval of human actions.

In the sphere of moral relations, moral assessment plays the role of moral sanction. Moral assessment is capable of endowing certain social phenomena with valuable properties and creating a certain social significance.

Education of moral qualities

What is good and what is bad begins to tell us from a very early age.

The education of moral qualities (in fact, this is socialization) is carried out not only by parents, but also by other significant adults - grandparents, aunts, uncles, educators, teachers. Also, even friends, classmates and society as a whole participate in this.

How does this happen:

through personal example (dad led grandmother across the road);
moral teaching (lectures and instructions);
literature. Let's take the same fables. Each of them explains how to and how not to behave, and ridicules human vices through allegory (a literary device). An allegory is an allegory.

For example, in the fable about the dragonfly and the ant, the first is the personification (what is this?) of idleness, laziness, irresponsibility, and the second is hard work. Having heard this story, the child understands that being lazy is bad, working is good;

good films, cartoons, music;
creating a positive experience for the child (give way to the girl, share).

Functions of morality

Few people actually question why morality is needed? This concept consists of many important components and protects a person’s conscience from unwanted actions. The individual is responsible for the consequences of his moral choice not only to society, but also to himself.

There are functions of morality that help it fulfill its purpose.

The evaluative function is related to how other people or the person himself determines the actions he has committed.

In the case when self-assessment occurs, the person is usually inclined to justify his own actions by some circumstances. It is much more difficult to bring actions to public court, because society is sometimes unforgiving when assessing others.

The regulatory function helps to establish norms in society that will become laws intended to be followed by all. The rules of behavior in society are acquired by the individual at a subconscious level. That is why, when we find ourselves in a place where there are a large number of people, most of us, after some time, begin to unerringly follow the unspoken laws adopted specifically in this particular society.

The controlling function is directly related to checking how much an individual is able to follow the rules established in society.

Such control helps to achieve a state of “clear conscience” and social approval. If an individual does not behave appropriately, then he will certainly receive condemnation from other people as a backlash.

Moral standards

They are consistent with Christian ideas about good and evil and what a real person should be.

Prudence is an essential component of any strong person. It presupposes that an individual has the ability to adequately perceive the surrounding reality, build harmonious connections and relationships, make reasonable decisions, and act constructively in difficult situations.

Abstinence involves a ban on looking at married people of the opposite sex. The ability to cope with one’s desires and impulses is approved by society, while reluctance to follow spiritual canons is condemned.

Justice always implies that for all deeds committed on this earth, sooner or later retribution or some kind of response will come. Treating other people fairly means, first of all, recognizing their value as significant units of human society.

Respect and attention to their needs also relate to this point.

Resilience is formed through the ability to endure the blows of fate, endure the necessary experience and constructively emerge from a crisis state. Resilience as a moral standard implies the desire to fulfill one's purpose and move forward despite difficulties.

By overcoming obstacles, a person becomes stronger and can later help other people go through their individual trials.

Hard work is valued in any society. This concept means a person’s passion for something, the realization of his talent or abilities for the benefit of other people. If a person is not ready to share the results of his work, then he cannot be called hardworking.

That is, the need for activity should not be related to personal enrichment, but to serve the consequences of one’s work to as many people as possible.

Humility is achieved through prolonged suffering and repentance. The ability to stop in time and not resort to revenge in a situation where you have seriously offended is akin to real art. But a truly strong person has enormous freedom of choice: he is able to overcome destructive feelings.

Politeness is essential when people interact with each other. Thanks to it, it becomes possible to conclude deals and agreements that are beneficial for both parties. Politeness characterizes a person from the best side and helps him move constructively towards a given goal.

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 (“ moritas ” 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.

Types of moral standards

There are several types of moral standards:

Related to the safety of life - a ban on killing a person or animal.
Concepts of honor and dignity.
Privacy Policy.
About independence and basic personal freedoms.
Related to trust.
Ideas about justice.
Relating to social conflicts.
Ethical principles formulated in the form of recommendations.
There is a separate group that regulates what moral norms there are and the procedure for their application.

Development of moral standards

Researchers claim that the age of the rules governing relationships is approximately equal to the age of humanity. The following forms arose in the clan system.

Taboo. Places strict restrictions on erotic and aggressive actions towards certain objects. It is reinforced by the fear of punishment from mystical forces.
Custom. Applies to members of a group that has historically established rules. Gives a person strict instructions, leaving no freedom of action, and is supported by public opinion.
Tradition. A stable type of custom maintained by many generations of people. Forms of behavior also do not require thinking; they must be strictly followed.

With the decomposition of the tribal system, a moral principle appeared - concentrated and generalized norms regulating a person’s worldview and behavior in different spheres of life. They apply to all people, give a person a guideline and leave him the opportunity for self-determination.

Support comes from the concepts of good and evil and the influence of public opinion.

