Signs of the rules of moral behavior. Morals, values ​​and rules. What are moral standards?

The emergence and consolidation of moral norms can be traced back to prehistoric times. Its standards and samples originated in the distant past. Despite the fact that primitive man acted primarily from selfish motives, trying to find food, seize profitable territories, and survive in difficult natural conditions, even then the desire for social cooperation was obvious.

As a result, the emergence and approval of a humanistic behavior strategy developed as a result of active interpersonal cooperation with group members.

Peculiarities

Of course, at the dawn of the emergence of motives that determine the behavior of an individual, there were still mundane life and material benefits. However, the community, and after it the morals, quickly progressed, pushing any of the participants to fully adapt to the team and build long-term humanistic relationships.

Moral standards of behavior are so firmly established in people’s minds that they are no longer a forced survival tactic, but generally accepted motives of human behavior, an emotional need. The norm becomes:

• moral and emotional sympathy for one's neighbor;
• compassion;
• willingness to always come to the aid of those in trouble.

A person who spiritually and physically supported the members of his community could himself count on the same attitude, thanks to which community ties were strengthened, and the group’s resistance to various negative influences increased.

Formation of moral behavior today

If you look closely at the technical intricacies of educating a modern person, you can see echoes of humanity’s first steps on the path of morality formation. Already in a preschool institution, children quickly master the basic norms of behavior in a group, and through trial and error they learn to follow them in a variety of situations. In primary school conditions, moral education is given paramount attention.

A long stay in a group of similar people, strict discipline strengthens the content side of such a concept as “internal position”.

A student who is in daily contact with a large number of peers and teachers reaches a new level of control over his behavior, when every erroneous action begins to seem unacceptable, upsetting teachers, friends and comrades. Understanding the high value of moral behavior results in a set of actions that implement the following ideas:

• love;
• freedom;
• of good;
• justice.

The team gently but persistently leads each student to:

• rejection of immoral behavior;
• denial of hatred and destructive behavior.

A high strong-willed attitude, as well as an acceptable moral level, are generously rewarded by universal sympathy, strengthening spiritual aspirations.

Who is a moral person?

What is moral behavior in a modern highly competitive society? There is hardly any need to consider this concept as a complete renunciation of oneself and one’s own interests. But we can say for sure that a highly moral person is definitely devoid of gross egoism, arrogance and greed. Such an individual seeks the benefit of others and thinks about the good for the whole society. By showing altruism, this person deprives manipulators of the opportunity to control themselves.

Good deeds and humane attitudes literally save lives. A passionate conscience and high ideals do not allow evil to extinguish the faith in the bright future of humanity, which is present in each of the people from birth.

Looking at a highly moral “good” person, many may think that this is some kind of gift from above. However, there are many examples where purposeful work on oneself, one’s worldview and mistakes led to outstanding results.

Conscience and morality need to be developed. Giving up base impulses and following high ideals invariably transforms a person.

Good example

An active principle, a powerful will, striving to transform a person for the better - these are the components that can work miracles. The clearest example is the work of the outstanding teacher Makarenko, who, over the course of several years, managed to “forge” from a group of juvenile delinquents and vagabonds with a certain “thieves’ face” a brilliant team that strictly holds all members of the community within the framework of highly moral behavior. The factors that pushed them to do bad things are the regulator of behavior.

Moral norms are the totality of all types of relationships between people that arise in the process of living together. Moral norms are a social concept, as they affect the problem of an individual’s living in human society. They, in essence, represent the requirements that society places on each individual person. It is society that determines how relationships between its members should be built. Society also makes an assessment of a person's behavior. Very often, these assessments do not coincide with individual ones: what an individual considers good for himself can cause a negative assessment by society, and vice versa, society often forces a person to do something that is undesirable for him.

The fact that moral norms are social in nature has developed historically. After all, a person’s moral consciousness is formed under the influence of his environment, on the basis of moral ideals and moral authorities. Therefore, we can say that norms are something that exists outside a person, but is aimed at him. But the picture would be incomplete if it were not to say that by absorbing norms from the outside, a person begins to recognize them himself, consolidate them in his consciousness and, ultimately, they become part of himself. Thus, moral norms are an intertwining of social attitudes and the personal consciousness of each person.

Moral standards determine a person's behavior, and society evaluates him - whether it is moral or immoral. There are no clear and fixed criteria for such an assessment; at different times the same moral standards were considered moral and immoral.

Moral norms in society exist in the form of prohibitions and commands. Prohibitions have a negative form and represent those norms of individual behavior that are undesirable for society as a whole. Commands, on the contrary, are positive and give a person freedom to choose the type of behavior within the framework of generally accepted norms. Historically, prohibitions always preceded commands. The living together of individuals in human society requires some suppression of the individualism of each person, which can become dangerous for society, on which relations of assistance and mutual assistance between people are then built.

Moral standards

Relationships between people nowadays are increasingly becoming tragic. Lies, betrayal, hypocrisy, hatred, malice, arrogance, greed, cruelty - and this is not the entire negative list of what fills the heart of a modern person. And the whole point is that people forget to observe moral standards. Some don't even know what it is.

Moral norms are the totality of all types of relationships between people that arise in the process of communication and living together (spending time).

Starting from early childhood, a person develops his own ideas about good and bad; about what is good and what is evil. Of course, the first ideas about moral standards are laid down by the parents to the child, telling him what is right and what is wrong (or not telling him, then the child draws his own conclusions from what he sees and hears). When a child grows up, society replaces his parents. And the more morally developed parents and (or) society are, the closer a person is to creating a virtuous personality, a healthy family and a harmonious society.

But at the present time, people (and, accordingly, society) are degrading. People stop developing spiritually and forget about moral standards. Their ideas about life become negative, which affects their standard of behavior in society.

Morality in the spiritual life of a person is very numerous.

Below is a list of some moral standards that a person should observe:

1. Truthfulness. It is very important to always be honest and tell the truth.
2. Reliability and fidelity are a positive spiritual and moral quality of a person, expressing steadfastness and constancy in feelings, relationships, and in the performance of one’s duties and duty. We feel calm when there are reliable and faithful people nearby. So you too try to become a reliable person for other people.
3. Sincerity - the absence of contradictions between real feelings and intentions towards another person (or group of people) and how these feelings and intentions are presented to him in words. Sincerity is one of the most difficult qualities to possess and one that must be taken very seriously. When expressing your sincere attitude to a person “in person”, it is important not to cross the line of politeness. This applies to your negative assessments, which may be offensive or offensive from the point of view of the interlocutor. In this case, it is better to refrain from your negative statements and simply stop communicating with the person who is unpleasant to you.
4. Politeness, correctness - the rules of conversation and argument that characterize the behavior of a person who outwardly shows respect for the people around him. Whatever the nature of your conversation (whether it is pleasant or unpleasant for you), always show respect for your interlocutor. Be correct in your statements and polite to people.
5. Expulsion of vices from the heart. Free your heart from anger, hatred, envy and other vices. Meditation helps with this. Communicate with those people who make you happy and inspire you to positive actions. Fill your heart with positivity!
6. Moral and physical strength. Courage is one of the virtues that reflects moral strength in overcoming fear. By developing moral and physical strength, you can easily learn to endure suffering or not experience it at all. Strengthen your spirit, mind and body.
7. Tolerance and the ability to forgive - a conscious decision not to do or commit any kind of persecution (punishment). The ability to forgive is characteristic of a spiritually developed person. It is important to remember that in order to learn to forgive, you must first learn not to be offended! And tolerance will help you with this. It is also inherent in people with very developed moral strength. Every person should understand what can be tolerated and why to endure. Sometimes you just need to say goodbye to a person so as not to cause yourself mental pain. And then you won’t have to endure anything, and there won’t be anyone to be offended by.
8. Modesty is a human character trait expressed in the following:

Moderation in all demands;
- lack of desire for luxury;
- lack of desire to excel, to show oneself;
- maintaining the limits of decency;
- sedateness in communicating with other people.
9. Dignity and self-respect is a person’s objective assessment of himself as internally positive or negative to some extent. Develop spiritually and self-realize. Become a worthy person.
10. The search for wisdom and knowledge, the desire for self-education and intellectual self-improvement. Always learn something new. Read more interesting and educational books.
11. The desire to devote all your time and your life to good deeds. Either do it with kindness and a pure heart, or don’t do it at all. If you have already decided to develop spiritually, then kindness is the first thing you should fill your heart with!
12. Generosity is an important moral norm for a person. It consists of openness towards other people, the ability to share with them both your material wealth and your abilities, knowledge, and spiritual strength.
13. Patience - calmly enduring pain, trouble, sorrow, misfortune in one’s own life.
14. Reasonable management of your funds. You shouldn't spend money on something that won't benefit you.
15. Sociability, kind attitude towards others.
16. Passion for cleanliness and beauty.
17. Aversion to evil and sin.

Every person is obliged to constantly purify and improve spiritually, morally and physically, striving to become impeccable. People must refrain from actions that can corrupt and destroy a person. Also, anything that can cause harm to the soul and body should be avoided.

Extramarital affairs are considered the main source of complete decay of the individual and society, leading to the moral and physical degradation of people.

Development of moral standards

For a long time, the prevailing opinion in society was that “morality is in the nature of things,” that is, a person (child) is initially moral (innocent as a child), and what makes him immoral (if he does) is the environment, that is, society. However, as Piaget's work showed, confirmed by subsequent experiments, this is not at all the case. When communicating with each other, children under 6-7 years of age do not use moral rules at all to regulate relationships (they do not remember rules like “you must share”, “you cannot be greedy”, etc.). Moreover, they do not master the moral principles of relationships in communication with peers. “Children do not tolerate injustice and do not forgive it to anyone,” “children will not play with a greedy person,” etc. - all of this, unfortunately, is an illusion: they tolerate, forgive, don’t even notice and will play.

At the same time, children 6-7 years old know most moral norms (they reproduce their wording appropriately and accurately). However, as Piaget showed, they mean something completely different from what adults mean (they confuse the concepts of “lie” and “bad words in general”; they evaluate a conscious lie and an unintentional mistake equally; they judge not by intentions, but by the importance of the consequences).

Example: the children think that Petya, who helped his mother set the table and broke 2 plates, is more to blame than Kolya, who took out candy without asking and broke 1 plate.

Example: “You wanted to divide the toys equally? - I forgot - Why? - The toys are very beautiful...”.

The limit of the possibility of transition to an independent stage of moral development (when, like a teenager and especially an adult, relationships between people acquire independent meaning and value) is 8-10 years. But this transition may not take place at all.

Thus, moral standards do not arise on their own or in a community of children; children can learn them only in communication with adults. Moreover, as shown in many works, it is the first stage (essentially, the stage of imitation - up to 6-7 years) that largely determines the moral face of an adult. In other words, if a child has not received good moral "training" before the age of 7, he will have nothing to internalize during adolescence. This is how adults seem to emerge, having mastered the external norms of cultural behavior, sufficient for superficial communication, but remaining inside preschool children: Their moral assessments are unstable and are used for external use, and do not turn into real guidelines for behavior; their immediate emotions easily supplant any considerations about right and wrong, about what is proper and what is forbidden; For them, the joy of owning a thing easily overcomes the desire to bring joy to another person.

There is hope that our children will reproduce the moral system (that is, the understanding of what is good and what is bad) that we instill in them. And, as we know, there are quite a lot of these moral systems, and internally consistent ones (examples are the morality of a representative of the Australian tribe, which was discussed in the first topic; the morality of a member of a mafia gang and the leader of this gang; the morality of a medieval nobleman and peasant; moral systems in different religions and etc.).

Even within the moral system of Christianity with its 10 commandments, there are many different ways in which people justify their behavior.

Thus, Kohlberg (USA) identifies several levels of morality depending on how the action is assessed:

1. pre-moral level (4-10 years): - according to reward/punishment for an action - according to the benefit that can be derived from it;
2. conventional level (10-13 years): - will the action receive the approval of other people - in accordance with the established order, law, respect for authority;
3. post-conventional level - the level of true morality (from the age of 13): - from the point of view of compliance with democratic procedure or general respect for human rights, if it is dictated by conscience, regardless of the legality or opinions of other people.

Example: As Kohlberg notes, many people never progress to stage two, and less than 10 percent of people over 16 reach stage three.

As an example of differences in moral systems, we will consider two - the morality of the Russian nobleman of pre-revolutionary times and the morality of modern American society.

The Russian aristocrat of the 19th century is a completely special type of personality. His entire lifestyle, behavior, appearance - everything bore the imprint of a certain cultural tradition. The so-called bonton consisted of an organic unity of ethical and etiquette norms.

The nobility stood out among other classes of Russian society for its clear orientation towards a certain speculative ideal, and the child was oriented towards it. At the same time, we must remember that noble education is not a pedagogical system, not a special methodology, not even a set of rules. This is, first of all, a way of life, a style of behavior that is acquired partly consciously, partly unconsciously. This is a tradition that is not discussed, but observed. Therefore, the so-called “normative education” was applied to noble children, which was aimed not so much at revealing the child’s individuality, but at polishing his personality according to a certain model. From the standpoint of modern pedagogy, the shortcomings of such education are completely obvious. At the same time, it should be noted that sometimes it yielded amazing results.

Pushkin wrote: “What does the nobility learn? Independence, courage, nobility. Aren’t these qualities natural? Yes, but the way of life can develop them - or stifle them.”

That is, here we again see the same, unfortunately, erroneous belief in the natural structure of morality. But, although not natural, these qualities were successfully cultivated in noble children. So, what were the ethical, that is, moral, norms of noble society?

Let us immediately clarify that all these personal qualities and norms of behavior were characteristic not of a noble or even secular society in general, but specifically of a “good” society.

Firstly, the same attitude towards all people was brought up, regardless of origin. This was not a comedy played out in front of strangers, but the real, true truth - the result of a deep conviction, which turned into a habit, that education, talent, scientists and literary merits are higher than class privileges, wealth and nobility.

As a comment, we note that a certain analogy of such relations is also characteristic of modern American society, starting from a certain level. Thus, a university professor is treated with more respect than a mere rich person.

Secondly, a combination of a sense of chosenness and a sense of responsibility was brought up: to whom much is given, much is required (a favorite expression of the poet K.R.). This approach was manifested in many aspects, for example, in relation to civic duty. The rule “to serve faithfully” was part of the code of noble honor and, thus, had the status of a moral law, no matter how funny it may seem to us today.

Examples. This is clearly seen in the examples of parting words that Andrei Petrovich Grinev from “The Captain’s Daughter” and Nikolai Andreevich Bolkonsky from “War and Peace” give their children. The same can be seen in “Tema’s Childhood” (Garin-Mikhailovsky): the boy playfully asks “When will I be king?” - and the mother seriously replies, “You won’t be a king, but if you want, you can help the king.”

The combination of chosenness and responsibility was also manifested in relation to the height of moral qualities. One of the principles of noble ideology was the belief that the high position of a nobleman in society obliges him to be an example of high moral qualities.

A noble child was oriented not towards success, but towards an ideal. Be brave, honest, etc. he should have, not in order to achieve anything, but because he is a nobleman, because he has been given a lot, because that is what he should be. At the same time, according to noble ethics, honor does not give him any privileges, but, on the contrary, makes him more vulnerable than others.

Example: a boy behaved inappropriately in a butcher shop; the butcher led him out of the shop by his ear; the boy threw a stone at the butcher; his mother scolds him; the boy justifies himself by saying that the butcher could take him out not by his ear, but by his hand; the mother retorts: “Why are you putting yourself in such a position that they can grab you by the ear?”

The threat of a mortal duel constantly hung over the nobleman, which greatly increased the price of words and, in particular, the “word of honor.” Therefore, children were brought up in an environment of increased demands - and at the same time emphasized trust.

I would like to especially emphasize the usefulness of this approach in our time. If the family assumes that the child may lie, steal, etc. (and, accordingly, this is constantly checked), then ultimately it will be so.

A noble child, who had been instilled in her family with traditional ethical standards, was shocked when faced with the impossibility of following them in the conditions of a state educational institution, where he usually received his first experience of independent life.

Example - "Childhood Themes". Tema went to the gymnasium for the first time. He was immediately “set up” by a classmate and brought upon him the wrath of his superiors. The topic, instead of remaining silent, began to be explained, referring primarily to the protection of one’s own dignity. “Be silent,” the gentleman in a uniform tailcoat roared with good obscenities, “you worthless boy.” Then Tema spoke, albeit in a trembling voice: “How dare you shout and scold me like that?” Tema was almost kicked out of the gymnasium. The director categorically told the parents that their son should not obey family rules, but general ones, if he wants to have a successful career.

It must be said that the director was absolutely right in this. Either make a career or money - or honor as a stimulus for life. The nobles chose the second. Then the guideline in human behavior becomes not results, but principles, and the well-known motto arises: “Do what you must, and be what will happen,” that is, the attitude is to think not about the practical consequences of an action, but about its ethical significance.

Thirdly, great ethical importance was attached to physical endurance and personal courage, both in relation to boys and girls. Moreover, there was confidence that these qualities could be cultivated through volitional efforts and training.

An example is the confession of A.S. Griboyedov (remember his far from heroic appearance) (drawing). Being in battle, he was ashamed of his cowardice, and “on occasion, he stood in a place where shots from an enemy battery reached. So I counted the number of shots I had appointed and then, quietly turning the horse, calmly rode away.”

Bravery was “hammered” into children through what we believe to be very harsh measures. Example: the Bestuzhev brothers went for a ride on a boat, which unexpectedly hit a pile and began to sink. Only one of them, the future writer Bestuzhev-Marlinsky, was not at a loss. He pulled off his jacket, plugged the hole, then grabbed his younger brother and, lifting him above the water, shouted: “If you don’t stop screaming and being a coward, I’ll throw you into the water.” At the same time, the only adult person in the boat, the tutor, was completely at a loss and randomly waved his oars through the air.

The riskiness of such educational measures was explained by a sincere belief in their beneficence; The children themselves shared this belief, perceiving this as necessary character building. It should be noted that girls were raised using similar measures.

Physical endurance was also considered an ethical value and physical endurance was also hammered into children through draconian measures. Examples - the daily routine at the Lyceum (horse riding, swimming, fencing, rowing, walks in any weather, very cold clothes, simple food all year round); for the heir to the throne, Alexander II - long marches on foot with full equipment, rough soldier food, in winter - without gloves and in light clothing. The same, although to a lesser extent, applied to girls.

Let us note that what strikes us most about the fate of the Decembrists is their voluntary refusal of comfortable living conditions. Meanwhile, in their time this was just perceived as a normal reaction of a wife whose husband was exiled; What was unexpected was a political act on the part of apolitical women.

Such methods of education differed from modern physical education in that it did not so much improve health, but was primarily considered as the formation of personality. Physical tests in their ethical significance were equal to moral ones - any blows of fate had to be endured courageously, without losing heart and losing one’s dignity. Let us remember how Pushkin endured his death throes.

Ethical standards here were closely related to etiquette: demonstrating feelings, although natural, but not fitting into the accepted norm of behavior, was not only undignified, but also indecent. An example is that the heir’s teacher, Zhukovsky, told the boy that it was indecent to get scared and complain at the slightest sign of illness. Let us pay attention to the fact that Zhukovsky was not going to somehow reassure the suspicious boy or explain to him that he was in quite good health - it’s just that such behavior is indecent, shameful, and there can be no leniency here.

To summarize, we can formulate the following ethical requirement: any manifestation of cowardice, cowardice, or weakness goes beyond the scope of worthy behavior. Fear, pain and despair must be overcome to the best of your ability and not shown, no matter how difficult it is.

Fourthly, the child was instilled with imperturbable calmness in all conceivable life situations, naturalness and ease. “A person who does not have secularism, at every unpleasant incident, either becomes enraged, or is completely destroyed by shame, etc. A secular person does not seem to perceive what cannot or should not irritate him. If he commits any “or awkwardness, he easily smooths it over with his composure.” Showing everyone your grief, confusion, and weakness was considered unworthy and indecent.

This was achieved by a combination of two techniques:

· instilling ethical standards (a well-mannered person has no right to burden others with his personal troubles and, on the other hand, knows how to protect his inner world from outsiders; treat others the way you want to be treated; do what you must, and be what will happen, etc.);
· constant, and often brutal, training (the constant presence of a tutor who “forced” - don’t walk fast, don’t speak loudly, speak only French, stay straight, etc.).

Let's limit ourselves to two examples. In the boarding houses, behavior in various situations was rehearsed (you are walking along the Arbat, and your stocking has come down; show what you will do - calmly step away and straighten your toilet). The heir to the throne, Alexander Nikolaevich, as a teenager, was painfully embarrassed to dance; Seeing this, his empress mother specifically sends her son to waltz and demands that he waltz “as he should.”

Since our topic is moral education, and not teaching manners, such very interesting issues as teaching good manners, compliance with hygiene requirements (even dandyism), etiquette, etc. are not touched upon here. Let us only note that all this was brought to the point of automatism - that is, the pupil had to not think in any situations and with any people (both higher and lower in social status), but act in accordance with these requirements.

How was such education implemented? A number of characteristic features can be identified, although they, of course, were not combined into a complete pedagogical system.

The child was raised by everyone in the house (nannies, tutors, parents, grandparents, all the numerous relatives, constant friends at home, etc.); at the same time, all these people reproduced the same system of relationships, that is, their influence on the child was not disordered. This is precisely what is practically absent now even in very good families.

The role of a permanent “trainer” was performed by special people (tutors). Parents were perceived to one degree or another as “distant deities”, as certain moral (primarily) standards. The principle “children are created for parents, and not vice versa” was implemented. All criticism of parents, including especially public criticism, was prohibited. The father's anger was considered the most severe punishment and the greatest shock. At the same time, in good families, accessibility and affection of parents were practiced without pampering and indulgence in misdeeds, complete freedom of action with a ban on crossing the line of what was permitted.

Note that this approach can, in principle, be implemented in our conditions, and it gives amazing results.

The family’s attitude towards children, from our point of view, was excessively strict and even harsh, which corresponded to the high level of demands placed on them (routine, class schedule, no coddling, etc.). Quite severe punishments were practiced - a rod, no sweets, no walks, being sent to a corner and on your knees, exclusion from the general game, etc.

How viable is such a moral system? In other words, how does it hold up under pressure from other systems, and how internally consistent is the system?

Following these traditions was often defended in an environment hostile to them and required a lot of perseverance and even courage.

An example is the experiences of Tema Kartashev, the hero of Garin Mikhailovsky’s trilogy, who was torn between his family and his schoolmates. At the gymnasium they openly laughed at the rules of behavior to which he was taught at home; and at home his mother and sisters were offended, seeing his disregard for what was dear to them.

This is a manifestation of the general dispute between, relatively speaking, commoners (democrats, nihilists, Sharikovs, etc.) and aristocrats. Commoners contrast education and upbringing as real and imaginary values; in fact, they are incomparable and each have their own absolute value. The theory of utilitarianism (Bazarov, the same Sharikov, etc.), for all its simplicity and apparent convincingness, has confirmed its inconsistency. In our country, where the cultural elite did not manage to gain either a sufficiently strong position in the state or real influence on the people, a grandiose educational experiment was carried out to eradicate bows and other “trifles”. And then, along with the word “courtesy”, what this word reflects disappeared from everyday use, the shades of feelings and relationships disappeared - but rudeness remained.

Tsvetaeva writes: “You can’t bow like that and get into a person’s face, and you can’t even say these words, and you can’t even think them - which means I’m already a different person, this bow is already inside me.”

Let us limit ourselves to two examples of the usefulness of such a moral system. Nikolenka Irtenyev, 12 years old, ("Childhood" by L.N. Tolstoy) turned out to have an extremely unsuccessful tutor - tactless and stupidly picky. A child, unjustly locked in a closet, dreams with tears of how they will find him dead and begin to love and pity him - but he only dreams: the strict system of the established noble family does not allow the child to make his dream come true. On the other hand, Dostoevsky writes that a 12-year-old high school student, calm and from a good family, committed suicide: he did not learn his lesson, was left in an empty classroom as punishment, found some kind of rope and hanged himself. Dostoevsky sees in this story an extreme and painful expression of uncertainty and restlessness, characteristic of people who do not have support in tradition, upbringing, or family life.

Here we can formulate the main question - why is such a set of moral principles needed?

Education built on such principles seems completely reckless: it not only does not equip a person with the qualities necessary for success, but also declares these qualities shameful. However, here everything depends on how to understand success in life - as external well-being or as an internal state (a clear conscience, high self-esteem, etc.). On the other hand, it gives a person the opportunity to survive in the most difficult life situations - when you are hurt, scared, when everyone has abandoned you, when you are generally in a logically contradictory situation, etc.

How do Americans view themselves and their national character? How do they imagine the right way to live? What do they teach their children? Let's try to highlight several main points of the moral paradigm of Americans.

Individualism. The measure of a person’s value is his personal success, which is created only through self-reliance. At the same time, it is important not just to get rich, but it is important to realize that you achieved this yourself, thanks to your enterprise, business acumen, etc. A self-made man is considered successful.

However, this position also has a downside. Unemployment or professional failure is perceived as a terrible blow that destroys the personality itself (for an American, having lost his job, will not place responsibility on the corporation, society, etc. - only blame himself, see himself as a loser; at the same time he does not will agree to another job with a lower social status, but will warm himself by the sewer, get drunk, etc.).

R.W. Emerson also wrote: “Good and evil are nothing more than empty words that can be applied to anything; only what suits my disposition is right, and what is contrary to it is wrong. If you obey custom, you are wasted you are wasting your allotted strength; get on with your work, and I will know who you are..."

These ideas are fully met by the “heroes of America” - the lonely and misunderstood cowboy, the defender “from the outside”, who comes and goes, having no place in society; a lone detective, smart, strong character, but misunderstood and not striving to make a career, defending his moral purity despite pressure from corruption.

In recent years, their circle has expanded. He is a man of status, a heroic manager, successful, competitive, fierce and enterprising, independent at heart and a flexible conformist at work. At work, his role is to manipulate people for the sake of the corporation's success; his life at home is completely different (wife, children, religion, community, etc.) The contrast between his behavior at work and at home is perceived as a virtue, showing the richness of his nature. This, in addition, is a “psychotherapist” - a person who enjoys manipulating his very style of life: adapting to the views of others, not arguing with them, and at the same time remaining himself, not changing. Directness and moral intolerance are contraindicated for him - after all, you can communicate with inveterate scoundrels and at the same time feel quite adequate if you hide your feelings in a distant drawer... Psychotherapy helps an individualist “save face”, maintain self-respect even in a situation where he is a cog in corporation, establishes the principle of “obey in order to succeed”: at work you are forced to be a conformist, to please and compromise principles - but in fact your values ​​do not suffer, your spirit remains free. On the other hand, psychotherapy teaches not to get involved in other people's problems, to hide likes and dislikes for clients if they interfere with business (remember the famous motto “keep smiling”).

Contract relationships. The moral basis of American individualism is reasonable egoism, expressed in the famous moral imperative: act towards another, the same individual, as you would like him to act towards you.

You cannot assert your own dignity by imposing your character and whims on others; being rude to others is absolutely forbidden; warning signs - the flip side of self-respect - are everywhere. An American's smile is not respect, but distance (if you don't smile, something has happened to you - and who cares?).

Compare with a similar principle among the Russian nobility (treat...) Here “if you have money, do what you want - smoke marijuana, drive a syringe with drugs - but don’t even think about teaching this to my children, don’t stick this dirt out of your house.”

The morality of communication follows from the contract relationship (this is exactly what psychotherapy teaches): sort out your feelings, find out what is important to you, then set a goal and choose a strategy to achieve it. If at the same time some principles of morality interfere with you, reconsider them, develop your own values, depending on what you want, what you are willing to give up and what you are not ready to give up. However, others also have their own values ​​- so don’t just do an action, but also think about how others will react to it, how it will affect your relationships with people.

With this logic of relations, there is no hope for fidelity to obligations: each party can break the agreement at any time, if the price for this is not too high.

Why become independent and achieve success? In order to become free. The concept of freedom is most dear to the American. An individualist understands freedom, first of all, as liberation from obligations and values ​​that other people, powerful public institutions, and primarily the state, try to impose on him from birth. In other words, this is the classical liberal understanding of freedom, formulated by the ancients (Cicero, Tacitus, Erasmus, etc.).

Moral foundations of work. What is the job for? Different religious systems dealt with this issue in different ways.

The position of Catholicism: work is either a means to maintain life or a preventive measure against sinful thoughts; heroes of the Middle Ages - a monk and a warrior.

The position of Protestantism: labor itself and wealth as its result are most pleasing to God. In other words, it was Protestantism that provided a moral justification for man’s desire for profit and, more broadly, for all of capitalism.

Let us present here the position of Orthodoxy: the hero of Orthodoxy is a holy fool, wealth corrupts souls, private enterprise as such is unfair.

There is sufficient basis for the theory according to which modern Western society arose thanks to the “creative spirit of capitalism”: work in itself is a good thing, for the sake of it we were born into the world. This was the position of Americans of the generation of the 50s. Now, largely thanks to the atheism of society, this spirit has almost completely exhausted itself, but it continues to be reproduced in the religious education of children.

Pragmatic ones took the place of religious and moral foundations for work. The oldest approach is income as a measure of a person's success (how much he is worth). Thus, a taxi driver will not go to work at a factory, where he could earn much more, for reasons of preserving the “purity of the profession.” Today, work is increasingly perceived as a career, a means of achieving high social status (“rat race”). In a competitive situation, this leads to mass neuroses, especially among working women, to alcoholism, and to mass visits to a psychotherapist. And it is extremely rare to approach work as a vocation (then a person is concerned about the meaning, the intrinsic value of work, that is, whether he has succeeded as a person).

The factor of friends, acquaintances, etc. is perceived by Americans as a variable; people are brought together not by common high goals, ideals, etc., but by parallel needs and goals. When a change in fate occurs (for example, a move), all previous connections remain behind it. Communication is organized accordingly. Business communication occurs “on the run”; here the task is to speak mainly on special topics, save time, and limit yourself to the essence. In non-business communication, on the contrary, the main task is to relax. Everything is allowed here except formal business style; The search for numerous, but fleeting acquaintances without obligations, rather than close friendships, is encouraged. It is strictly not customary to offer or expect help, especially in financial matters. For example, an American woman in Russia talks about the “threat of grandmothers” who discuss how she dresses her daughter.

Here it is advisable to recall E. Bern's theory about the levels of communication.

Thus, friendship formally lacks social or moral principles. Nevertheless, they exist: the social criterion of a youth company is the level of education; The moral criterion is that the companion does not lie, does not steal and is a decent person towards me personally, the rest is none of my business. The ideal of friendship corresponds to D. Carnegie - a circle of people who may be useful to you.

What does the concept of “happiness” consist of for an American? Happiness is self-expression, material success, the technique of feeling good, described in the famous manual of D. Carnegie (in particular, not having enemies or ignoring them, etc.), as well as having a loved one who is equal to you in strength and independence. If you have made your choice, tell others and yourself that you are happy.

Family. The worst prospect for parents is children who have been “hanging by their necks” for too long; therefore, they very early begin to treat their children as adults, as individuals responsible for their actions. For example, instead of “Go”, an American mother says to a 5-year-old child “Could you...”. The child is expected to leave his parents' home. Then he only visits his parents, but does not count on them. He is expected to have his own home (preferably in the literal sense of the word) and a family - a wife and children (not necessary, since they are contrary to individualism).

Love in marriage poses a dilemma for the American - how to combine free will and complete intimacy of loving beings. Absolute harmony is rare, someone gives in more (usually a woman), becomes an exploited party in a marriage, loses his “I” - and the one who previously loved him can leave him.

In other words, marriage is a voluntary contract between two independent individuals, which can be dissolved at any time for the sake of a better contract. The fairness of the distribution of responsibilities is constantly discussed. Separations (trial divorces) are common - they rested with each other, then got bored, and moved in together again; but children do not live in an environment of constant family scandal.

Religion. A religious foundation for morality, goodness and love is simply necessary for an American, because, as we see, he has no other moral support. Humane, loving, moral means he believes in God, an atheist means a person without honor and conscience. Turning to God especially helps at the turning points of life - people receive a strong boost of confidence, begin to live in harmony with themselves, and gain moral strength for decisive actions. For example, the future President J. Carter, as a result of such a change, first took up missionary work, then became convinced of his destiny to become the governor of Georgia, and then the president of the United States. At the same time, you can believe in anything: no religious fanaticism, all churches coexist. It is quite acceptable to change your religion, several times in your life.

Belonging to some religion, you become a member of the local parish, a community where your stress is relieved, where you come when it’s hard for you, where you gain strength (but no one will blame you or educate you). In addition, private schools with a religious bias have a high level of teaching. Finally, church rituals are needed in order to strengthen objectively disintegrating families: the Holy Scriptures do not speak about a voluntary contract between two beings, but about the fact that to love means, first of all, to do good to people, without thinking about one’s own benefit.

Hence the love for family and religious holidays and charity. In the mid-1980s, more than half of American adults and 53 percent of youth volunteered their free time for social activities.

The constitution, the founding fathers and the rules of formal democracy (our familiar democratic centralism) are deified: the decision is discussed, accepted by the majority and becomes law for all. However, the decision is lawful not because it was made by the majority, but because it was made according to formal rules (it was discussed for quite a long time, minutes of the discussion were kept, everyone had the opportunity to speak). Otherwise, it is a product of pressure from a “special interest group.”

Moral searches and passions around the ideal of justice are considered indecent and archaic for modern cosmopolitan specialists. Civic duty is realized only through grassroots initiative and unification into appropriate groups.

Moral standards of behavior

Moral standards are similar to legal ones. The thing is that they act as the main mechanism by which human behavior is formed. Thus, moral norms today are unwritten rules and laws that have developed over several millennia of human existence. In the legal field, laws are legally enshrined.

Morality, norms of human behavior and other values ​​are the embodiment of morality, since they determined the characteristics of human behavior and his consciousness in various spheres of life. For example, in the family, at work, in interpersonal relationships, and so on.

As for moral standards, this is a set of rules that determine human behavior according to principles. Failure to comply with them causes harm not only to human society.

These norms are formulated in the form of a specific set:

Give way to pregnant and elderly people;
don't be late;
say hello and goodbye;
wear certain clothes;
protect the helpless;
help the weak and so on.

Moral and ethical norms and other values ​​constitute the image of not only ancient, but also modern man, who has successfully developed in the sense of standard piety. A child, and even adults, should strive for this portrait. So we can see the pursuit of this goal, based on the analysis of the individual’s actions.

In Christianity, the image of the Savior – Jesus Christ – is used as a standard. It was he who began to instill justice in human souls and hearts, as well as moral standards of behavior in society. He is God.

Ethics and other rules play the role of personal and life guidelines for different people. A healthy person sets his own goals. Thus, positive morality is manifested, which helps to control immoral behavior, as well as the thoughts and feelings of a person.

As you know, morality performs its functions in society in the form of 3 interconnected elements. Each of them represents one of the embodiments of morality.

Let's introduce them:

Moral activity;
moral consciousness;
moral relations.

The moral norms of society arose quite a long time ago. Each generation of humanity interpreted the understanding of good and evil in its own way. And also interpreted the norms of behavior in its own way. In a traditional society, we see the moral character unchanged. That is. A person of the past had no choice to accept or not accept these moral standards of humanity. He had to abide by them unconditionally.

Today, a person observes or considers ethical norms as recommendations for achieving good for himself and others. For the most part, modern society no longer observes moral laws, but legal ones.

Previously, morality was defined as a set of rules prescribed by God. However, today they are presented as a social contract, the terms of which are desirable to be observed. If a modern person violates moral standards, he will not be held accountable, but will only be condemned at a family dinner.

Adopting moral laws for oneself is everyone’s choice. But remember that they will be an excellent fertilizer for the sprout of a harmonious soul. You can reject them, then do not expect a human attitude towards your person. However, it so happens that humanity and all society revolves around morality and ethics. And without them, the modern generation of people would not have achieved humanity and virtue.

The abundance of moral principles and norms must first be divided into two areas:

Permissions;
requirements.

Philosophers distinguish obligations and natural duties in requirements, and they divided permissions into supererogatory and indifferent. Morality can be social, that is, it implies a general rule for everyone, regardless of nationality and religion. In other words, this is an unspoken set of rules that operates in a particular family or in any state. There are also guidelines that recommend how to build a line of behavior with individuals. To understand moral culture, you need not only to read useful literature, but also to do good deeds that will be accepted and appreciated by others.

There is an opinion that society exaggerates the importance of morality. They say that a person’s moral standards are being pushed into limits. However, not a single literate, educated and well-mannered person considers himself a prisoner or a household appliance, using life according to instructions. Moral standards are the same guidelines, patterns that help a person build a life path. Without entering into numerous conflicts with conscience.

Be that as it may, moral standards largely coincided with legal ones. But life cannot be put within the framework of the law. There are situations when law and morality become adversaries. For example, one of God’s commandments says “Thou shalt not steal.” So why doesn't a person steal? If he does not commit this act out of fear of judgment, then this act can no longer be called moral. But, if a person does not steal, based on the belief that theft is bad, his act is based on compliance with moral values. Unfortunately, it happens in life that a person steals medicine, breaking the law, in order to save the life of another person.

It is worth understanding that a moral environment will never be formed on its own. A person must build correct relationships according to law and ethics. He must constantly work on himself. Schoolchildren learn the unspoken rules of morality in history, literature, social studies and other electives. However, growing up, they find themselves in a society where they feel defenseless and even helpless. Remembering myself when in the first grade we went to the board with horror to solve an example.

Thus, we see that piety fetters and makes a slave out of a person if moral values ​​are perverted. And they adapt to the material interests of a certain group of people.

In modern life, choosing the right path on the path of life worries the individual less than social ill-being and discomfort. Moms and dads want more for their child to learn and become an excellent specialist than a healthy person. Today it is more important to marry on a material basis than to know true love. It turns out that giving birth to a child is much more important than feeling a woman’s true need for motherhood.

Thus, human behavior and moral standards are closely related. Remember that when thinking about moral values, you should not equate them with regulations. Compliance with these rules must come from your own desire.

Social and moral norms

A person should not adapt to any patterns of behavior, manners of communication, principles of life in society, which are accepted among the majority because they simply represent some kind of proper norm, that is, they are correct only because they should be so and nothing else, that they are some kind of accepted standards for the reason that it is moral and decent, that is, it is normal and generally accepted, but in fact it is just a set of unspoken or public rules that were invented like the rules in some a sports game or for the behavior of any robot model and do not represent anything more than the instructions of some gambling casino. Only those moral principles are true that make sense in becoming closer to your highest nature.

Instead of love, people develop patterns of behavior, the ability to be hypocritical, bully, and pretend. They accumulate negative qualities in themselves, based on adapting to certain normative manners, in order to be liked by the majority of the same false and artificial people. Instead of learning to accept others and themselves to be in their natural manifestation, they strive to fit everything into negative morality, that is, based on the continuity of another, if he, like a robot, corresponds to some standardized and typified norms, which causes approval due to fitting into a certain range of reference prototypes. In this case, there is a negative harmonization with a sense of morality, which represents such satisfaction with moral principles in which acceptance or affection is caused only by what does not go beyond the scope of stereotypically programmed preferences. This can be called a program-resonant complex of sympathies, that is, it does not come at all from spiritual recognition and acceptance, sympathy for spiritual nature, but from the negative essence of the soul, which strives for a violent and forced transformation and adjustment of everything into what appeals to it and resonates, that is, if she likes cubes and pyramids, then all the balls cause her strong disgust and she dreams in her soul of enslaving them all and turning them through forceful pressure and pressure into shapes and designs appropriate for her, that is, formatting the ball into the shape of a cube or pyramids. A diabolical philosophy similar to this is widespread among all humanity. And there is nothing surprising in the fact that many of its representatives are paving their way straight to hell, without even really realizing it, but like a stupid and thoughtless herd they follow where they are all sweetly lured by the ominous fate of a cunning and calculating puppeteer.

Moral and ethical standards

As world experience shows, a public relations specialist very often has to deal with ethical problems generated by the conflict between the goal and the ethics of the means to achieve it. Concern for ethical behavior in public relations is related to the moral side of this relatively young profession. The reputation of a company or organization is usually assessed in three areas: moral behavior, responsibility to society, and financial position. The organization's commitment to the interests of society must be clear and distinct.

The globalization of the world, the creation of an international communications system, business networks, the development of science and a global network of professional organizations mean that limiting discussions on ethical issues to one country is no longer possible; social responsibility is no longer just a local problem. The key points from the point of view of legal and ethical standards for PR specialists is strict compliance, first of all, with the laws of the country in which they operate. Equally obligatory for them is adherence to the ethical standards imposed by the profession. “Everyone involved in PR, regardless of their narrow specialization, must acquire basic knowledge and experience in using methods and means, and comply with certain rules and norms of professional conduct,” - S. Black.

And if in medicine the basis of professional ethics has been the Hippocratic Oath for many centuries, then in PR (an incomparably younger science) various ethical codes have become this basis. During the history of PR as a profession, case law on professional conduct has been developed, and the first professional code of the International Public Relations Association (IPRA) was adopted. Many national associations have also adopted their own codes. It was assumed that strict adherence to codes would greatly contribute to the establishment of PR as a profession and would help maintain high quality work. In total, many codes of professional conduct have been created, among them the following can be mentioned: the Rome Charter, the Helsinki Charter, the Russian Code of Professional and Ethical Principles in the Field of Public Relations, the Declaration of Professional and Ethical Principles in the Field of Public Relations, the Code of Professional Standards of the American Society for Public Relations by the public.