Balance of positive and negative

Should negative phenomena be combated by introducing prohibitions and using violence if they are violated? As historical experience shows, it is pointless to fight the objective laws of social development. As a rule, negative and positive development results are interconnected and it is impossible to fight the negative without destroying the positive. Therefore, in cases where such a struggle is successful, society pays for it with a lag in development - and negative trends are simply transferred to the future.

A different approach seems more constructive. It is necessary to study the patterns of social changes without emotion and understand what positive and negative consequences they lead to. After which society must take actions aimed at strengthening the positive aspects of existing trends and weakening the negative ones. Actually, this is what this site is dedicated to.

An increase in freedom always leads to some people using it to their detriment. For example, the ability to purchase vodka leads to the emergence of alcoholics, the freedom to choose a lifestyle leads to the emergence of homeless people, sexual freedom increases the number of cases of sexually transmitted diseases. Therefore, freer societies are always accused of “decay,” “moral decay,” etc. However, most people are quite rational and use freedom to their advantage. As a result, society becomes more efficient and develops faster.

When they talk about “health” and “unhealthy” society, they forget that the state of society cannot be described in terms of healthy/unhealthy/no third choice. Unfree societies are much more “healthy” in the sense of the absence of marginalized people (for example, in Nazi Germany even the mentally ill were destroyed). But they are much less healthy in the sense of the lack of people focused on development. Therefore, unfree, overly regulated societies (including those regulated by too strict moral standards) inevitably lose. And prohibitions, as a rule, are not very effective - prohibition, for example, does not so much fight alcoholism as create a mafia. The best choice is maximum freedom while strictly suppressing aggressive outcasts (including the destruction of criminals).

Modern morality is making its way into Russia. The new generation is much more individualistic and freer. I've heard from entrepreneurs I know that hiring young people is profitable - young people are more honest, more energetic and steal less often. At the same time, during the transition period, crisis phenomena are observed, incl. and in the field of morality. This was the case, for example, during the transition from an agricultural to an industrial society; in particular, England in the early to mid-19th century experienced a serious crisis, accompanied by an increase in alcoholism, family breakdown, homelessness, etc. (just remember Dickens; you can read more about this in F. Fukuyama’s book “The Great Divide”).

Here, by the way, one common myth should be mentioned. Ancient Rome collapsed not as a result of “moral decay”, but because it stopped developing. Rome's main advantage was the presence of a rule of law and an effective civil society. With the transition from republic to imperial dictatorship, these social institutions were gradually undermined, development ceased, and as a result, Rome became a typical unstable empire, lacking fundamental social advantages compared to its barbarian surroundings. From that moment on, his death was only a matter of time.

But society also faces destruction if freedom exceeds certain limits and some people have the unpunished freedom to cause harm to others. In fact, this means that the freedom of some is curtailed by increasing the rights of others, i.e. freedom is destroyed. That is why the morality of Modern society is complete freedom, with the exception of the right to cause direct harm to another person. Moreover, Modern society should be intolerant of any attempts to cause such damage, i.e. restrict someone's freedom. In this, Modern society must be uncompromising and even cruel: as experience shows, the main problems of the most Modern countries lie precisely in excessive humanism in relation to intolerant and aggressive people.

How modern society limits intolerance is discussed in the section “Intolerance of Intolerance.”

The arguments presented here are often objected to by saying that “permissiveness cannot be allowed!” And this thesis is absolutely true. Permissiveness is allowing one person to harm another. For example, safe premarital sex is not permissive, because... Each of the participants does not see any damage to themselves in this. But “highly moral” Iran is a permissive state: the country’s criminal code, based on Sharia law, provides for the execution of women by stoning for some “sexual crimes.” Moreover, it is specially stipulated that the stones should not be too large so that the victim does not die immediately. Such sadistic murder is undoubtedly permissive.

The morality of Modern society (as opposed to religious morality) is a morality based on reason. Such morality is more effective than morality based on emotions: emotions work automatically, while reason allows you to act more subtly depending on the situation (provided, of course, that reason is present). Just like human behavior based on emotional morality is more effective than animal behavior based on innate instincts.

What is the difference between morality and law?

Basic values and moral norms often resonate with laws, but do not always repeat them, and sometimes come into conflict. A person may commit a crime with good intentions, his conscience will be clear, but he will have to answer to the state.

Let us consider in more detail how moral norms and legal norms differ.

The legislative aspects are dealt with by the authorities, they regulate them and monitor their implementation. Morality is based on the individual’s worldview and the opinions of others; there cannot be clear control.
Moral norms are encouraged to be followed, but they give a choice. The laws do not provide it.
If you ignore the laws, you will be punished (fine or prison term). If you fail to follow moral rules, you will earn the censure of others and a bad conscience
Legal standards are enshrined in writing, but moral ones can be transmitted orally.