These codes govern the professional conduct of all public relations professionals in relation to other citizens and must therefore be consistent with the laws, traditions and customs of the country concerned. The generally accepted standards of the code of professional ethics of a specialist come down to the following: the basic principle of professional ethics of a specialist in the field of public relations is a firm rule - the interests of the client or organization must always be above the interests of PR practice: the professional level of a specialist in the field of public relations is determined by the effectiveness of the results of the campaign to achieve mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and the public; The priority direction in the field of CO should be the achievement of harmony and understanding between interacting social actors - the individual and the organization, the organization and society.

In the conditions of modern Russia, due to the urgent need to stabilize the way of life, establish market relations, preserve the values ​​of Russian culture, create civilized living conditions, and spiritual and physical development of the nation, the moral aspect in the activities of SOs acquires special importance. Ethical norms and rules prevent various kinds of conflicts that arise in practical activities and establish clear ethical standards of professional behavior. And most importantly, they do not replace a person’s personal moral choice, position and beliefs, his conscience and responsibility.

Ethical rules are designed to strengthen the confidence of conscientious, professionally trained SM specialists that their qualities and efforts will be fully appreciated and rewarded: they must take into account the real aspects of professional work and keep them in an ethical context, and the wider this context, the more better. All codes of ethics in the field of CO are based on this assumption. Main problems: publication of information that could potentially harm the whole society or part of it; intentional publication of information that infringes on the interests and dignity of an individual or organization; violation of corporate rules; violation of ethical standards in relation to society, the media, and professional colleagues. Compliance with public interests. Everything that a PR specialist does is always aimed at a specific target group, and when conducting a PR campaign, he has to work simultaneously with several target groups, and sometimes with huge audiences, and this activity undoubtedly causes a public outcry. Everything that the law defines as illegal is at the same time unethical, in this the law and ethical standards completely coincide, and in such cases they say that ethics confirms the law.

Public relations serves the public in the best possible way through its activities, providing it with timely, truthful, honest and objective information. When carrying out PR activities, PR specialists should always remember that by violating ethical standards, a PR specialist in many cases violates the law, and, therefore, harms his own career; unethical behavior destroys the personal dignity of a specialist (after all, he is aware that he is acting unethically), as well as human and professional trust in himself; such a specialist is unlikely to be in demand by clients; Unethical behavior of a PR specialist also destroys the business reputation of the organization or clients for whom he works and undermines trust in them. By unethical behavior, such a professional undermines the trust of society as a whole in the entire public relations profession.

Morals and principles

Moral norms governing behavior and relationships that arise in the process of business activities perform certain functions, the main ones of which can be considered the following:

Evaluative - makes it possible to evaluate, from the point of view of compliance with moral norms and principles of behavior and action, the goals and objectives of an organization in the market, its aspirations and intentions, its chosen means of achieving goals and end results.
Regulatory - stems from the need to regulate the behavior and actions of organizations in market conditions in various formal and informal situations, so that they fit organically into the activities of the organization itself and correspond to market relations.
Organizational - serves to improve the organization, requiring its personnel to creatively perform their duties and professional duty.
Manager - serves as a means of managing the behavior and actions of personnel during the process, during joint activities, in the interests of the business.
Motivational - serves as a means of forming social and professionally approved motives for activity.
Coordinating - ensures the cooperation of all personnel in the process of promoting goods or services to the client, based on social responsibility and trust.
Regulating - directs and determines the organization’s choice of goals, methods and means in working with the client.
Reproductive - allows you to reproduce the actions of personnel and their relationships among themselves and with clients, partners and competitors on the basis of morality and morality.
Educational - serves as a means of educating and improving the personality of all personnel in the organization, as well as the organization’s clients, partners and competitors.
Communicative - serves as a means of communication between staff, clients, partners, competitors.
Optimizing - helps to increase efficiency and quality in joint activities, increasing the status of the professions of entrepreneur, manager in society and the level of morality in their actions and actions in the market.
Stabilizing - helps to stabilize relationships within the organization with clients, partners, and competitors.
Rationalizing - makes it easier for the manager to choose goals, methods and means of influence, and to choose the most effective and morally acceptable decision.
Preventive - protects, warns the manager from actions and actions that harm the client and society.
Predictive - allows you to predict the action and behavior of an organization and its personnel in the market. Resolution of contradictions contributes to the elimination, resolution and smoothing of contradictions arising in the process of joint activities.
Informational - introduces all personnel of the organization to a system of shared values.
Social - contributes to the creation of conditions favorable for the implementation of social responsibility.
Socializing - serves the purpose when communicating with the organization.

Ethical relations in business exist in the form of demands made by the subjects of relations to each other in terms of fulfilling the duties and obligations of the moral principles that underlie the business and subordinate all activities; moral qualities that entrepreneurs and managers should have and actualize in their work in the process of activity; their constant self-control in the business sphere. The ethical consciousness of entrepreneurs and managers is a reflection of their social existence and activities arising in the process of market relations. This consciousness is a subjective reflection of morality, ideas about proper behavior and actions. An entrepreneur or manager operates in a value-oriented world, where every action, goal, motive, means to achieve a goal, or even intention can be assessed in terms of compliance with its moral standards, i.e. the idea of ​​society or microsociety about good and evil.

A number of moral principles of business ethics can be identified. Moreover, when considering the content of these principles, it makes sense to conduct their level-by-level consideration.

The principle of justice. Its first level is associated with the recognition of equality of starting opportunities. In this regard, the state takes an active part in the development of business and entrepreneurship, which is manifested in the legislative framework that creates the legal basis for the development of business and entrepreneurship. In Russia, such a legislative framework was not sufficiently thought out at the first stage of the development of market relations, but, nevertheless, it contributed to the manifestation of initiative in the development of entrepreneurship.

This level of the principle of justice is also manifested in the creation of equal starting opportunities for everyone to receive an education. The system of continuous education is also the concern of the state, and the fact that today a system of paid education has appeared in the higher education system is also the influence of the state on the development of education. On the one hand, we can say that this system appeared due to the fact that the state did not have funds for the development of the budgetary sector, but nevertheless, by adopting the law on education, the state determined the boundaries of the development of the paid education system in the country. Thus, through the education system, the state takes part in creating starting opportunities for every citizen of society. Previously, the state provided the opportunity for every employee to go through the so-called advanced training system throughout his life. This system of advanced training contributed to a certain development of the level of production. Today, various business schools have been created, a large network of courses that allows you to gain primary skills in organizing and running your own business, gain the basics of marketing, advertising, public relations, tourism, legal literacy, and so on.

The second level of the moral principle of justice is associated with the recognition of inequality of starting opportunities. It must be said that we were not very prepared for this level, because for a very long time in our country there was a slogan of universal equality. But we are all different, we all have different abilities, life circumstances develop differently, so psychologically it was and remains very difficult for us to recognize this level of justice, but, unfortunately, such is the dialectic of life that we achieve our success in life in different ways. And this is an axiom of life today and, especially, an axiom of market relations.

We will also consider the principle of honesty at two levels.

The first level is to be honest with your colleagues. Probably the first thing in which this principle manifests itself is the principle of delegation, on which the management system is built. A bad leader is one who is afraid or does not delegate his powers to an insufficient extent. The art of a leader is to build a management system in his organization in such a way that everyone clearly knows what they are responsible for, what independent decisions they make, and most importantly, how they can make them.

The principle of honesty in a particular team is manifested through the organizational culture that exists in this company, the traditions that exist in this company. Then there are, of course, labor incentive systems. To what extent does the labor incentive process affect the interests of everyone who works in this company? This is also a process of implementing the principle of honesty with your colleagues within the company. These are the privileges that exist in this team. Today, many companies are developing company codes of honor. Looking into such a code, you can clearly assess how the principle of honesty of a given enterprise is implemented, including honesty with colleagues in your team.

The principle of honesty with colleagues and partners is manifested in approaches to solving ethical problems: from the point of view of benefit; from a rights perspective; from the point of view of justice; from a public benefit perspective; in terms of virtues (traits or qualities of character that encourage excellence).

The second level of the principle of honesty is to be honest with your clients, partners, and competitors. And today, many entrepreneurs and managers have realized that being honest today is beneficial. This aspect of the principle of honesty in business in our country has been very unfortunate, because for many years we have been thinking one thing, doing another, saying something else.

The principle of privacy is the recognition of an individual’s right to protect himself from unnecessary contacts. The first level of the privacy principle is psychological privacy. It is very important for managers to know the problems of their subordinates, not only production, but also personal. But how can I make sure that my subordinates can trust me with their personal problems? Of course, a manager must enjoy authority and trust among his subordinates, because for my subordinate it is very important that the problem, perhaps a purely personal one, with which he came to me, remains forever only between us. If a manager violates this rule, then very soon the entire team will know that this manager should not be trusted with their problems of a purely personal nature.

The next level of privacy is physical privacy. We were also very unlucky with physical privacy. It is violated very often in our country - from behavior on the street and in transport to gangster racketeering in business.

In general, we can talk about social privacy, i.e. correlation of one’s capabilities with the capabilities of society, awareness of one’s own privacy and the privacy of one’s subordinates, the privacy of one’s clients, partners and competitors.

The principle of gender interaction. The problem of gender relations is very relevant in modern management. Today in business the problem of the business woman is being discussed very seriously. According to some surveys, more than 84% of the world's business men said that they would not like to work under the leadership of business women. Business men noted that a woman is not inclined to search and take initiative, that after three or four years a business woman becomes uninteresting as a leader in making her own decisions: stereotypes in decision making begin to come into play. In addition, business men noted that it very often seems to them that many female managers took their chair, their place thanks to certain sexual assaults on men. Women (not without reason) think that the situation in life is diametrically opposite, but it turns out that men also think the same way.

In the United States, the problem of sexual harassment during working hours, associated with degrading human dignity and a gross invasion of privacy, is being actively discussed. Sexual harassment from others has become commonplace for some company executives. Every third working woman faces this problem in large cities, and every fourth in the provinces. Sexual harassment is a relationship of power and submission. Your desires, your inclinations are not taken into account - you will do as I say. The main thing here is not sex, but the demonstration of power, the use of power for humiliation. And this is not only a problem for secretaries and office managers. Although now that young, prosperous “new Russians” with an increased level of sexuality and a lower level of morality and respect for the law have begun to do business, this happens quite often in their offices renovated to European standards. It is useful for such managers to remember that a million dollars is the amount of compensation that, according to a court verdict, the management of an American cannery in the city of Laurel (Maryland) had to pay to twenty-two of its employees who dared to bring charges of sexual harassment against their superiors. In Germany, to date, about one and a half thousand women working in federal ministries and other central departments have been subjected to outright sexual harassment. These data are contained in the published report of the Ministry of Family Affairs. An official investigation has been launched into 242 complaints. In 103 cases, formal charges were brought against superiors in connection with sexual harassment of female subordinates.

Such processes are the norm abroad, but here they are the exception. In the United States, thousands of cases are tried every year, and sexual predators are paid out more than ten million dollars a year in compensation. It is important that not only the culprit, but also the head of the company is responsible, because he did not create safe working conditions for the woman. The Russian Criminal Code has Article 133: coercion to perform acts of a sexual nature... using the financial or other dependence of the victim. But, alas, it practically does not work. Women simply do not go to court - they are ashamed, and they are afraid that public opinion will not support them.

Legal and moral standards

The moral content of criminal procedural relations is determined by the moral principles of criminal procedural legislation regulating the relevant activities. In the course of this activity, moral requirements * addressed to the persons who carry out it are also realized.

M. S. Strogovich, like many other scientists, distinguishes two main elements in the criminal process: the law-based activities of the investigative bodies, the prosecutor's office and the court and the legal relations of these bodies both with each other and with the persons and organizations to which they apply activity. He wrote: “...criminal procedural relations represent the legal form of activity of the investigative bodies, the prosecutor’s office and the court, carrying out the tasks assigned to them by law... and this activity itself is the content of criminal procedural relations.”

The criminal process is, in a certain sense, a system of criminal procedural relations in which all participants in the criminal process are involved, who at the same time are also the subjects of legal relations.

In the procedural literature, some scientists identify a central legal relationship: between the court and the defendant or between the authorities and the accused. Isolating this complex legal relationship, which naturally includes more specific legal relationships, seems justified. It essentially contributes to the humanization of the approach to the analysis of the system of procedural legal relations.

In criminal proceedings, legal relations exist in close unity with moral ones.

In ethics, moral relations are usually considered in two aspects, at different levels.

First of all, moral relations are a system of moral values, norms and prohibitions established in society that regulate behavior and are implemented in everyday life. In this sense, they talk about what are the moral relations that have developed in a given society, social group, that is, what is the real morality of this society from the point of view of the ideas established in it about the moral values ​​of moral relations.

On the other hand, moral relations are relationships into which an individual person, an individual, enters and remains with other people, guided by ideas about moral and immoral, good and evil, the dictates of duty, conscience, and self-esteem.

Procedural relations, like other legal relations, include subjects, an object, and a legal relationship between subjects in the form of rights and obligations as their main elements.

Approximately according to this scheme, one can analyze moral relations when it comes to relationships* between specific individuals. Thus, L. M. Arkhangelsky writes: “By entering into one way or another motivated relationships with each other, with society, people impose upon themselves certain moral obligations, fixed by the consciousness of duty, responsibility, and conscience. Along with this, moral relations entail moral rights for the participants in these relations, associated with the expectation of fulfillment of duties by others, with recognition of personal dignity, with the expectation of stimulating evaluation from public opinion.”

An individual person is in a system of moral connections, in moral relations with other people at different levels. These types of connections are: personality and personality; individual and team; personality and group (age, professional, etc.) and, finally, personality and society and even personality and humanity.

Moral relations are two-way. People enter into moral relations with others because in the process of their activities they somehow affect the interests of others, who respond to them either with assessments, or with actions, deeds.

If we analyze criminal procedural relations from the point of view of their connection and correlation with moral ones, then the main attention should be paid to moral relations of the person-person type, since in criminal proceedings they have a leading place. For example, the investigator is in a procedural relationship with the accused. Both subjects of these legal relations are bound by procedural rights and obligations. But at the same time, the investigator also bears moral responsibilities, which correspond to the moral rights of the accused, etc. It can be considered that most procedural relations include or are accompanied by moral relations.

Take, for example, the moral relationship between the judge, who alone considers and resolves a criminal case, and the defendant. The judge by law has the right, as a result of the consideration of the case, to decide the fate of the defendant. But this legal right is realized in conditions where the judge has moral responsibilities towards the defendant. The judge is obliged to examine the case objectively, impartially and unbiasedly; he is obliged to see the defendant as a person, not to humiliate his dignity and not to allow such actions on the part of the persons involved in the case; the judge is obliged to take care of the protection of the rights and interests of the defendant as a citizen; when deciding to be fair, treating defendants equally, regardless of their social, property and other differences, and determining their fate, guided by the law and one’s conscience, moral duty.

The defendant has a moral obligation to show respect for the court, respect the dignity of the victim and other persons involved in the case, and observe moral standards in public proceedings and in dealing with the judge and participants in the trial. At the same time, he has the moral right to demand fair justice from the judge. For example, an innocent person whose Case is being considered by a judge has a moral right to acquittal, no matter how seemingly convincing the evidence the prosecution uses. The defendant has the moral right to demand justice in the imposition of punishment if he is guilty, which means, in particular, humanity, and in many cases, mercy. The defendant has the right to count on the protection of his dignity as a person, the protection of his private life, and respect for his right not to testify against himself and his close relatives or spouse.

As we see, the moral rights and obligations of participants in moral relations are closely related to their procedural status, regulated by law, but legal relations form, as it were, an outer shell, a legal form in which moral relations function.

If we return to the characterization of the criminal process as a combination of content - procedural activity and form - procedural relations, then it should be recognized that moral relations rather relate to the content of the criminal process and are realized in the form of moral activity.

Criminal procedural relations regulated by law are not personalized. The rights and obligations of their subjects are indicated in relation to abstract judges, prosecutors, investigators, accused, victims, etc. But moral relations within the framework of criminal proceedings are relations between specific people with their own individual moral qualities. This side of the matter is pessimistically captured by the old Russian proverb: “Fear not the court, fear the judge.” In the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, all judges, defendants, and witnesses are abstract, which is quite natural. And in real life, in legal and moral relations during criminal proceedings, investigator “A”, accused “B”, defense attorney “C”, witnesses “G”, “D”, etc.; prosecutor “Z”, then judge “I”, etc. The moral relations in which they participate are relations between certain individuals. Each convicted person, for example, remembers not an abstract judge, but precisely the concrete person who tried him and sentenced him to punishment, the person to whom he gives a moral assessment and for whom he has certain feelings.

Moral relations in criminal proceedings that develop between specific subjects reflect moral relations in society as a whole, the system of moral values ​​accepted in it. Thus, the Middle Ages, with their cruelty, violation of the individual, and absolutist power, were characterized by the inquisition process with the lack of rights of the accused, the presumption of guilt, and torture as a way of obtaining “perfect evidence.” The modern process of a civilized society requires humane forms, respect for the dignity of the individual, an impartial, independent and competent court.

The influence of the state of morality of society as a whole, the nature of the moral relations existing in it and recognized moral values ​​on criminal procedural activity and moral relations in the process can be judged, in particular, by those phenomena that arose in the conditions of the crisis that has gripped society in the last few years . Evasion of citizens from testifying during investigations and in court has become widespread. Under the influence of threats, bribery, and simply unwillingness to cooperate with government agencies, perjury (usually in favor of criminals) has become almost a common occurrence. The media report on bribery of law enforcement officials, experts, the inability to organize the work of courts due to the failure of people's assessors to appear in courts to perform their duties, and other negative processes and facts. The moral crisis in society affects the state of legality in the state, the solution of moral problems that arise in the administration of justice and law enforcement.

The types of moral relations in criminal proceedings vary depending on the stage of the process at which they take place and the subjects participating in them.

At the stage of initiating a criminal case, the subjects of moral relations are the applicant - usually the victim of a crime or another person reporting a crime due to a legal or moral obligation, and the prosecutor, investigator, investigative body, judge, who are authorized and obligated by law to initiate a criminal case if signs are detected crimes. When serious crimes are committed, the victim and other person who has reliable knowledge of the crime has not only a legal, but also a moral obligation to report it to the authorities. Officials who are authorized and obligated to initiate a criminal case bear moral responsibility for evading the initiation of a case, concealing crimes, and depriving the victim of the right to judicial protection. At the same time, unfounded initiation of a case is fraught with restrictions on the rights and freedoms of citizens and can create preconditions for bringing innocent people to justice. The procedural rules governing legal relations at this stage of the process are defined and oblige both officials and citizens to behave accordingly. However, the moral defects inherent in some part of these people give rise to more than one deviation from the law and moral duty.

During the preliminary investigation, moral relations are formed and developed between the investigator conducting the investigation and the suspect, the accused, his defense attorney, as well as with the victim, civil plaintiff and civil defendant, expert, specialist, translator, witnesses and all other persons with whom the investigator enters into contact on duty. The investigator also has a moral relationship with the prosecutor, the body of inquiry, and the interrogating officer.

The most acute situations, which in many cases are associated with moral choice and in which moral relations are manifested, arise when a person is brought in as an accused, procedural coercive measures are applied, or a decision is made to end the Investigation (by terminating the criminal case or sending it to court).

The judge, when scheduling a court hearing, also has a moral relationship with the participants in the process, the prosecutor, and the investigator, although he makes decisions in their absence. His procedural rights are implemented taking into account moral criteria. For example, the right to change the charge towards mitigation is exercised in accordance with the moral obligation to fairly evaluate the actions charged to the accused, to detect and correct the mistake made by the investigator and the prosecutor.

In court proceedings, where, in conditions of immediacy, judges enter into communication with all participants in the process, moral relations develop both within the panel of judges or jurors, and between judges and the parties, between the parties, between judges and experts, witnesses and other persons participating in the case .

Judges exercise a moral obligation to objectively, impartially examine a case and resolve it fairly. At the same time, they take into account the different situations and different claims of the parties, but are guided by their conscience and the law, caring for justice.

In a court with the participation of jurors, the latter enter into moral relations both among themselves and with the judge presiding over the case and with the parties.

During proceedings in a higher court, the duty of judges to other participants in the process is to carefully check the grounds and content of the verdict, detect injustice and, if it has been committed, correct it.

Moral and ethical standards of behavior

Morality (or ethics) is a special form of social knowledge and a type of social relations, one of the main ones capable of regulating human actions in society with the help of norms. In contrast to the norms of law, the fulfillment of moral requirements is sanctioned only by forms of spiritual influence (public assessment, approval or condemnation). The sphere of morality is the object of study of a special philosophical discipline - ethics.

Morality, acting as a moral imperative, establishes requirements for human behavior in accordance with the developed norms of human society and the rules that the professional environment imposes on the individual and which are consistent with his own ideas about good and evil.

Ethical principles and standards of behavior of people within a specific type of work activity are determined by professional ethics. It sets requirements for the employee in relation to his professional duty, through it - to colleagues, and, ultimately, to society as a whole. Morality does not come with position or social position. However, as experience shows, both position and social position are a serious test of the actual morality of people.

Some Russian scientists divide moral actions in the context of professional ethics into obligatory and appropriate.

Mandatory actions (responsibilities) are one of the main not only official, but also ethical components of any activity. Failure to fulfill or dishonest attitude towards official duties leads to the emergence of various kinds of conflict situations that worsen the psychological climate in the organization, which in some cases can lead to undermining the image of the organization. It is to the solution of this problem that the greatest attention is paid when developing and institutionalizing any professional ethics.

Many problems of a moral nature that arise in the sphere of professional activity are correlated with the basic moral principles and norms of behavior in everyday life, and in each of the professional spheres a person must act in accordance with the requirements of ethics and morality. The norms of any professional ethics are considered as private in relation to general civil moral norms, which cannot be implemented without taking into account the specific conditions in which a person’s profession places him.

The norms of professional ethics prescribe a certain style of behavior and relationships - one that does not cause misunderstanding and condemnation from others. These norms provide a certain guarantee that people can rely on each other.

Employee behavior is influenced by various regulators. Most of them reflect the specifics of the mission of a particular organization and a particular type of professional activity.

Among these regulators are the following:

Regulators of the external environment: state laws, social rules of behavior, family traditions;
features of the content and means of labor used in the organization, determined by the nature of technological processes, division and cooperation of labor;
social role, status of individual workers in formal and informal groups of the organization;
regulations in force in the organization: orders, instructions, regulations, instructions, traditions, customs.

In this case, the employee acts not only as an object of regulation, but as a subject capable of actively influencing the action of all the above regulators, including the state.

In the professional sphere, human behavior acts as labor behavior, which manifests itself primarily in relation to work. The attitude towards work can be judged by objective and subjective indicators. Objective sociologists include: the degree of responsibility, conscientiousness, initiative, discipline, which are determined by the quantity and quality of work performed, the number of proposals made for its improvement, and the desire to increase the level of one’s professionalism. Subjective indicators of attitude towards work: degree of satisfaction with work, pay, organization and working conditions; relationships with management and colleagues.

The actual labor behavior of workers includes several of its norms. Sociologists associate a form of behavior with certain needs and motives, i.e. with the employee’s desire for a particular goal.

In this regard, the following main forms of target behavior are distinguished:

Functional behavior determined by the content and organization of work;
economic behavior - the desire to achieve a certain level of well-being and quality of life (can differ: “maximum income with maximum effort” and “maximum income with minimum effort”);
organizational behavior, which is associated with the reaction of employees to the use of various management methods (incentives, regulation of activities, regulations, instructions, etc.; this is a part of behavior regulated by the organization that allows it to achieve its goals);
stratification behavior, i.e. desire to change one's status (stratum);
innovative behavior (searching for ways to improve the content, organization and efficiency of work);
adaptive behavior is typical for new working conditions, when joining a new team, etc.;
characterological behavior determined by the socio-psychological characteristics of the employee, his character (obviously, a psychologically unstable type does not correspond to the position of a manager).

Ethical forms of labor behavior determine the content of professional ethics. The latter is often presented in the form of a code of conduct (ethical code), prescribing a certain type of moral relationships between people that are considered optimal in terms of fulfilling their professional duties. A code of ethics can be developed in relation to employees of an organization as a whole or in relation to a specific group of them performing the same or similar professional functions (professional code).

A code of ethics usually includes three types of moral standards:

Prescriptive (as required, from the point of professional morality, to act in certain situations);
prohibitive (what is specifically not permitted within the framework of official conduct);
recommendatory (how one should behave in a particular moral situation).

The code of ethics and ethical standards of a professional activity (or organization) express the voluntary acceptance by a professional group of workers or employees of an organization of obligations to observe strict discipline to a greater extent than is provided by law. Their purpose is to communicate to the public that a particular group of members of society is committed to maintaining high ethical and civic standards, and to state that, in return for the public's trust, that group is committed to carrying out its practices in a manner that serves the public good.

A code of ethics expresses in general terms the standards of professional conduct that should be shared by all members of a given profession and related professions. It serves as the basis for disciplinary action when a member's conduct does not meet the required standards stated in the code.

However, the code of ethics cannot provide for all moral situations that arise in practical activities; the rules of the code cannot replace a person’s personal moral choice, position and beliefs.

The need to develop professional moral codes is due to the fact that increased demands are placed on certain types of professional activities in society. These requirements are caused by the special situation of some professions, which is expressed in granting them the right to manage significant material resources and make responsible decisions. There are professional ethics of a doctor, teacher, journalist, civil servant, etc. There are ethical codes for the military, judges (codes of honor), in the field of trade, international ethical codes for museum workers, the Red Cross Society, etc. New “ethics” are constantly appearing - for business, communications, etc.

Due to the deepening professionalization of work, specialists in various fields are increasingly faced with moral problems that cannot be solved relying only on professional knowledge. Therefore, professional ethics becomes a necessary component of professional education. It does not aim to put forward new moral standards. Its task is to summarize what already exists and determine the degree of their importance from the point of view of this profession.

Management of morality in an organization and society as a whole is carried out by various entities, including state and non-state structures. In a number of countries, special services have been created within the structure of government bodies and commercial organizations, which are entrusted with the functions of monitoring compliance with the moral requirements of employees. However, in our conditions such a practice is hardly justified. It is necessary that government and commercial structures in general act as bearers of moral values. At the same time, the civil service must represent a social and moral institution capable of asserting the requirements of proper morality among employees and citizens of the country. The same function should be assigned to commercial structures, since without a high moral image, as evidenced by the experience of leading firms and corporations in the world, their successful development and prosperity is impossible.

In the implementation of the principles and priorities of state personnel policy, the leading role belongs to the public administration system, therefore the issue of the moral and ethical foundations of the public service acquires special importance. The formation of ethical requirements for civil servants is significantly influenced by the socio-economic and political situations that have developed in society, as well as by the values ​​that are currently supported by the political elite. Moreover, government officials lack motives that encourage them to radically revise existing values ​​and life goals. This situation contributes to less ideologization of the ethics of civil servants, however, on the other hand, it inevitably increases its alienation from society (bureaucracy).

One of the essential manifestations of ethical leadership is the ability to prevent conflicts related to the interests of interacting parties.

In the public sphere, the following types of conflicts are distinguished:

Emerging on political grounds (the state apparatus deviates from the principle of political neutrality and participates in the election campaign, serving one candidate or another);
arising on economic grounds - in the process of interaction between government agencies and private companies (use of official position for personal, selfish purposes);
related to the activities of officials (demonstration of power in relation to citizens, red tape, secrecy, etc.).

In order to overcome this kind of conflict and minimize the consequences of actions, various ethical strategies are used in world practice: based on the code, regulations and official instructions; relying on a leader or employee (their personal qualities). Each type of strategy represents a certain priority in regulating moral and psychological relations. Experience has shown that business firms are more likely to use code-based strategies; government bodies prefer regulatory regulation, including a focus on ethical standards developed by higher authorities.

Along with ethical codes, the oath serves as a means of ensuring the legality of the ethical activities of employees. Thus, in many countries, including the Republic of Belarus, a procedure has been established for swearing in the President of the country, heads of federal subjects (in Russia), judges of the Constitutional Court, employees of a number of specialized types of service: military, customs officers, etc.

In some countries, the oath extends to a wider range of employees. For example, in the USA, an oath is taken when an employee takes office. It can be given orally or in writing, or implied by the very fact of entering into official duties. The oath, along with other provisions, contains the moral obligation of the employee to honestly and conscientiously fulfill his official duty, follow moral standards, and consistently defend the state interest (or the interest of the company, if this concerns a commercial structure).

Ethical standards of labor behavior of employees are often established among the requirements for professional, business and moral-psychological qualities of managers and specialists of organizations and enterprises.

Principles and norms of moral behavior

Of particular importance for a manager is working with subordinates (visiting the office of the director of the company, head of a department, group, etc.).

The principle and norms of moral behavior of a leader are the ethical principles of a leader’s work that determine his style of leadership and communication with the team and are aimed at increasing the effectiveness of each employee and the team as a whole.

The success of a company largely depends on the business qualities of its leader. It is often believed that the ability to lead is a quality that a person receives from birth or does not receive at all. This premise is wrong: the art of leading can be learned. The secrets of leadership skills themselves are very simple.

The leadership style should consist of various, sometimes even contradictory forms and methods of influencing people, seemingly excluding each other: firmness and complaisance, unity of command and broad collegiality, the ability to demand from subordinates and fulfill their demands, to control and trust, to be official and in at the same time, be friendly and close with people, convince and inspire, smile and get angry.

The art and success of business communication are largely determined by the norms and principles that the manager uses in relation to his subordinates: what behavior in the service is acceptable and what is not. Without observing the ethics of business communication between a manager and a subordinate, most people feel uncomfortable and morally unprotected in the team. The attitude of a manager towards his subordinates influences the entire nature of business communication and largely determines its moral and psychological climate. It is at this level that standards and patterns of behavior are primarily formed.

Let's note some of them:

· If an employee does not follow your instructions, you need to let him know that you are aware of this, otherwise he may think that he tricked you. Moreover, if the manager has not made an appropriate remark to the subordinate, then he is simply not fulfilling his duties.
· Criticize actions and actions, not the person’s personality.
· Never give employees the opportunity to notice that you are not in control of the situation if you want to maintain their respect.
· Observe the principle of distributive justice: the greater the merit, the greater the reward.
· Encourage your team even if success is achieved mainly due to the success of the leader himself.
· Strengthen your subordinate's self-esteem. A job well done deserves not only material, but also moral encouragement. Don’t be lazy to praise your employee once again.
· Protect your subordinates and be loyal to them.

Knowing how to address and treat your manager is no less important than what expectations you should have of your subordinates. Without this, it is difficult to find a common language with both the boss and subordinates. Using certain norms, you can attract a leader to your side, make him your ally, but you can also turn him against you, make him your ill-wisher.

Here are some necessary ethical standards and principles that can be used in business communications with a manager:

· Try to help the manager in creating a friendly moral atmosphere in the team and strengthening fair relationships. Remember that your manager needs this first.
· Do not try to impose your point of view on the manager or command him. Make your suggestions or comments tactfully and politely. You cannot directly order him to do anything, but you can say: “How would you feel if...?” etc.
· Do not talk to your boss in a categorical tone, do not always say only “yes” or only “no”. An employee who always says yes becomes annoying and comes across as a flatterer. A person who always says “no” is a constant irritant.
· Do not ask for help, advice, suggestions, etc. “over the head”, directly to your manager’s manager, except in emergency cases. Otherwise, your behavior may be perceived as disrespect or disregard for your boss's opinion or as doubting his competence. In any case, your immediate supervisor in this case loses authority and dignity.
· If you have been given responsibility, gently raise the question of your rights. Remember that responsibility cannot be realized without an appropriate degree of freedom of action.

In relation to fellow managers, it should be borne in mind that finding the right tone and acceptable standards of business communication with employees of equal status from other departments is a very difficult matter. Especially when it comes to communication and relationships within one organization. In this case, they are often rivals in the struggle for success and promotion. At the same time, these are people who, together with you, belong to the general management team. In this case, participants in business communication should feel equal to each other.

Here are some principles of ethical business communication between colleagues:

· Try to achieve a clear division of rights and responsibilities in performing the overall work.
· If your responsibilities overlap with those of your colleagues, this is a very dangerous situation. If the manager does not differentiate your duties and responsibilities from others, try to do it yourself.
· Don't make promises you can't keep. Do not exaggerate your importance and business opportunities. If they don't come true, you will be uncomfortable, even if there were objective reasons for this.
· Don’t try to seem better, smarter, more interesting than you really are. Sooner or later, everything will come out and fall into place.
· View your colleague as a person to be respected in his or her own right, rather than as a means to achieve your own goals.

Aspects of moral standards

In the first section I already touched upon the question of the moral side of human experience. There I expressed the assumption that the basis of morality is confidence in the meaningfulness of life, which implies God as the only sufficient basis. But morality has other aspects that are also related to the question of God.

One of them was noted by Emmanuel Kant in the Critique of Practical Reason, where he explained why morality can only be given meaning by accepting without proof the existence of God. Kant gives the following arguments: in life, virtue does not always lead to happiness, although this should be so, morality is an incomplete state if we consider only this world (the sphere of sensory experience); for this state to be correct, it is necessary to affirm that God and immortality exist; then the incompleteness will be eliminated and the conditions for the existence of morality will be ensured by His power.

Kant's arguments are aimed at eliminating the inconsistency that arises from a purely secular interpretation of morality. Anyone who explains morality without trying to appeal to religion makes our moral sense meaningless. By denying God and immortality, we thereby deny the goal toward which the moral law existing within us directs us. A humanist would probably say that man is the only organism whose conditions of existence do not correspond to his hidden capabilities. The greatness of a person, in this case his desire to act morally, turns into humiliation and disappointment for him. The Christian faith makes it possible to see the situation completely differently.

Another important aspect of morality is the sense of duty that we often experience, a certain impulse that sometimes leads us far away from our own benefit. Humanism tends to regard moral standards as a matter of personal opinion and taste. But moral consciousness often leads us to something else. During the trials of Nazi criminals, few people probably believed that the actions of a person like Eichmann, for example, could be justified because they were acceptable from the point of view of the criteria that he himself recognized. The majority felt and understood that genocide is an absolute and objective evil and those who carry it out deserve death. Humanism may find actions morally objectionable, but it has difficulty regarding them as morally unacceptable, as our moral consciousness often demands.

The idea, which most of us readily share, that every human being has inalienable rights as an individual, that he should not be regarded as merely a means to some end, can best be understood in the context of religion. The moral imperative is an expression of faith in a moral God who rules the universe. Man's worth is guaranteed by the fact that he is created by God, loved by God, and destined for eternal life with Him. Our moral sense has its basis in actual personal responsibility before God. The feeling of guilt that we experience when we violate moral requirements can be understood as the feeling that we have betrayed someone who loves us. Thus the existence of God gives meaning to morality.

Moral standards of culture

Moral culture, like all social culture, has two main aspects:

1. values;
2. regulations.

Moral values ​​are what the ancient Greeks called “ethical virtues.” The ancient sages considered prudence, benevolence, courage, and justice to be the main virtues. In Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the highest moral values ​​are associated with faith in God and zealous reverence for him. Honesty, loyalty, respect for elders, hard work, and patriotism are revered as moral values ​​among all nations. And although in life people do not always show such qualities, they are highly valued by people, and those who possess them are respected. These values, presented in their impeccable, absolutely complete and perfect expression, act as ethical ideals.

Moral (moral) regulations are rules of behavior focused on specified values. Moral regulations are varied. Each individual chooses (consciously or unconsciously) in the cultural space those that are most suitable for him. Among them there may be those who are not approved by others. But in every more or less stable culture there is a certain system of generally accepted moral regulations, which, by tradition, are considered mandatory for everyone. Such regulations are moral norms. The Old Testament lists 10 such norms - “the commandments of God”, written on the tablets that were given by God to the prophet Moses when he climbed Mount Sinai (“Thou shalt not kill,” “Thou shalt not steal,” “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” etc.). The norms of truly Christian behavior are the 7 commandments that Jesus Christ indicated in the Sermon on the Mount: “Do not resist evil”; “Give to the one who asks from you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you”; “Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who use you and persecute you,” etc.

It is clear that moral values ​​and ideals, on the one hand, and moral regulations and norms, on the other, are inextricably linked. Any moral value presupposes the presence of appropriate regulations for behavior aimed at it. And any moral regulation implies the presence of a value towards which it is aimed. If honesty is a moral value, then the regulative follows: “Be honest.” And vice versa, if a person, by virtue of his inner conviction, follows the regulative: “Be honest,” then for him honesty is a moral value. Such a relationship between moral values ​​and regulations in many cases makes their separate consideration unnecessary. When talking about honesty, they often mean both honesty as a value and a regulation that requires one to be honest. When it comes to characteristics that are equally related to both moral values ​​and ideals and moral regulations and norms, they are usually called principles of morality (morality, ethics).

The most important feature of morality is the finality of moral values ​​and the imperativeness of moral regulations. This means that the principles of morality are valuable in themselves. That is, to questions like: “Why do we need them?”, “Why should we strive for moral values?”, “Why should we observe moral standards?” - there is no other answer than to admit that the purpose for which we follow moral principles is to follow them. There is no tautology here: simply following moral principles is an end in itself, that is, the highest, final goal” and there are no other goals that we would like to achieve by following them. They are not a means to achieve any underlying goal.

Professional moral standards

The concept of ethics consists of a set of norms governing the personal and professional behavior of people. As a rule, these norms are developed for a specific society in order to protect various categories of citizens, associations, and groups.

Ethics (from the Greek “character, custom”) is the philosophical study of morality and ethics.
Morality (from the Latin moralitas - generally accepted traditions, unspoken rules) - accepted ideas in society about good and bad, right and wrong, good and evil, as well as a set of norms of behavior arising from these ideas. Ethics is the science of morality.
Morality is the internal attitude of an individual to act according to his conscience and free will. By and large, morality is seen as synonymous with morality.

Studying a person’s value orientations is not only cognitively important, but also allows one to gain a lot of practical experience.

Values ​​are:

Desirable state of public relations;
- criteria for assessing events and phenomena;
- the meaning of purposeful activity;
- regulator of social interactions.

Thus, knowledge of the relevant values ​​allows both a person and society to comprehend emerging situations, to cognize and evaluate the integrity of objective events, and, consequently, to make the optimal decision in a given particular case in order to regulate human behavior.

Professional morality is the universal principles of morality in relation to the conditions of activity of a particular profession.

Universal values ​​relate, as a rule, to a specific society and are formed in a person under the influence of established family traditions and customs, school rules and guidelines, and in the process of spontaneous socialization.

The existence of professional morality is associated with the characteristics of a person’s work activity (criteria and characteristics of work, corporate directions, etc.).

Specialists in a particular industry perform the same functional responsibilities in organizations. As a result of this activity, they develop certain moral standards. These standards help to effectively solve professional problems, and their knowledge contributes to the improvement of the specialist’s personality.

Professional values ​​are formed in the course of professional education and practical activity and are derivatives of such group and organizational values ​​as universal, national, and personal.

They satisfy one of the most important needs of the professional community - the need for consolidation to solve professional problems. Ideals play an exclusive role in satisfying this need.

An ideal is a standard of what should be, the main evaluative criterion that expresses the highest goal of activity.

Professional activities include:

Inherent ethical responsibility characteristics to the profession. For example, upholding the interests of the profession, protecting its dignity and integrity, improving ethical rules, love for one’s profession, conscientious attitude to work, manifestation of creativity in performing professional tasks, symbolism, professional rituals;
- ethical standards aimed at self-realization, self-affirmation and self-improvement of the specialist’s personality, achieving high qualifications in professional activities.

An indicator of professionalism is a high level of cultural development in the relevant field of activity.

The presence and functioning of professional values ​​and value systems in a particular industry allows its employee to understand many professional situations related to his duties and correlate them with the current value system.

Mastering moral standards

Preschool age, occupying a period of time from three to six years on the scale of a child’s physical development, makes a great contribution to the mental development of the child. Over these years, the child acquires much of what remains with him for a long time, defining him as a person and subsequent intellectual development.

From the point of view of the formation of a child as a person, the entire preschool age can be divided into three parts. The first of them relates to the age of three to four years and is mainly associated with strengthening emotional self-regulation. The second covers the age from four to five years and concerns moral self-regulation, and the third relates to the age of about six years and includes the formation of the child’s business personal qualities.

At preschool age, children begin to be guided in their behavior, in the assessments given to themselves and other people, by certain moral standards. They develop more or less stable moral ideas, as well as the ability for moral self-regulation.

The sources of children's moral ideas are the adults who teach and raise them, as well as their peers. Moral experience from adults to children is transmitted and learned in the process of communication, observation and imitation, through a system of rewards and punishments. Communication plays a special role in the development of a preschooler’s personality. Knowing the history and content of a child’s interpersonal contacts in preschool age, we can understand a lot about his development as a person. Communication is associated with the satisfaction of the same need, which manifests itself quite early. Its expression is the child’s desire to know himself and other people, to evaluate and self-esteem. A careful consideration of how communication develops in ontogenesis, what character it takes on when a child is involved in various types of joint activities with other people, helps to better understand the opportunities that open up for personality development with age.

In preschool childhood, as in infancy and early childhood, the mother continues to play one of the main roles in the child’s personal development. The nature of her communication with the child directly affects the formation of certain personal qualities and types of behavior in him. The desire for approval from the mother becomes one of the incentives for behavior for a preschool child. The assessments given to him and his behavior by close adults become essential for a child’s development.

Children are among the first to learn the norms and rules of so-called “everyday” behavior, cultural and hygienic norms, as well as norms related to the attitude towards their responsibilities, observing the daily routine, and handling animals and things. The last moral norms to be learned are those relating to the treatment of people. They are the most complex and difficult for children to understand, and following them in practice is very difficult for children. Role-playing games with rules, common in older preschool age, have a positive impact on the assimilation of such rules. It is in them that the presentation, observation and assimilation of rules take place, their transformation into habitual forms of behavior. At first, children follow the learned norms and rules of interpersonal behavior by imitation (younger preschool age), then they begin to more deeply understand the essence of the rules and norms themselves (senior preschool age). They not only perform them themselves, but also carefully ensure that other children around them follow the same rules and regulations.

For the behavior of children in preschool age, there comes a period when it goes beyond cognitive self-regulation and is transferred to the management of social actions and deeds. In other words, along with intellectual self-regulation, personal and moral self-regulation arises. Moral standards of behavior become habitual, acquire stability, and lose their situational character. By the end of preschool childhood, most children develop a certain moral position, which they adhere to more or less consistently.

Quite early, a child develops a quality that plays a very significant role in his future personal destiny, giving rise to many other individually useful qualities. This is the desire for recognition and approval from the people around us. From this quality, as from a common root, in normal upbringing grow the need to achieve success, determination, a sense of self-confidence, independence and many others. It is also associated with the formation of such important personality qualities as responsibility and a sense of duty.

In preschool age, a child also develops personal qualities related to relationships with people. This is, first of all, attention to a person, to his worries, troubles, experiences, successes and failures. Many preschool children develop empathy and caring towards people, not only in play situations, but also in real life.

In many cases, an older preschooler is able to rationally explain his actions, using certain moral categories. This means that he has formed the beginnings of moral self-awareness and moral self-regulation of behavior. True, due to the special responsiveness of children of this age to the judgments, opinions and actions of other people, the external manifestations of the corresponding personal qualities do not seem to be sufficiently stable.

Formation of moral standards

One of the most pressing questions in various spheres of our existence is the question of the morality of each person. What needs to be done to protect today's and future generations from immorality and lack of spirituality? How to effectively implement the functions of raising and teaching children?

The formation of moral qualities of an individual on the basis of universal human values, socially oriented motivation, harmony of intellectual, emotional and volitional spheres of personal development is one of the most important educational tasks.

Moral education, merged in a holistic pedagogical process with physical, mental, labor and aesthetic education, makes it possible to form a comprehensively and harmoniously developed personality.

Moral education is carried out throughout the entire life activity of an individual, taking into account age and the environment that influences a person’s value orientations. It is necessary to begin to develop moral qualities in a child as early as possible.

The ways of forming the moral qualities of preschoolers have their own specifics when organizing special work on the moral education of those being educated, the formation of their moral experience in collective life, in communication, in joint activities, and in the formation of friendly relationships.

Moral education occurs thanks to targeted pedagogical influences, familiarizing the child with moral standards in the process of various activities that have morally valuable significance. All this is a kind of school for the child, where he gains experience in moral relations, learns the rules of behavior, an elementary culture of activity that is important in the organization of educational work at school, a culture of speech, and, most importantly, he develops an emotional and moral attitude towards the world around him.

The demands of adults should call the child “up” the steps of moral manhood. Children two to three years old are taught positive communication based on feelings of goodwill, the ability to play next to children, and share toys with them. Already at this age stage, it is necessary to ensure that elementary moral concepts are expressed in the desire to follow the instructions of an adult.

At three or four years old, a child has access to some simple norms of organized behavior. For example, do not disturb others with shouting and noise. We teach children how to behave without disturbing the normal flow of life in a group, how to behave at home so as not to interfere with the rest or activities of their elders, in public places not to shout, not to talk loudly, not to push passers-by. Children of this age are taught the ability to play amicably with a peer, to give in to him if necessary, to share toys, and to show care for him.

Children aged four to five years are increasingly able to express humane feelings and positive relationships. During this period, children develop collective behavior skills. Five-year-old children are able to evaluate their own and others' actions. To develop this quality, adults form in children a sensitivity to positive examples and a negative attitude towards bad ones. He encourages them to make value judgments about their own behavior: “I behaved well,” or: “I offended my friend, that’s bad,” or: “My action upset an adult.” The child feels shame for not living up to the adult’s opinion, for offending a friend, for telling a lie, for not keeping a promise, etc.

By the end of senior preschool age, children show even greater awareness of their actions. During this period, adults try to awaken in them a critical attitude towards what is not allowed, to use situations when the child can evaluate his own actions: “Do you think you did the right thing?”, “Is it good to refuse to help your mother?”, “What do you think you should do in this case?”, “Why?”, “What would you do in this boy’s place?”, “What would your friend say about your action?” etc. By this we normalize the moral consciousness and motives of behavior that the child should be guided by in appropriate situations.

During the period of senior preschool age, when the concepts of “possible” and “impossible”, “good” and “bad” are already perceived meaningfully, it is necessary to ensure that the child adheres to the basic rules of behavior both in the presence of adults and in their absence. This is of particular importance due to the fact that children will soon enter school, where they will be required to be more independent in behavior and communication with adults and peers both in class and in everyday life. What attitudes the child will be guided by depends on the level of his moral education.

During this period, children are taught responsibility for their own behavior, organization, a sense of camaraderie, mutual assistance, goodwill, sociability, i.e., those qualities that help people’s moral orientation in society. That is why special attention is paid to the development of social skills, the ability to comply with the norms of behavior in a team, to take into account the opinions of peers, and, if necessary, to defend one’s right in the correct form without quarrels and conflicts.

Adults encourage children to show concern for others, seeing in this the origins of friendly and comradely relationships. It is necessary to deliberately use any situation that puts the child in front of the need to obey the rules of life in a team, to take care of each other: “Help your friend.” I brought a new toy from home - “show it and let all the kids finish playing with it,” etc. So the concepts of “mine” expand to the understanding of “we”, “ours”.

We must not forget about instilling in children independence, habits of work effort, thrift, accuracy, and the ability to notice disorder and eliminate it on their own initiative. A child must understand that people’s labor is invested in every thing, and therefore he is obliged to take care of public property, everything that surrounds him at home, on the street, in public places, and accordingly behave like a future creator and citizen.

This is the baggage of children’s moral ideas; at every age stage. In this regard, teachers and parents are faced with the task of organizing the moral education of children in such a way that the child begins to normalize moral independence, an active attitude to life, a social orientation of motives of behavior, and an emotionally conscious positive attitude towards the environment.

Rules contribute to the formation of moral independence.

They are a guideline for children, with the help of which they choose the necessary forms of behavior. Thanks to the rules, every child understands and comprehends how to behave with adults and peers, at home and in kindergarten, on the street and in public places.

The rules are introduced gradually, in natural situations, taking into account the age of the children. Along with mastering the basic rules, children are explained others that specify and complement what they already know, for example: “How to behave at the table”, “How to behave on the street, in transport”, “Pedestrian rules”, “How to behave during a conversation” with adults”, “Rules of friendly games”, “Rules of friendly work”, “Rules of politeness”, etc.

When introducing any rule, adults explain its meaning. If children understand its necessity and know how to carry it out, then they will quickly master the necessary methods of behavior.

It is not enough to just introduce children to the rule; it is also useful to show how to implement it. When children learn all this, they will understand what it means to be expected to behave well. Thus, a show in combination with a word helps the child understand what they want from him.

It is important that mastering the rules requires from older children moral tension, efforts of will, restraint and constant basic self-control; so that the child, as it were, tries on and compares his actions with what is prescribed by the rule. This develops self-awareness and the ability to evaluate one’s behavior.

Adults need to turn to familiar nursery rhymes and use apt comparisons from their favorite children's works of art. For example, such as “Moidodyr”, “Fedorino’s grief” by K. Chukovsky, “The grimy girl” by A. Barto, “What is good and what is bad?” V. Mayakovsky, “The Incompetent” by Y. Akim, etc. Well-placed jokes, jokes, proverbs, and riddles have a good effect on children. The guys easily remember them and often use them themselves: “When I eat, I am deaf and dumb,” “When I’ve finished my work, go for a walk safely,” “It’s a boring day until the evening, if there’s nothing to do.”

Children of middle and senior preschool age need to discover the moral meaning of certain rules. They are already able to understand that the rules must be followed, since they provide for respect for the work of adults (“Wipe your feet, clean up after yourself, which means you respect the work of the nanny”), respect for the peace, comfort, and recreation of others (“You can’t talk loudly or play noisy games where people are reading, studying, or relaxing—this means showing disrespect for people”), etc. We need to help children understand why a well-mannered person acts this way and not otherwise. Explain that, for example, it is indecent to attract the attention of others, that it is unacceptable to jump, push, or block the sidewalk for oncoming pedestrians while walking down the street. This makes people uncomfortable. Such behavior is a sign of bad manners and disrespect for others. And those who do not know how to treat others with respect can never count on respect for themselves.

The degree to which children understand the rules of behavior largely depends on how they are justified. You could say: “Be quiet when entering the bedroom.” But you can do it differently: “There are kids behind the wall of your bedroom. When you enter your bedroom, be quiet, don’t forget that the little ones are already sleeping.”

In the first case, the requirement is categorical, it does not cause the child to think; in the second case, it is designed for higher awareness. Hence, naturally, children’s responsibility for their own actions increases: they are faced with the need to take into account the conveniences of those around them, in order to help them understand the demands of adults, it is useful to evaluate the actions of children: “If you acted according to the rules - good,” “If you acted against the rules - bad.”

Praise and blame, as polar assessments, help them distinguish good from bad, so evaluative influences show actions from a moral standpoint, causing the child to experience either pleasure and a desire to do the same, or embarrassment and shame for ugly behavior.

Blame and praise specify the concepts of “what is good” and “what is bad.” It is useful for the assessment to contain such definitions as “kind”, “polite”, “helpful”, “modest”, “neat”, “well-mannered”. For example: “Vova is a helpful boy, he noticed that Irina Viktorovna is carrying heavy objects and he helped her." This is what “well-mannered people” do.

We must try to bring to the consciousness of children the concepts of “attentive”, “kind”, “responsive”, etc. For example: “It’s good to be helpful, like Vova. People are always grateful for this. And being considerate means understanding what kind of help a person needs and offering him help in a timely manner, without waiting for him to make a request.” Or: “Attentive”, “responsive” is someone who knows how to sympathize and tries to help. That’s what Marina did today. She saw that the new boy was having trouble tying a scarf and offered him her help.”

When children receive such assessments of behavior in specific life situations, these assessments become especially intelligible.

All this once again convinces us that the first moral ideas and first impressions received in preschool years leave a mark for the rest of life and it is the duty of elders to mold the character of a future person with patience and love so that his intellectual and emotional development is harmonious.

The formation of moral behavior in preschool age occurs in various ways. The process of assimilation of moral concepts is carried out in preschool age not only from the private, specific to a more general understanding of the moral content of situations. The child spends most of his time communicating with peers. In the process of forming a children's collective, he first assimilates moral concepts in categorical form, gradually clarifying and filling them with specific content, which undoubtedly accelerates the process of their formation. His actions and relationships with peers are no longer directly emotional in nature, but begin to be mediated and regulated by moral norms.

Moral standards of communication

There are gaming, educational, leisure, intimate, spiritual communication, including communication with oneself. Apparently, business communication is another variety of it.

As already noted, the essence of business communication is that it has a regulated (targeted) nature and is limited to a specific topic or range of issues. It is carried out, as a rule, during business interaction, in an official, work environment, both in the form of direct personal contact and through technical means.

We can name such forms of business communication as business conversation, meeting, meeting, meeting, negotiations, presentation, conferences and teleconferences, business correspondence (now, increasingly, by e-mail). Consultation with an expert (doctor, lawyer) on a specific issue, consultation, interview with a journalist, assignments to subordinates, their reports to management, student speech at a seminar, passing an exam, test, interview with a teacher - all these are examples of business communication.

Researchers have noted some modern trends in changing the role, content and quality of business communication:

Firstly, there is a significant increase in the role of communication, both business and interpersonal, in modern life both in our country and abroad. Currently, contacts between people have expanded, especially in the field of international relations. In Russia, the role of communication in the process of creating and providing various services has significantly increased.
Secondly, there is a noticeable weakening of the role of direct communication in connection with the development of electronic communication systems and virtual organization of work.
Thirdly, the nature of communication is significantly influenced by the socio-economic and political stratification of modern Russian society.

The general principles governing the flow of business communication processes include its interpersonal nature, purposefulness, continuity and multidimensionality.

Interpersonality. Interpersonal communication is characterized by openness and diversity of interaction between people, based on their personal interest in each other. Despite the predominantly business orientation, business communication inevitably has the character of interpersonal contact and contains a certain interpersonal radical. The implementation of business communication in any case is determined not only by the specific case or business issue being discussed, but also by the personal qualities of the partners and their attitude towards each other. Therefore, business communication is inseparable from interpersonal contact.

Focus. It is clear that any act of business communication is purposeful. At the same time, the focus of business communication is multi-purpose. In the process of communication, along with a conscious goal, an unconscious (latent) goal also carries the information load. Thus, the speaker, reporting statistical data to the audience, wants to outline the objective situation in the problem area. At the same time, perhaps on an unconscious level, he has a desire to demonstrate to those present his intelligence, erudition and eloquence. Other targets can be found in the same episode.

Continuity. Once we come to the attention of a business partner, we initiate continuous business and interpersonal contact with him. Since communication includes both verbal and nonverbal elements, we constantly send behavioral messages to which the interlocutor attaches a certain meaning and draws appropriate conclusions. Even the partner’s silence or his physical absence at the moment are included in the act of communication if they are significant for the other person. This happens because any of our behavior informs about something. It represents a reaction to a situation and to the people around you. Experienced communicators must be aware of the explicit and implicit messages that are constantly being conveyed.

Multidimensionality. In any situation of business interaction, people not only exchange information, but in one way or another regulate their relationships. For example, when, getting ready for a trip, Leonid tells Denis: “We need to take a map with us,” he is not only conveying information. It is important how Leonid speaks - depending on the tone, his message may imply: "I am more important than you - if not for me, we would have forgotten an important thing for our trip."

During business communication, at least two aspects of the relationship can be realized. One aspect is maintaining business contact, transferring business information. Another is the transmission of an emotional attitude to a partner (positive or negative), present in any interaction. For example, someone says to someone: “I am glad to see you.” The facial expressions that accompany these words will show whether the speaker is truly happy to see his interlocutor. If he smiles, speaks sincerely, looks into the eyes and pats the interlocutor on the back or confidently shakes his hand, the latter regards this as signs of affection. And if the words of greeting are pronounced quickly, without soulful intonation, with an impassive expression on the face, the one to whom they are addressed will perceive them only as ritual signs of etiquette.

The process of business communication is significantly influenced by the physical, social-role and emotional-moral contexts in which it occurs.

The physical context of business communication consists of place, time, environmental environmental conditions (temperature, lighting, noise level), physical distance between participants, etc. Each of these factors can positively or negatively impact communication. For example, when a manager sits at a table in an office and talks to his subordinates, this is one context; when he talks to the same people at a round table in a conference room, this is a different context.

The social-role context is determined by the purpose of communication and the situation in which it occurs - in the office, at an official reception ceremony, at a business meeting, in a classroom, at a police station, in a restaurant, among members of a work team, or when visiting a competing organization. The flow of business communication is also influenced by interpersonal relationships and social positions of its participants.

All of this influences the content of communication and how different messages are formed, conveyed and understood. So, the secretary of the head of the company talks differently with his boss and with clients. A young employee recently hired into a company will behave differently when talking with his peer and with a much more experienced and titled specialist.

The emotional and moral context creates the moods and feelings that each of the interlocutors brings to communication. The connections formed between participants in previous communication episodes and influencing the understanding of what is happening in the current situation are also important.

The emotional and moral aspect represents the main psychological content of business communication, its internal side. To give a psychological assessment of business communication is to say what the relationship between business partners looks like in the “human” dimension (respect-disrespect, arrogance-servility, etc.).

From a psychological point of view, it is important what emotions and feelings accompany the communication process: joy, elation, inspiration or fear, anger, anxiety, uncertainty. On what moral and ethical basis is the position taken in communication by the partner built, as well as what moral qualities he displays in business relationships: honesty, decency, commitment or the opposite.

Each participant in business communication is guided by certain moral standards: honesty and decency, justice, respect, responsibility and others.

Honesty forces people to refrain from deception and deceitful acts. But we must keep in mind that sometimes you have to lie even to those people who accept honesty as an immutable norm of business behavior. Most often, people resort to lying when they are caught in a moral dilemma and forced to choose between unsatisfactory alternatives.

The basic rule of morality is that “one should tell the truth whenever possible. The fundamental requirement of this rule means that one should not intentionally deceive or attempt to deceive others or oneself. Only if we are faced with a genuine moral dilemma and must make a choice justified by the circumstances (for example, not informing the enemy of a planned attack in order to save lives) or choose the lesser of two evils (protecting privacy by lying), only then is lying possible.”

A person’s integrity is expressed in the unity of his beliefs and actions. Decent behavior is the opposite of hypocrisy and duplicity. A decent person always keeps his promises to someone. For example, an employee who promised to help a colleague in completing a work task will definitely help him, even if this involves serious difficulties for him.

The principle of fairness in business communication presupposes objectivity or the absence of bias in assessing other people and their actions. Showing consideration or consideration to a business partner and respecting his rights indicates respect for his personality. Respect is demonstrated by whether we listen and try to understand our business partner's point of view, even when it differs significantly from ours.

Responsibility is manifested in the extent to which participants in business interaction are responsible for their words and fulfill their obligations, the extent to which they comply with moral standards, as well as obligations to each other.

Depending on our self-esteem, as well as on the perception and assessment of our partner, we consciously or unconsciously choose different approaches to building business relationships. Relationships can be built on: partnership (equal participation in the business); rivalry (the desire to impose or defend one’s position at any cost); dominance (the desire to subjugate a partner).

Partnership means treating another person as your equal. In a partnership, the interlocutor is perceived as an equal subject who has the right to be who he is, who must be taken into account. The main ways of influencing each other are based on a public or tacit agreement, which serves both as a means of unification and as a means of mutual control.

When competing, the other side appears dangerous and unpredictable. In relations with her, the desire to outplay her and achieve a one-sided advantage takes over. The interests of the other party are taken into account to the extent determined by the logic of competition.

The dominance-oriented approach defines treating a partner as a means of achieving one’s goals, ignoring his interests and intentions. Those who are inclined to dominate have a prevailing desire to control, to gain a one-sided advantage.

Dominance in relationships is seen as complementary or symmetrical.

In a complementary relationship, one partner allows the other to determine who will have more influence. Thus, one participant in communication plays a leading role, and the other voluntarily takes on the role of a follower. For example, the relationship between employer and employees is complimentary and the owner takes a controlling position. The relationship in a public lecture situation is also usually complimentary, since the audience gathers to listen to the lecturer and recognizes the information he presents as trustworthy.

In symmetrical relationships, people specifically do not “agree” in advance about who will control the situation. Let's say one person claims to be in control of the situation, but others perceive this as a challenge and encourage them to claim their own right to leadership. Or, conversely, someone gives up power, but others do not want to accept it. For example, a husband says to his wife: “I think we should cut back on our expenses for a couple of months.” The wife may object to this: “No way! I need a new suit, I need to buy new tires for my car. Besides, you promised me that we would change the sofa.” In this case, both spouses claim to be in control of the situation.

Complementary relationships are less likely to lead to open conflict, and in symmetrical relationships there is more often an equal division of power.

The advantages and disadvantages of some of these options for business and interpersonal communication can be characterized as follows.

The positive side of a partnership is that both parties typically benefit greatly. The disadvantage is that it can take a very long time to achieve it if the partner, for example, is competitive.

Competition takes a little time and leads to victory, but only if you have obvious advantages. If your partner does not recognize your advantages and, like you, is prone to competition, then the matter may end in conflict or a complete break in the relationship.

Dominance eliminates the waste of time on discussions and clashes of opinions. However, it paralyzes the will of the subordinate partner, thereby impoverishing the common intellectual resource.

Unfortunately, we are not always taught this at school. But many people are interested in the rules of behavior among friends and in the company of unfamiliar people. How to make a culture of etiquette a part of your life and become a welcome member of any company?

Norms and rules of behavior in society apply to all forms of human interaction with the outside world. Well-mannered behavior implies that a person reacts correctly to any events and does not respond with outbursts of anger to negativity.

The formation of personality begins in childhood, so most of the responsibility for upbringing lies with the parents. It is adults who must instill in the child love for loved ones, respect for others and, naturally, the rules of good manners. And you need to do this not only with words, but also with your own example.

The next stage of personality development is self-education. Persistent and purposeful movement along this path builds character, allows you to consciously develop the most valuable human qualities and learn the rules of behavior accepted in society. There should be no excuses here, because today there are all the necessary resources for self-education - a wide network of libraries, theaters, television, the Internet. The main thing is not to absorb the entire flow of information, but to learn to select the most valuable grains of truth.

To develop a culture of behavior, focus on aesthetic self-education. It develops a sense of beauty, teaches you to correctly understand and perceive the beauty of nature and art, and enjoy communication in a positive way. But it’s worth making a reservation: simply knowing and applying the rules of behavior accepted in our society is not enough. Lies and pretense are unacceptable here - in the heart of a truly educated person there is only place for natural politeness, sensitivity and tact.

Listen first, then speak. Do not interrupt your interlocutor - you will have time to express your point of view later.

Basic norms and rules of behavior in society

Kindness and consideration for others are the most important rules of social behavior. But the list of good manners is quite extensive.

Let's consider the main ones:

1. Think not about yourself, but about others. People around us prioritize sensitivity over selfishness.
2. Be hospitable and friendly. If you invite guests, treat them as your closest people.
3. Be polite in your communication. Always say greetings and farewells, thank for gifts and services provided not only in word, but also in deed.
4. Avoid bragging. Let others judge you by your actions.
5. Listen first, then speak. Do not interrupt your interlocutor - you will have time to express your point of view later.
6. Don’t point your finger at people or stare with piercing eyes. This confuses them, especially disabled people.
7. Avoid criticism and complaints. A person with good manners tries not to offend people with negative statements and does not complain about fate.
8. Stay calm in all situations. Anger not only leads to unnecessary conflicts with others, but also brings dissonance into your own inner world.
9. Be punctual. Being late shows that you don't know how to plan your day and don't value other people's time.
10. Keep your word. An unfulfilled promise can lead to real tragedy in the life of the person you hope for.
11. Repay your debts on time. Failure to comply with this rule often becomes the reason not only for the cessation of friendship and good relationships, but also for serious enmity.

In business, it is not enough to just be a well-mannered person, but by following the rules of business etiquette, you will achieve success much faster.

Correct behavior in the company of business people

In the business environment, as well as in social life, there is a certain etiquette. It largely repeats the basic rules of behavior of people in society, but it also has its own nuances.

Knowing the rules of business etiquette, you will receive recognition in the world of successful people, you will be able to quickly build a career or promote your own company to a leading position in the market.

Of course, in business it’s not enough to just be a well-mannered person, but by following the rules of business etiquette, you will achieve success much faster:

Punctuality. One of the fundamental tenets of the business world is “time is money.” You can negotiate brilliantly, present presentations charismatically, manage staff professionally, but... “stealing” someone else’s time by being constantly late negates the entire effect of your positive qualities. An unpunctual person does not inspire trust and respect and is unlikely to find permanent partners among successful large companies. Correct behavior among business people requires clear planning of the working day and complete control over the course of events.
Dress code. Appearance is a person’s calling card, which tells more about his character and inner world than any words. A provocative appearance shows protest against the laws and foundations of society, and this is not accepted in the business world. But a strict business suit, neat hairstyle and harmoniously selected accessories indicate that a person is ready to obey universal rules and work in a single team.
Grammatically correct speech. Muttering under your breath or using slang words will ruin even the most correct appearance. If you do not have the innate gift of expressing thoughts clearly, work in this direction. Speech to the point, without unnecessary lyrical digressions, will help you find a common language with colleagues and clients and will be a good help for moving up the career ladder.
Maintaining trade secrets. In life they don’t like talkers and gossips, and in the business world they don’t like disloyal employees. Disclosure of company secrets can not only cause dismissal, but also cause difficulties with subsequent employment - the spy immediately ends up on the secret “black list” of unreliable employees.
Respect. A professional must show courtesy to his partners, clients and colleagues. The ability to listen to other people's arguments without argument or criticism and to discuss disagreements in a constructive and positive way is an invaluable quality of a business person.
Mutual assistance. You need to help your colleagues in word and deed, especially those who have recently worked with you. In most cases, good comes back to us a hundredfold.
Responsibility. Everyone knows that at work you need to work. However, many employees waste work time chatting and personal matters. This is direct irresponsibility in relation to the common cause. It’s not so bad if it only affects the idlers themselves. But the failure of an important project can leave the company without profit and employees without wages.
Telephone etiquette. Business negotiations over the phone require a special approach, because at a distance it is impossible to establish visual and emotional contact with the interlocutor. To leave a positive opinion about yourself, do not interrupt your interlocutor, speak clearly and clearly, ask questions only to the point. If we talk about telephone etiquette within the company, then try to avoid personal calls during working hours - they distract the attention of other employees and position you as a frivolous talkative person.

It is perhaps impossible to list all the rules and norms of human behavior in society and at work. To be considered a well-mannered person, do not forget the basics of etiquette and show people the same attitude that you want for yourself.

Human behavior in society

Human behavior in society is a multifaceted concept that reflects all forms of human communication with the outside world. It implies a person’s reaction to events that are happening here and now, and also reflects a person’s desire and ability to follow the rules and norms established in society. Behavior is based on human needs for social communication; these needs imply actions through which contact with the outside world is carried out.

Every behavioral action has a driving motive. Motives determine a certain order of behavioral actions. These actions are divided into two categories by type: automatic and conscious.

Automatic actions. These actions are based on reflexes inherent in a person from birth, as well as skills acquired throughout life, which, when implemented, do not require intellectual activity, but are brought to automaticity. These include the ability to read, write, and walk upright.

Conscious actions. They require a person to turn on his intellect. When entering an unusual environment, a person consciously chooses for himself a certain pattern of behavior that is consistent with his understanding of the environment. Consciousness always strives to consolidate this pattern of behavior and transfer it into the category of automatic actions. For example, this happens when a person comes to work in a new team. The first few days he adjusts his behavior to the requirements of employers and the conditions of the team, and then his actions become automatic.

The human psyche is constantly working towards consolidating various life situations into automatic behavioral actions. The main motives for such consolidation are happiness on the one hand, and pain on the other. For example, incorrect behavior of a pedestrian on the roadway leads to injury or death; consciousness reinforces the order of crossing the road at a green traffic light and at a pedestrian crossing.

Success at work is associated with receiving moral pleasure - a feeling of happiness. Consciousness also reinforces the order of actions that led to this feeling. Thus, human behavior consists of actions that prevent the body from losing vitality and establish the order of achieving success and happiness.

Rules of conduct in society

First of all, you need to cultivate an attentive attitude towards people. Without this, a person puts both himself and those around him in an awkward position at every step. He didn’t say hello to one, didn’t think of apologizing to another, turned his back on a third, didn’t give up his seat to a woman, patted an elderly man familiarly on the shoulder, gave his hand to an older man first, didn’t give a girl his coat, insulted his interlocutor with a vulgar hint, and at the dinner table began to complain about their illnesses.

A well-mannered person will never appear in society drunk, unshaven, unkempt, wearing an ironed dress or polished shoes. He will never be late not only for work, but also for visits, not only for a meeting, but also for the theater or on a date. He is characterized by restraint and the ability to control himself.

In society one must behave at ease, and for this it is necessary to have sufficient general development. Why do some boys and girls feel awkward when visiting? They just don’t know what to do, what to talk about. Someone who loves his job, studies, reads a lot, takes part in amateur performances, often goes to the theater, museums, and finds something to do in any company: argue about a new book, tell something interesting, listen with pleasure to the stories of others, sing, dances, organizes a game.

Do not speak ill of others, do not repeat gossip. If you want to joke, do it in a way that does not hurt the pride of those present. Jokes about the appearance, names or age of others are completely inappropriate. It is not a person’s fault that he is fat, or thin, or too short-sighted, or very young, as if his parents called him some “unusual” name.

Don't interrupt the speaker. Before objecting, listen to the end of the sentence. If you are interrupted in a conversation, do not try to talk over them, but shut up and listen to the objections.

When talking, do not grab your interlocutor’s hand, do not tug on a button, or pat him on the shoulder. Try not to gesticulate while talking. Don't shout or laugh too loudly or for too long.

Do not say “he” or “she” about those present, but call them by name and patronymic.

When making your way to your seat in a theater, cinema or club, walk along the row facing those sitting. If you are already seated and someone passes by you, stand up and give way.

We have the most diverse relationships with people of different ages, experience and position. Naturally, the culture of these relations is important.

We say: man is friend, comrade and brother to man. And it is necessary that these words, expressing the essence of our moral code, be truly embodied in the behavior of everyone. Our country has created all the conditions for a benevolent, friendly atmosphere and mutual trust. The ability to live among people and for people requires, first of all, lively and kind attention to them, deep respect for the human person. We must take into account the interests of others and take them into account. Therefore, it is quite understandable why we are now so particular about how a person behaves in society and how he behaves at home.

The wise saying that nothing costs us so little or is valued so dearly as politeness has long become a proverb. Unfortunately, some people still believe that politeness is not a particularly important detail, and some even attribute it to relics of the old society. However, the behavior of a person, a member of a new society, should be distinguished by politeness, expressing self-esteem and at the same time respect and attention to those people with whom he communicates.

Politeness is manifested in a certain external restraint and smartness when communicating with other people, in courtesy and consideration, in the desire to express in a variety of forms one’s kind attitude not only towards loved ones and respected people, but even towards strangers. No matter how we treat this or that person, this does not relieve us of the obligation to be polite towards him.

A polite person will never forget: to be the first to say the kind word “hello”; Accompany any request with the words “please”, “please be kind”, “be kind”; thank him for any attention and service rendered to him and respond in kind; If he accidentally disturbs or causes inconvenience to someone, he will definitely say “excuse me, please” or “excuse me, please.”

Every person should pay special attention to a woman. A woman is not only a bride, wife, mother, mistress of the house, she is a person who deserves due attention and respect.

A polite, cultured person is characterized by tact. Tact is a sense of proportion. To be tactful means to be able to feel the mood of another person, take into account the characteristics of his character, take into account the properties of his nature and, depending on the individuality of each person, find the appropriate form of addressing him.

The spiritual beauty of a person is combined with physical beauty, with the ability to behave in the theater, at the stadium, on the street. In other words, to be a cultured person everywhere and in everything.

An intelligent, cultured person will not be tactless with a woman, will not behave cheekily anywhere, and will consider it a disgrace to utter a rude word. Only poorly educated, dissolute, ignorant people can allow this.

That is why those who neglect the beauty of actions, words and behavior are wrong, flaunting the fact that it is important, they say, to be a decent person, and the rest, they say, is all nonsense, and there is nothing shameful in the fact that a person does not shave for a week, walks in unclean shoes, talking, waving his arms and spitting over his shoulder. Anyone who is careless and tactless in words, in dress, in attitude towards others is careless in both work and behavior. Such sloppy people are often undisciplined, do not follow the culture of the workplace, do not keep their word, let the team down, and are rude to their wife and children.

Norms of human behavior are, first of all, norms of public morality, high culture, comprehensive education and upbringing.

A man who is outwardly polite and has mastered good manners, but morally a real layman, with a narrow ideological and social outlook, who puts personal petty interests above public ones, is worthless.

Therefore, when it comes to etiquette, we say that our etiquette is, first of all, ideological, high internal culture, politeness, delicacy, courtesy, tact everywhere and in everything, be it at home, at work, at the stadium, in a train carriage or at the cinema.

Norms of human behavior in society

Since man is a social being, his full life outside the life of society is simply impossible. A person must take into account the norms and forms of behavior that are established in society as a whole and in specific situations or in a particular society. Often what is unacceptable in one society can be tolerated in another situation. But still, each person must form for himself fundamental principles of behavior that will determine his life norm and line of behavior and thus shape his relationships with other people, and hence his success in life.

Norms of human behavior in society and in dealing with other people have been formed over the centuries. But these norms were not always the same. The social system, social and class division of the population changed, the customs in the society of the aristocracy, townspeople, clergy, workers, peasants, intelligentsia, and military were different. At the same time, the behavior of young people and adults differed, and the national and social traditions on which these norms of behavior were based were different. For representatives of the highest status, the aristocracy, there were established firm rules of behavior, ignorance or violation of which was considered a lack of education.

Also, often the norms of behavior of the corresponding state of society at different times were assessed differently: at the time of their formation they were appropriate, but in another period of the development of society they were already considered inappropriate, indicating a person’s low culture.

When communicating, people tend to gather together. Either in a smaller or in a larger society, these meetings of more people are mainly caused by something. The reason may be some personal or family event (birthday, angel's day, weddings, anniversaries) or public (state and local holidays, celebrations of some historical event, etc.). The participants in such meetings are, as a rule, people who know each other well. But when a stranger first enters such a society, he must first introduce himself so that those present know about this person. Therefore, most often such a person is accompanied and recommended to the society by the owner of the house or a person who knows the society well. If there is no such person, then the stranger introduces himself: Dear ones, allow me to introduce myself. My name is (you should give your first name, patronymic or last name), my specialty is... (here you can indicate either a profession, or a position, etc.).

Before entering a room, they usually take off outerwear and hats in the dressing room, and women do not have to take off their hats. It is not considered necessary to kick off your shoes; instead, you should dry them well on the mat.

But what to do when you are late for a party where many acquaintances and strangers have already gathered? Then you should approach the owners and say hello, and nod politely to the others.

When a woman older than you offers her hand in greeting, you should politely bend over slightly and kiss her hand. Moreover, this symbolic kiss should fall on the back of the fingers; a kiss on the palm or wrist will have a completely different meaning - this is most likely evidence of low culture or a frank desire for intimate relationships. As a rule, young girls' hands are not kissed. In large society, hugging and kissing are also unacceptable.

The habit of introducing oneself has become increasingly widespread in our time. This makes it possible, immediately from the moment of meeting, to get to know a person from the perspective of what or who he represents, and also to imagine common topics or a range of interests that could bring you together on the basis of which to start a conversation.

Typically, the basis of behavior in the company of acquaintances or strangers should be a polite attitude towards others. An intelligent person always knows how to carry on a conversation on any topic, listen and turn to someone. Therefore, one should not be closed in society, because this is where we find our chances and opportunities for self-expression, self-development and self-improvement. Society, in turn, also helps us in the formation and implementation of our ideas and plans. The idea heard in society is very important, because this is how other people will perceive your already implemented idea, and your success in life as a whole will depend on it.

Rules of behavior for people in society

The world around us is constantly changing: entire eras are passing into the past, scientific and technological progress is developing, new professions are appearing and people themselves are becoming different. This means that the rules of behavior in society also do not stand still. Today you can no longer find curtsies and bows that were relevant in the centuries preceding the 21st century. So how should we behave in modern society? Find out about it right now!

Often a person does not even think about the fact that this broad concept also has a more compact version, which is used mainly in school social studies lessons or by sociologists - these are “social norms”. In scientific terms, the meaning of this term lies in the existence of general established patterns of individual behavior that have developed over a long period of time in the course of the practical activities of society. It is this activity that develops standard models of correct, expected and socially approved behavior. This includes many different categories: customs and traditions, aesthetic, legal, religious, corporate, political and a number of other norms and, of course, rules of behavior in society. The latter may vary depending on the country, age and even gender of a particular individual. And yet, in general, there are universal rules and norms of behavior in society, following which, there is no doubt that success in communication and interaction is guaranteed!

The rules of conduct established by society state that in case of acquaintance one should present:

Man - woman;
junior in age and position - senior in the same categories;
those who came later are already present.

At the same time, the person being introduced to is mentioned first in the address, for example: “Maria, meet Ivan!” or “Alexander Sergeevich, this is Artyom!”

When introducing people to each other, it is recommended to briefly characterize them in order to start a conversation and specify who the “organizer” of the acquaintance is with this person: “Elena, this is my brother Konstantin, he is a geologist.” Then the girl will have the opportunity to continue the conversation, for example, by asking Konstantin about the specifics of his profession, asking in more detail about family affairs, etc.

Greetings

Rules of behavior in society also regulate the manner in which people greet each other. Thus, men are the first to greet women, and those younger in position and/or age are the first to address their elders.

However, it must be taken into account that, regardless of social status and age, the person entering the room should always say hello first.

When two married couples meet, the girls/women greet each other first, then the men greet them, and only after that the gentlemen exchange greetings with each other.

When shaking hands, the one to whom the stranger was introduced is the first to shake hands, but always the lady to the man, the elder to the younger, the leader to the subordinate, even if the employee is a woman. The rules of behavior accepted in society indicate: if a hand is offered to a sitting person to shake, he must stand up. A man should take off his glove; for ladies this condition is not necessary.

If, during a meeting, one of the couple or company greeted the person they met, then the rest are recommended to also greet him.

Politeness and tact

The rules of behavior in modern society also require a person to be able to be tactful and relaxed in communication, which will allow him not to be considered unpleasant and unethical in certain circles.

So, it is highly not recommended to point your finger at a person. You should not interfere in the conversation of strangers when they are discussing personal topics and are not in the mood to accept another interlocutor. Attentive and intelligent people will not belittle the dignity of others in communication, interrupt the speaking interlocutor, or raise incorrect and non-recommended topics in conversation (for example, about political views, religion, painful moments in life, etc.). When communicating with a stranger, it is especially recommended to stick to neutral topics, such as sports, interests and hobbies, culinary preferences, travel, attitude to cinema and music, and others - then a positive impression of the communication will remain with all participants in the conversation.

You should not belittle the meaning of the existing so-called magic words, namely “sorry”, “please”, “thank you”, “goodbye”. The familiar “you” address is not recommended to be used even by successful people who have successfully realized themselves in life, because this is a sign of a lack of elementary culture and upbringing. The rules of behavior of people in society are optimal models established for everyone, regardless of financial status, social status, standard of living, etc.

Correctly delivered speech

The rules of behavior in society require a person to be able to correctly express his own thoughts, because, as you know, whoever thinks well speaks in exactly the same way.

You should speak at a moderate pace, calmly, and not too loudly, because attracting unnecessary attention to yourself by raising your tone is the wrong approach to business. The interlocutor should be captivated by his own erudition, breadth of views and knowledge of certain areas of life.

Unnecessarily complaining about your problems or “pushing” your interlocutor into a frank conversation when he demonstrates a clear reluctance to share his secrets is considered bad manners.

Mood

In addition, the norms and rules of behavior of people in society require, for the period of interaction and conversation, to put aside existing life difficulties, bad mood, pessimism and a negative attitude towards something. You can only say something like this to a very close person. Otherwise, there is a risk of remaining misunderstood by the interlocutor and leaving an unpleasant aftertaste from the conversation. It is also not recommended to talk about bad news, otherwise there is a high chance, on a subconscious level, to “attach” to your person an association with everything bad, joyless, and unpleasant.

What tone should you set?

Of course, it is best to give a conversation in a group a light-hearted, half-joking, half-serious tone. You shouldn’t clown around too much in the hope of winning the attention of others, otherwise you can forever gain the reputation of a buffoon with a narrow mindset and view of things, which will be difficult to get rid of later.

How to behave in a cultural place, at an event or as a guest?

It is considered offensive to laugh loudly, openly discuss others, or stare at someone in a public place where people come to rest and relax.

It is recommended to turn off your mobile phone in quiet places, such as cinemas, theaters, museums, performances and lectures, etc., in advance.

When moving between rows of seated people, you need to walk towards them, and not vice versa. In this case, the man passes first, the woman follows him.

It is better to hold off on showing feelings, such as kissing or hugging, and not show them in front of the public, because for some, such open tenderness may be unpleasant.

At exhibitions, you should not take photographs where it is prohibited, or touch the exhibits.

If a person is invited to visit, he needs to take care to arrive as precisely as possible at the specified time. To be late or arrive too early is to show tactlessness and disrespect towards the owner of the house.

The optimal time frame for making a visit, which should not be out of the blue for the receiving party, is considered to be from 12 noon to 8 pm. At the same time, it is impossible to stay up late when you are not asked to do so, because in this way you can simply disrupt the plans of another person and his time schedule. A visit empty-handed, with another uninvited person, in a state of intoxication - all this can become the reason that in the future the owner, most likely, will no longer want to host such an unethical individual.

As you can see, it is not difficult to follow the simplest social rules of behavior, the main thing is to start, and then they will become a habit and, as a result, will bring a lot of benefits!

Socially accepted norms of behavior

It is a well-known fact that a person is not able to be alone for a long time. Therefore, in order to once and for all forget about what lies behind the word “loneliness”, people simply must learn to communicate correctly with each other.

Not every person is lucky enough to receive a good upbringing in childhood and learn the rules of behavior that are instilled in the family and continue to be supplemented and improved in kindergarten, at school, and throughout life. The rules of behavior accepted in society will help you communicate with people at ease and be a pleasant conversationalist.

Men and women have different life functions and, therefore, different rules of behavior in society. It is generally accepted that a man should be a breadwinner and protector, that is, resourceful and courageous. Women are physically weaker, they are the custodians of the home and need protection. Based on this, the rules of conduct for men and women are appropriate.

However, there are rules that are equally fair for both men and women, so we will look at them today. So what should a polite person be like?

In order to learn to be a polite person, it will take a lot of effort, perseverance and a lot of work on yourself, and the first thing you need to do is give an objective assessment of your behavior at the moment. An outside perspective is very helpful in such a situation. This will help you understand and analyze all your mistakes, existing bad habits, wrong actions committed and your behavior in general. After which you can safely start “working on mistakes.”

Etiquette is universal human moral standards, a set of rules of behavior in society: addresses, greetings, manners, clothing. Manners are forms of human behavior. The essence of etiquette is respect for other people.

Once upon a time, the rules of good manners in communication or the rules of etiquette were one of the subjects of the educational program at school. Children were taught this science and strictly controlled how well they learned it; tutors were responsible for raising children. Currently, there are no tutors or corresponding subjects in the school curriculum, and the need for teaching basic politeness is still high.

Let's try to figure out what the rules of good manners are and let's strictly follow them.

One of the basic rules of good manners in ordinary, everyday life is courtesy in relationships, the ability to greet people without unnecessary demonstrations, the ability to congratulate on a holiday, express sympathy or wish good health, as well as the ability to thank for the service provided to you.

In addition, the concept of courtesy presupposes that the person entering lets the person leaving, who, in turn, holds the door if necessary; the man walking next to the girl always lets her go ahead, with the exception of going down the stairs, exiting the elevator and public transport.

Despite the fact that some prim manners have long since become obsolete, for example, closing the car door behind a girl before getting behind the wheel, it still doesn’t hurt to help ladies get out of the car.

Correctly addressing another person, whether familiar or not, is an important part of the rules of conduct. Thus, the rules of behavior accepted in society state that you can only address children under 18 years of age, close friends and relatives. All other strangers, even if they are younger than you or your peers, should only be addressed as “you.”

In addition, it is customary to switch to “you” when strangers appear and call a relative or friend by name and patronymic, including when it is inappropriate to demonstrate familiar or family relationships in society. The transition from “you” to “you” should be appropriate and tactful; as a rule, it is initiated by a woman, a person senior in age or position.

If absent people are mentioned in a conversation, you cannot talk about them in the third person - “they” or “she”, even if they are close relatives, you must call them by name or by name and patronymic.

There are three types of address that are used in different situations:

Official - citizen, sir, madam, and the titles and ranks of the people represented are also used;
informal - by name, using “you”, brother, dear friend, girlfriend;
impersonal - used in cases where you need to address a stranger. In these cases, the phrases “sorry”, “excuse me”, “excuse me”, “tell me”, and so on are used.

It is unacceptable to address a person by gender, occupation or age: woman, man, plumber, salesman, child, etc.

The rules of human behavior in society require maintaining the correct distance between interlocutors.

There are the following generally accepted distances in communication:

Public distance – when communicating with large groups of people, is more than 3.5 meters;
social distance - when communicating between strangers, between people with different social statuses, at receptions, banquets, etc. from 3.6 to 1.2 meters;
personal or personal distance - for everyday communication between familiar people, ranges from 1.2 to 0.5 meters;
intimate or sensory distance - for communication between very close people, entry into this zone is allowed only to a select few, it is less than 0.5 meters.

At the same time, it is important that each of the interlocutors always has the opportunity to freely exit the conversation; holding a person’s hand or the lapel of a jacket, or blocking the passage during a conversation is considered unacceptable.

In addition, it is important to choose suitable topics for conversation; they should be interesting and pleasant to both interlocutors and should not affect personal matters. It is considered unacceptable to interrupt the interlocutor, correct his speech or make comments. It is also indecent to watch and stare at your interlocutor for a long time, especially if he is eating.

Social behavior of a person in society

Social behavior is a person’s actions among people and in relation to people (the “Me and you”, “Me and we” paradigm). These are not just actions among people, but socially significant actions, something that is significant for others. “Your child ran away from class and cleaned up the bad grades in his diary!” - this is a significant circumstance, therefore such actions relate to social behavior.

Social behavior comes in many varieties. When talking about the objective consequences of social behavior, we first of all talk about adequate or inappropriate behavior. Adequate behavior, as corresponding to the requirements of the situation and the expectations of people, is internally divided into conformal behavior, responsible behavior, helping behavior, correct behavior and syntonic behavior.

Correct behavior is in accordance with accepted norms and rules, erroneous behavior is not in accordance with norms and rules due to an accidental error or ignorance.

Responsible behavior is behavior in which a person undertakes (personally) specific obligations and fulfills them properly.

Syntonic behavior - giving birth to harmony and meeting the needs of other people. Conflict - generating tension and conflicts.

Types of inappropriate behavior include victim behavior, deviant behavior, delinquent behavior, demonstrative behavior, conflict behavior and erroneous behavior.

Victim behavior (from the English victim - victim) - such actions and actions of a person that provoke a desire to attack him. “If someone exposes their butt, I really want to spank it.” Girls who get into random cars late at night exhibit victimized behavior.

Deviant behavior (from the English deviation - deviation) - actions that do not correspond to the officially established or actually established moral and legal norms in a given society (social group) and lead the offender (deviant) to isolation, treatment, correction or punishment.

Delinquent behavior (from the Latin delictum - misconduct) is asocial, illegal behavior of a person. Behavior is not just deviant, but highly deviant, violating the boundaries of the law, often criminal behavior. Manifests itself in actions (actions or inactions) that harm both individuals and society as a whole.

Demonstrative behavior is expressive actions and deeds in which there is a purposeful desire to attract attention to oneself, regardless of the needs of others.

Conflict behavior is behavior that provokes conflict.

Erroneous behavior is inappropriate behavior directed away from a person’s desired goal.

The axis “adequate - inadequate” and “toward a person’s desired goal - aside” gives a convenient typology: “correct - erroneous - conformal - non-standard” behavior.

When analyzing the reasons for this or that social behavior, we distinguish the behavior of a psychologically healthy person and the behavior of a psychologically problematic person - the behavior of a neurotic or psychopath. In particular, this behavior is demonstrative, stuck behavior, defensive behavior, conforming behavior.

In everyday life, it is important for people to distinguish between intentional (intentional) behavior (carried out on purpose) and unintentional (carried out accidentally, without a head). If a person is not used to thinking and does not think about what he is doing, this mitigates his guilt, but does not relieve him of responsibility. You will get a bad grade for bad behavior at school, both for pranks and for accidentally breaking a window as a result. If a person has a behavioral reaction, his responsibility is not removed, but reduced. “It wasn’t me who started calling names, he started it first!”

Another important distinction is between conscious behavior (consciously controlled by a person) and unconscious behavior. Unconscious behavior is the most common, and it is also the source of most human problems. We usually don’t notice our unconscious behavior, but those around us notice immediately and react to it - unfortunately, often just as unconsciously.

Note that if a husband and wife begin to take revenge on each other unconsciously, this is still their behavior. They may not notice this, deny it and argue, but if some facts are recorded by adequate people around them, most likely those around them are right.

Personal behavior in society

Behavior as a manifestation of human activity is the subject of study in psychology, ethology, pedagogy, sociology, ethics, and jurisprudence. Psychology and ethology in all their directions study how behavior manifests itself in the actions and reactions of any living system, including humans. It has been revealed that it correlates with the life activity of the subject, is directed towards an object and can be peaceful or aggressive, based on emotions or intellect, and be of a conscious or unconscious nature. Psychology strives in research to determine non-judgmentally the forms, direction, and intensity of behavior. Sociology and social psychology give an idea of ​​the forms, direction, intensity of behavior of small and large groups of people and also more indifferently than biasedly record the behavior of these people with their mentality, political and economic preferences.

Behavior rules

In ethics and pedagogy, behavior is, first of all, a person’s actions in relation to another (others), which must be correlated with culturally accepted rules and norms in human relationships. It should be noted that there are rules of behavior that are recognized by most people, regardless of race or nation. This is a series of commandments coming from the Old Testament: do not kill, do not steal, etc. At the same time, every nation, every subculture has its own ideas about good and evil.

And if ethics, based on the norms accepted in society, encourages a person to choose the type of behavior in a given community, then pedagogy, as the science of education, develops methods of influencing a person. It determines the paths and system of values ​​that must be accepted by the individual and which must be followed while living in a given subculture, accepting its mentality in the process of socialization. In jurisprudence, the behavior of an individual is considered from the point of view of the compliance of human actions in relation to other people, animals, society, material values, and the interests of the state. It is assumed that actual human behavior should be regulated by laws, where adherence to laws is encouraged and violation is punished.

Social behavior of the individual

The term “behavior” in science is associated with activity, a system of actions, which consists of adaptation, adaptation to the existing existing environment, moreover, in animals only to the natural one, and in humans - also to the social one. This adaptation is carried out on the basis of certain biologically or socially specified programs, the original foundations of which are not subject to revision or restructuring. A typical example of social behavior is, say, adaptation, adaptation to the surrounding social environment by following the customs, rules and norms accepted in this environment.

Adaptive behavior is a “closed” system of attitude to reality, the limits of which are limited by a given social or natural environment and a given set of possible actions in this environment, certain life stereotypes and programs. The form of attitude to reality inherent only to man is activity, which, unlike behavior, is not limited to adaptation to existing conditions - natural or social - but rebuilds and transforms them.

Accordingly, such activity presupposes the ability to constantly review and improve the programs underlying it. In this case, people act not simply as executors of a given program of behavior - even if they are active, finding new original solutions within the framework of its implementation - but as creators, creators of fundamentally new programs of action. In the case of adaptive behavior, with all its possible activity and originality, the goals of action are ultimately given and defined; activity is associated with the search for possible means of achieving these goals. In other words, adaptive behavior is purposeful and expedient.

To achieve life goals and when implementing individual tasks, a person can use two types of behavior. Typically these types of behavior are labeled "natural" and "ritual." The differences between them are completely invisible at first glance, but are fundamental. Natural behavior is individually significant and egocentric: it is always aimed at achieving individual goals and is adequate to them. Therefore, for a person in a situation of carrying out such behavior, there is no question of the correspondence of goals and means. The goal can and should be achieved by any means. The discrepancy between goals and means of achieving them makes it possible to isolate natural egocentric behavior into a special form. It is socially unregulated, fundamentally immoral, or rather “unceremonious.” It is natural, natural in nature, since it is aimed at providing organic needs. In society, “natural” egocentric behavior is prohibited.

Despite the immanent nature of social life, it is always based on convention and mutual concessions on the part of all individuals. But the behavior of concessions - ritual, “ceremonious” - is individually unnatural behavior, although it is thanks to such behavior that society exists and reproduces. Ritual in all its diversity of forms - from etiquette to ceremony - permeates all social life so deeply that we simply do not notice that we live in a continuous field of ritual interactions. (On the contrary, due to the fact that “natural” behavior is prohibited, we are able to note the smallest manifestations of it in another). Thanks to ritual behavior, a person seems to be in the cradle of social well-being: every minute he is convinced that the state of affairs is preserved, and his social status is unshakable. Ritual behavior is a means of ensuring the stability of the social structure. And every person who implements forms of ritual behavior thereby carries out activities to ensure social sustainability. Society needs significant efforts for this, since the share of ritual in the pool of everyday behavior is so large.

But society does not abolish natural egocentric behavior, and it cannot abolish it. Moreover, since “natural” behavior is adequate in goals and unscrupulous in means, it always turns out to be “energetically” more beneficial for the individual than ritual behavior in accordance with external rules. Therefore, social mechanisms - primarily socialization mechanisms - are aimed at transforming forms of “natural” behavior into various forms of ritual behavior. Naturally, whenever there is a need to replace one form with another, special social mechanisms with the functions of support, control and punishment are needed. Such social mechanisms are developed in any society. And the main ones among them are the institutions of socialization. Socialization concerns primarily the individual. This is an individual process. But it always takes place under the watchful eye of society and the people around it.

If control is exercised by an individual, then it is of an individual nature, and if it is carried out by a whole team - a family, a group of friends, an institution or a social institution, then it acquires a social character and is called social control. The main task of social control is to create conditions for the sustainability of a particular social system, maintain social stability and at the same time for positive changes. This requires great flexibility from control, the ability to recognize deviations from social norms of activity: dysfunctional, harmful to society and necessary for its development, which should be encouraged.

Socialization, shaping our habits, desires and customs, is one of the main factors of social control and the establishment of order in society. It eases difficulties when making decisions, telling you how to dress, how to behave, how to act in a given life situation. At the same time, any decision that runs counter to the one that is made and internalized during implementation seems to us inappropriate, illegal and dangerous. It is in this way that a significant part of the individual’s internal control over his behavior is carried out. Social control helps preserve the living fabric of social relations and is a special mechanism for maintaining social order and includes two main elements - norms and sanctions.

Social norms are instructions about how to behave correctly in society. Social sanctions are means of reward or punishment that encourage people to comply with social norms. Social norms vary in scope. Some norms arise and exist only in small groups - groups of friends, work teams, families, sports teams. Other norms arise and exist in large groups or in society as a whole and are called “general rules” rather than “group habits”. “General rules” include customs, traditions, mores, laws, etiquette, and manners of behavior that are inherent in a particular social group. All social norms can be classified depending on how strictly they are enforced. Violation of some norms results in a very weak punishment - disapproval, a smirk, an unkind look. Violation of other norms is followed by very strong sanctions - expulsion from the country, death penalty, imprisonment. Violation of taboos and legal laws (for example, murder of a person, disclosure of state secrets) is punished most severely; certain types of group habits, in particular family ones, are punished most mildly.

In the system of social control, sanctions play a key role. Together with values ​​and norms, they constitute its mechanism. The rules themselves do not control anything. People's behavior is controlled by other people based on norms that are expected to be followed by everyone. Compliance with generally accepted norms makes our behavior predictable. Sanctions are also predictable and generally accepted. Each of us knows that an official reward awaits for an outstanding scientific discovery, and imprisonment for a serious crime. Sanctions also introduce elements of predictability into behavior. When we expect a certain action from another person, we hope that he knows not only the norm, but also the sanction that follows. Thus, norms and sanctions are combined into a single whole. If a norm does not have an accompanying sanction, then it ceases to regulate real behavior. It becomes a slogan, a call, an appeal, but it ceases to be an element of social control. Depending on the method of imposing sanctions - collective or individual - social control can be external and internal. Internal control is also called self-control: the individual independently regulates his behavior, coordinating it with generally accepted norms. In the process of socialization, norms are internalized so firmly that when people violate them, they experience a feeling of embarrassment or guilt. In such cases they talk about pangs of conscience. Conscience is a manifestation of internal control.

About 70% of social control comes from self-control. The more self-control the members of a society develop, the less that society has to resort to external control. And vice versa, the less self-control is developed in people, the more often institutions of social control, in particular, the army, courts, and the state, have to come into action. The weaker the self-control, the stricter the external control should be.

Deviant personality behavior

No matter how different the forms of deviant behavior are, they are interconnected. Drunkenness, drug use, aggressiveness and illegal behavior form a single unit, so that a young man's involvement in one type of deviant activity increases the likelihood of his involvement in another. Unlawful behavior, in turn, although less severely, is associated with violations of mental health standards. To some extent, as already indicated, the social factors that contribute to deviant behavior (school difficulties, traumatic life events, the influence of a deviant subculture or group) also coincide. As for individual personal factors, the most important and constantly present are undoubtedly the locus of control and the level of self-esteem.

The most serious attempt to establish not just statistical correlations, but a causal relationship between these factors is the theory of deviant behavior by the American psychologist Howard Caplan, tested in the study of drug use, delinquent behavior and a number of mental disorders, including the longitudinal method. Kaplan began by studying the relationship between deviant behavior and low self-esteem. Since every person strives for a positive self-image, low self-esteem is experienced as an unpleasant state, and self-acceptance is associated with liberation from traumatic experiences.

This encourages people to act in ways that reduce the subjective likelihood of self-deprecation and increase the subjective likelihood of self-acceptance. People who suffer more from self-abasement than others feel a greater need to change this condition through their behavior. Therefore, there are always significantly more people who generally accept themselves than those who reject themselves and are prone to self-deprecation. Low self-esteem in young men is statistically associated with almost all types of deviant behavior - dishonesty, belonging to criminal groups, committing crimes, drug use, drunkenness, aggressive behavior, suicidal behavior and various mental disorders.

What explains this connection? In the scientific literature there are four main hypotheses on this matter. Deviant behavior contributes to a decrease in self-esteem, because the individual involved involuntarily internalizes and shares the negative attitude of society towards his actions, and thereby towards himself. Low self-esteem contributes to the growth of anti-normative behavior: by participating in antisocial groups and their actions, the teenager thereby tries to increase his psychological status among his peers, to find ways of self-affirmation that he did not have in his family and school. Under some conditions, especially when initial self-esteem is low, deviant behavior helps to increase self-esteem. In addition to delinquency, other forms of behavior have an important influence on self-esteem, the significance of which changes with age.

By comparing the long-term dynamics of adolescents' self-esteem, beginning at age 12, with their participation or non-engagement in deviant behavior, Caplan found strong evidence in favor of the second and third hypotheses. It turned out that in the vast majority of adolescents, positive self-esteem prevails over negative ones, and this tendency intensifies with age - self-criticism and dissatisfaction with oneself help to overcome noticed shortcomings and thereby increase self-esteem. However, for some teenagers this does not happen and they constantly feel like failures.

Their negative self-perception consists of three different but interrelated experiences:

Firstly, they believe that they do not have personally valuable qualities or cannot perform personally valuable actions and, on the contrary, have negative traits or perform negative actions.
Secondly, they believe that significant others do not treat them positively or treat them negatively.
Thirdly, they do not possess or are unable to effectively use psychological defense mechanisms that allow them to remove or mitigate the consequences of the first two elements of subjective experience.

The need for self-esteem in such adolescents is especially strong, but since it is not satisfied in socially acceptable ways, they turn to deviant forms of behavior. Caplan compared the level of self-esteem of 12-year-old adolescents with their subsequent (over the next year or three years) participation in 28 different forms of deviant behavior. In 26 cases, the correlations turned out to be statistically significant, i.e., low self-esteem is positively associated with forms of deviant behavior (petty theft, exclusion from school, threats of suicide, breaking things, emotional outbursts, etc.).

Why is this happening? The feeling of self-humiliation, of one’s inadequacy to the requirements, forces one to choose either in favor of demands and the continuation of painful experiences of self-humiliation, or in favor of increasing self-esteem in behavior directed against these demands. As a rule, the second one is chosen. Therefore, the desire to meet the expectations of the team and society decreases, and the desire to evade them, on the contrary, grows. As a result, the teenager’s attitudes, reference groups, and behavior become more and more anti-normative, pushing him further along the path of deviation. Does this achieve the goal of increasing self-esteem? Under certain conditions - yes.

An alcoholic, for example, in a state of intoxication does not realize his inferiority and may even be proud of himself. Belonging to a criminal gang gives a socially deficient individual new criteria and methods of self-affirmation, allowing him to see himself in a favorable light not at the expense of the socially positive ones in which he found himself bankrupt, but at the expense of socially negative traits and actions. A new, negative social identity also presupposes new criteria for self-esteem, often directly opposite to the previous ones, so that the former minus becomes a plus. Of course, deviation is not the best and not the only way to get rid of the feeling of self-abasement. The “high self-esteem” of a criminal is often problematic; there is a lot of pretense and demonstrativeness in it; deep down, he cannot help but measure himself on a general social scale, and sooner or later this affects him.

Nevertheless, deviant behavior as a means of increasing self-esteem and psychological self-defense is quite effective. The compensatory mechanisms by which a teenager “restores” damaged self-esteem are not entirely the same for one side or another of his “I.” Feelings of insufficient masculinity can lead a teenager to start smoking or drinking, which increases his self-esteem as a “tough guy.” But this shift does not necessarily extend to other elements of the self-concept. In addition, adolescent self-abasement is relieved by deviant behavior only insofar as such behavior is accepted in the corresponding subculture, but if the subculture changes, it loses its meaning.

Deviant behavior is always initially unmotivated. A teenager, as a rule, wants to meet the requirements of society, but for some reason (constitutional factors, social conditions, inability to correctly define their social identities and roles, conflicting expectations of significant others, lack of material resources, poor mastery of normal methods of social adaptation and / or overcome difficulties) he cannot do this. This is reflected in his self-awareness and pushes him to search in other directions. The most important factor in such development is deviant peers.

Presence of a deviant group:

A) facilitates the commission of deviant actions if the person is internally ready for them;
b) provides psychological support and encouragement for participation in such activities;
c) reduces the effectiveness of personal and social control mechanisms that could inhibit the manifestation of deviant tendencies.

This creates a vicious circle. Deviant actions increase the attractiveness of the teenager committing them to others who accept this style of behavior; By committing anti-normative actions, a teenager attracts attention, interest, etc. At the same time, deviant actions increase the teenager’s need for social approval of the group, especially if he grew up in a normal environment where such actions are condemned. Finally, deviant actions cause negative attitudes and sanctions from “normal” others, even to the point of excluding the deviant adolescent from communication with them. This social alienation contributes to the intensification of the teenager’s communication with the deviant environment, reduces the possibilities of social control and contributes to the further strengthening of deviant behavior and the tendency towards it. This situation is characterized by the formation of an inverse relationship between a teenager’s relationships in the family and the degree of his involvement in deviant groups. As a result, deviant actions turn from unmotivated to motivated.

Role behavior of the individual

The concepts of social status, role and role behavior are distinguished. Social status is the position of a subject in the system of interpersonal relations, which determines his duties, rights and privileges. It is established by society. Social relationships are confusing. A social role is associated with status; these are the norms of behavior of a person occupying a certain status. Role behavior is a person's specific use of a social role. His personal characteristics are reflected here. Mead proposed the concept of social role at the end of the 19th – 20th centuries. A person becomes a Personality when they learn to take on the role of another person.

Any role has a structure: A model of human behavior from society. A system of representing a person how he should behave. The actual observable behavior of a person occupying a given status. In reality, each individual performs not one, but several social roles: he can be an accountant, a father, a trade union member, etc. A number of roles are prescribed to a person at birth, others are acquired during life. However, the role itself does not determine the activities and behavior of each specific carrier in detail: everything depends on how much the individual learns and internalizes the role. The act of internalization is determined by a number of individual psychological characteristics of each specific bearer of a given role. Therefore, social relations, although in essence they are role-based, impersonal relations, in reality, in their concrete manifestation, acquire a certain “personal coloring”. Each social role does not mean an absolute set of behavior patterns; it always leaves a certain “range of possibilities” for its performer, which can be conditionally called a certain “style of playing the role.”

Social differentiation is inherent in all forms of human existence. The behavior of the Personality is explained by social inequality in society. It is influenced by: social origin; ethnicity; the level of education; job title; professional affiliation; power; income and wealth; lifestyle, etc. The performance of the role is individual in nature. Linton proved that the role has socio-cultural conditioning. There is also a definition that a social role is a social function of a Personality. Types of roles: psychological or interpersonal (in the system of subjective interpersonal relationships). Categories: leaders, preferred, not accepted, outsiders; social (in the system of objective social relations); active or current – ​​currently being executed; latent (hidden) – a person is potentially a carrier, but not at the moment; conventional (official); spontaneous, spontaneous - arise in a specific situation, not determined by requirements.

Role behavior is the individual performance of a social role - society sets the standard of behavior, and the performance of the role is personal. Mastering social roles is part of the process of socialization of the Personality, an indispensable condition for the “growth” of the Personality in a society of their own kind. In role behavior, role conflicts can arise: inter-role (a person is forced to simultaneously perform several roles, sometimes contradictory), intra-role (occur when different demands are placed on the bearer of one role from different social groups). Gender roles: male, female. Professional roles: boss, subordinate, etc.

A social role is a fixation of a certain position that one or another individual occupies in the system of social relations. A number of roles are prescribed from birth (to be a wife/husband). A social role always has a certain range of possibilities for its performer - a “role performance style.” By mastering social roles, a person assimilates social standards of behavior, learns to evaluate himself from the outside and exercise self-control. Personality acts (is) the mechanism that allows you to integrate your “I” and your own life activities, carry out a moral assessment of your actions, and find your place in life. It is necessary to use role behavior as a tool for adaptation to certain social situations.

Conflict personality behavior

Needs, attitudes, habits, way of thinking, experience in solving problems and behavior patterns have a decisive influence on the behavior of an individual in a conflict. There are such concepts as “conflict personality” and “personality conflict”. A “conflict personality” is a personality that involves increased production of conflicts. “Personality conflict” is a character trait that contributes to the frequency of conflicts and a person’s entry into them. We will talk about conflict. Personal conflict is determined by the action of such psychological factors as temperament, level of aggressiveness, competence in communication, and emotional state. As well as a number of social factors - living and activity conditions, environment and social environment, general level of culture.

Thus, conflict is a complex indicator that is associated with personal prerequisites. Personal situational prerequisites are as follows: a feeling of uncertainty, uncertainty; fatigue; mood instability; increased excitability; state of suggestibility. If a person is rejected or not recognized as one of his peers, he may be predisposed to conflict. Unfair treatment of a person and dissatisfaction with work can also provoke conflict. However, it depends on the person himself and his character traits whether he will find himself in a conflict situation or not. If serious actions, communication with colleagues, the intention to incline to undesirable actions touch a person to the quick, then this stimulates conflict.

Stable personality qualities and character traits are called characterological prerequisites for the occurrence of conflict. This:

Reduced self-criticism;
bad manners;
incontinence in feelings;
tendency to aggressive behavior;
selfishness.

If a set of personality traits provoke conflicts, then difficulties may arise in the team, and the individual may experience “internal” discord. Each person's unique life experiences determine how they interact with others. In a sense, people are tuned to certain conditions; sometimes conditions can change, but the attitude remains the same. When developing your own point of view, you can form an incorrect picture of a new situation, seeing only what is convenient, that is, the landscape that you are used to looking at. Hence – inconsistency of behavior with situations, misunderstandings, disputes and conflicts.

Behavior is the result of life experience. To organize normal relationships in a team, you need to help people choose the most appropriate behavior. Sometimes people can become uncontrollable, initiate agitation of others and disrupt the psychological atmosphere of the team. The difficulties that a person experiences and experiences are revealed as a result of analyzing the situation of interpersonal conflicts. Analysis helps to identify optimal ways to resolve conflicts and ways out of difficult situations. Real knowledge of the current circumstances, personal behavior, possibilities and prospects for the development of events in a positive direction allows us to provide effective psychological support.

Behavior that does not correspond to accepted social norms

People's behavior does not always correspond to social norms. On the contrary, in many cases there is non-compliance and violation. Behavior that is not consistent with the norms, does not correspond to what society expects from a person, is called deviant behavior. Sociologists give another definition: deviant behavior is a form of disorganization of an individual’s behavior in a group or category of people in society, which reveals a discrepancy with established expectations, moral and legal requirements of society. Negative deviations from social norms at the personal level manifest themselves primarily in crimes and other offenses, in immoral acts. At the level of small social groups, these deviations manifest themselves in deformations and disruptions in normal relationships between people (discord, scandals, etc.). In the activities of state and public organizations, such deviations are manifested in bureaucracy, red tape, corruption and other phenomena.

Deviation from norms can also be positive, that is, have consequences useful for society (for example, manifestations of initiative, innovative proposals aimed at improving public relations). There are also individual, non-harmful characteristics of an individual’s behavior: eccentricity, eccentricity.

Manifestations of deviant behavior are as varied as different social norms. The consequences of these deviations are no less diverse; their common feature is harm, damage caused to society, a social group, other people, as well as the individual who allows negative deviations.

Social deviations as a mass phenomenon are especially dangerous. Crimes and other offenses, alcoholism, drug addiction, religious fanaticism, racial intolerance, terrorism - these and other similar negative processes in the development of society bring extreme loss to humanity.

What are the causes of deviant behavior? Researchers have different points of view on this issue. At the end of the 19th century. a biological explanation for the cause of the deviations was put forward: the presence in some people of an innate tendency to violate social norms, which is associated with the physical characteristics of the individual, criminal temperament, and the like. These theories were subsequently subjected to convincing criticism.

Other scientists have sought a psychological explanation for the cause of the deviations. They came to the conclusion that a large role is played by the value-normative ideas of the individual: understanding of the world around him, attitude to social norms, and most importantly - the general orientation of the interests of the individual. The researchers came to the conclusion that behavior that violates established norms is based on a different system of values ​​and rules than the one enshrined in law. For example, a psychological study of such motives for illegal actions as cruelty, greed and deceit has shown that among criminals these qualities are most pronounced, and their admissibility or necessity is justified by them (“It’s always better to show your strength,” “Take from life everything you can.” ! ").

Scientists have come to the conclusion that these personality deformations are a consequence of its improper development. For example, cruelty can be the result of a cold, indifferent attitude towards a child on the part of parents, and often cruelty of adults.

Studies have shown that low self-esteem and self-abasement in adolescence are compensated later by deviant behavior, with the help of which it is possible to attract attention to oneself and gain approval from those who will evaluate violation of norms as signs of a “strong” personality.

The sociological explanation of the causes of deviations from social norms has become widely accepted. The famous sociologist E. Durkheim showed the dependence of deviant behavior on crisis phenomena in social development. During crises, radical social changes, in conditions of disorganization of social life (unexpected economic downturns and upswings, declines in business activity, inflation), a person’s life experience ceases to correspond to the ideals embodied in social norms. Social norms are destroyed, people become disorientated, and this contributes to the emergence of deviant behavior.

Some scientists have associated deviant behavior with a conflict between the dominant culture and the culture of a group (subculture) that rejects generally accepted norms. In this case, criminal behavior, for example, may be the result of an individual’s primary communication with carriers of criminal norms. The criminal environment is created by its own subculture, its own norms, which are opposed to the norms recognized in society. The frequency of contacts with representatives of the criminal community influences the assimilation by a person (especially a young person) of the norms of antisocial behavior.

There are other explanations for deviant behavior. Think about the points of view presented and try to explain for yourself the reasons for the deviation of behavior from social norms.

In relation to persons who allow negative deviations from norms, society applies social sanctions, that is, punishment for disapproved, undesirable actions. Weak forms of deviant behavior (mistake, deception, rudeness, negligence, etc.) are corrected by other people - participants in the interaction (remarks, humor, condemnation, etc.). More significant forms of social deviations (offenses, etc.), depending on their consequences, cause condemnation and punishment, coming not only from the public, but also from government bodies.

Of the many manifestations of deviant behavior, let us take a closer look at crime, alcoholism and drug addiction.

Culture of behavior in society

The culture of human behavior in society – raising a child. It passes through the influence of national culture, the bearers of which are the people around the child. Adults would like to see a child as they themselves are, therefore education is a process of assimilation.

The culture of human behavior in society comes down to the formation of a child’s personality and his adaptation to life in a given society, as a result of which the child comprehends the culture within which he is placed and learns to act without violating generally accepted rules of behavior.

We all seem to have a good idea of ​​the culture of human behavior in society. What is behind the words culture of behavior? Still, it is useful to turn to the scientific definition of the concept. The Dictionary of Ethics will help us here. Culture of behavior is a set of forms of everyday human behavior (in work, in everyday life, in communication with other people), in which the moral and aesthetic norms of this behavior find external expression.

The culture of human behavior in society, how exactly the requirements of morality are implemented in behavior, what is the external appearance of a person’s behavior, to what extent organically, naturally and naturally these norms merged with his way of life and became everyday life rules. For example, the requirement of respect for people is expressed in the form of rules of politeness, delicacy, tact, courtesy, the ability to take care of other people’s time, etc.

The culture of behavior includes all areas of a person’s external and internal culture. Such as etiquette, rules of dealing with people and behavior in public places; culture of life, including the nature of personal needs and interests, relationships between people outside of work. And also, organization of personal time, hygiene, aesthetic tastes in the choice of consumer goods (the ability to dress, decorate a home). And such as the aesthetic properties of human facial expressions and pantomimes, facial expressions and body movements (grace). They especially highlight the culture of speech - the ability to competently, clearly and beautifully express one’s thoughts without resorting to vulgar expressions.

Culture of behavior is considered as a generally accepted form of external expression of true humanity. Here, the culture of behavior of this or that person to a certain extent characterizes his spiritual, moral and aesthetic appearance, shows how deeply and organically he has assimilated the cultural heritage of humanity and made it his own property.

It turns out that the culture of human behavior in society is the whole person, in the entirety of not only external manifestations, but also internal qualities. And this means that each of us bears responsibility for our own culture of behavior for the people around us and especially for those who are growing, for those who are taking their place.

Ethics is one of the oldest and most fascinating areas of human knowledge. The term “ethics” comes from the ancient Greek word “ethos” (ethos), which meant the actions and actions of a person, subject to himself, having varying degrees of perfection and presupposing the moral choice of the individual. Initially, back in the time of Homer, ethos was a dwelling, a permanent residence. Aristotle interpreted ethos as the virtues of human character (as opposed to the virtues of the mind). Hence the derivative of ethos - ethos (ethicos - related to character, temperament) and ethics - a science that studies the virtues of human character (courage, moderation, wisdom, justice). To this day, the term “ethos” is used when it is necessary to highlight universal human moral principles that manifest themselves in historical situations that threaten the existence of world civilization itself. And at the same time, from ancient times, ethos (the ethos of the primary elements in Empedocles, the ethos of man in Heraclitus) expressed the important observation that the customs and characters of people arise in the process of their living together.

In ancient Roman culture, the word “morality” denoted a wide range of phenomena and properties of human life: disposition, custom, character, behavior, law, fashion prescription, etc. Subsequently, another word was formed from this word - moralis (literally relating to character, customs ) and later (already in the 4th century AD) the term moralitas (morality). Consequently, in terms of etymological content, the ancient Greek ethica and the Latin moralitas coincide.

Currently, the word “ethics,” while retaining its original meaning, denotes philosophical science, and morality refers to those real phenomena and properties of a person that are studied by this science. Thus, the main areas of morality are culture of behavior, family and everyday morality, and work morality. In turn, the structure of ethics as a science expresses the functions historically assigned to it: defining the boundaries of morality in the system of human activity, theoretical justification of morality (its genesis, essence, social role), as well as a critical value assessment of morals (normative ethics).

The Russian fundamental principle of moral themes is the word “character” (character, passion, will, disposition towards something good or evil). For the first time, “morality” was mentioned in the “Dictionary of the Russian Academy” as “the conformity of free actions with the law.” Here the interpretation of moral teaching is given as “a part of wisdom, containing instructions, rules guiding a virtuous life, curbing passions and fulfilling the duties and positions of a person.”

Among the many definitions of morality, one should highlight the one that is directly related to the issue under consideration, namely: morality belongs to the world of culture, is part of human nature (changeable, self-creating) and is a social (non-natural) relationship between individuals.

So, ethics is the science of morality. But since morality is socio-historically determined, we should talk about historical changes in the subject of ethics. Ethics itself arose in the process of transition from primitive society to early civilizations. Consequently, ethical knowledge was not a product of human civilization, but a product of even more ancient, primitive communal relations. In this case, what is meant is normative ethics rather than ethics as a philosophical science. During the period under review, morality began to stand out as a special, relatively independent form of social consciousness. Individual moral consciousness expressed reflection on moral norms that opposed the real mores of ancient Greek society. We can cite some of these norms attributed to the seven wise men: “Honor your elders” (Chilo), “Hasten to please your parents” (Thales), “Prefer old laws, but fresh food” (Periander), “Moderation is the best” (Cleobulus) , “Wilfulness should be extinguished sooner than a fire” (Heraclitus), etc. Ethics arises as concrete historical value systems (in relation to a particular historical era) are given an abstract, universal form that expresses the needs of the functioning of early class civilizations.

It should be noted that morality is studied not only by ethics, but also by pedagogy, psychology, sociology, and a number of other sciences. However, only for ethics is morality the only object of study, giving it an ideological interpretation and normative guidelines. Questions about what is the source of morality (in human nature, space or social relations) and whether the moral ideal is achievable are transformed into the third, perhaps the main question for ethics: how and for what to live, what to strive for, what to do?

In the history of ethics, the evolution of the object of study can be traced as follows. Ancient ethics is characterized as the doctrine of virtues, a virtuous (perfect) personality. Here virtue is identified with any specific bearer of it (the same hero of myths) and is associated primarily with such moral qualities as courage, moderation, wisdom, justice, generosity, etc.

The humanists of the Italian Renaissance supplemented these virtues with one more, in which the traditions of ancient and medieval culture were united - the virtue of philanthropy. C. Salutati (1331-1406) called this virtue humanitas; it combines the interpretation of humanitas, coming from Cicero and Aulus Gellius, as education, instruction in the noble arts, and the attitude towards humanitas as the totality of the natural properties of man in the Middle Ages. Humanitas, according to Salutati, is that virtue “which is also customary to call benevolence.” The head of the Florentine Academy, M. Ficino (1433-1499), defined humanitas as the main moral property. Under the influence of humanitas as the virtue of philanthropy, he believed, people become inherent in the desire for unity. The more a person loves his equals, the more he expresses the essence of the race and proves that he is human. And vice versa, if a person is cruel, if he distances himself from the essence of the race and from communication with his own kind, then he is a man only in name.

Christian ethics of the Middle Ages focused on the study of morality as an objective, impersonal phenomenon. The criteria for distinguishing between good and evil were extended beyond the boundaries of the individual. From the point of view of Christian ethics, the absolute source of morality is God. In it a person finds the reason, basis and purpose of his existence. Moral norms are elevated to a world law, following which a person, God-like in his essence, but hopelessly sinful in the socio-natural dimension, is able to bridge the gap between his purpose (to be like God) and everyday existence. To the above-mentioned virtues, Christian ethics adds three more new ones - faith (in God), hope (in his mercy) and love (for God).

In the ethics of modern times, one of the most ancient normative requirements, expressing the universal content of morality, has received a new meaning. At the end of the 18th century. This requirement is called the “golden rule”, which is formed as follows: “act towards others as you would like them to act towards you.” I. Kant gave a more strict expression of this rule, presenting it in the form of the so-called categorical imperative. Moreover, here we should pay attention to the fact that Kant thereby gives morality an important humanistic dominant: “Act in this way,” he writes in the “Critique of Practical Reason,” “so that you always treat humanity both in your own person and in the person of everyone else in the same way.” as an end and would never treat it only as a means.” According to Kant, the categorical imperative is a universal, generally binding principle that should guide all people, regardless of their origin, position, etc.

Having traced the evolution of the object of ethics, it is necessary to indicate the three functions of ethics: it describes morality, explains morality and teaches morality. According to these three functions, ethics is divided into empirical-descriptive, philosophical-theoretical and normative parts.

Here it is necessary to note some differences between morality and ethics, although at the level of ordinary consciousness these concepts are recognized as synonyms. There are several points of view on this matter that do not exclude, but, on the contrary, complement each other, revealing some nuances. If morality is understood as a form of social consciousness, then morality includes practical human actions, customs, and morals. In a slightly different way, morality acts as a regulator of human behavior through strictly fixed norms, external psychological influence and control, or public opinion. If we correlate morality with morality understood in this way, it represents the sphere of moral freedom of the individual, when universal and social imperatives coincide with internal motives. Morality turns out to be an area of ​​human initiative and creativity, an internal attitude to do good.

One more interpretation of morality and morality should be pointed out. The first is an expression of humanity (humanity) in an ideal, complete form, the second fixes a historically specific measure of morality. In the Russian language, the moral, noted V.I. Dal, is that which is opposite to the bodily, carnal. Moral - relating to one half of spiritual life; opposite to the mental, but constituting a common spiritual principle with it. V.I. Dal refers to the mental as truth and lies, and to the moral as good and evil. A moral person is a good-natured, virtuous, well-behaved person who agrees with conscience, with the laws of truth, with human dignity, with the duty of an honest and pure-hearted citizen. V. G. Belinsky elevated the human desire for perfection and the achievement of bliss in accordance with duty to the rank of “the fundamental law of morality.”

The moral culture of an individual is a characteristic of the moral development of an individual, which reflects the degree to which he or she has mastered the moral experience of society, the ability to consistently implement values, norms and principles in behavior and relationships with other people, and readiness for constant self-improvement. A person accumulates in his consciousness and behavior the achievements of the moral culture of society. The task of forming a moral culture of an individual is to achieve an optimal combination of traditions and innovations, to combine the specific experience of an individual and the entire wealth of public morality. Elements of a person’s moral culture are a culture of ethical thinking (“the ability of moral judgment,” the ability to use ethical knowledge and distinguish between good and evil), a culture of feelings (a friendly attitude towards people, interested and sincere empathy for their sorrows and joys), a culture of behavior and etiquette.

The moral culture of an individual is a product of the development of human relations and, therefore, is determined by social progress. In this regard, there have long been discussions about moral progress. Is it an illusion or reality? There is no clear answer to this question yet. We are interested in the very question of moral progress and possible answers to it in connection with the question of how moral progress is revealed in the world of culture of human relations, where the values ​​of material and spiritual culture, their creation and development are objectified (and deobjectified).

It is obvious that moral progress is one of the aspects of the socio-historical progress of mankind. We should equally talk about economic, scientific, technical and other types of progress, each of them having its own specifics, relative independence and its own criteria.

The criterion of moral progress reveals the prospects for normative and value-based human improvement. The origins of this kind of human improvement (both in practical-educational and scientific-ethical terms) lie in the famous thesis of Protagoras “Man is the measure of all things.” At least three propositions followed from this position. Firstly, in human existence, the establishment of culture (primarily customs and mores) are fundamentally different from the laws of nature. Thus, a kind of cultural layer was identified in man, irreducible to his natural being. And this layer is subject to formation and education. Secondly, this cultural layer, “second nature,” appears as the result of the activity and creativity of man himself. The world of culture is a product of the activity of man himself. And thirdly, and most importantly: the cultural content of a human individual depends on his relationships with other individuals. Therefore, it is not the individual himself who is the bearer of culture (and within it, first of all, morality): both culture and morality are located outside his body, in the society in which he lives, in relationships with other individuals. Thus, the ancient tradition of understanding a moral person was transformed into criteria for moral progress, which was a reflection of the development of man’s dominance over the elemental forces of nature, over his social relationships, over his own spiritual world, over himself.

Moral progress acts as a complex, multifaceted process of establishing humanistic principles in the consciousness and activity of man as the creator of history. In this regard, it is appropriate to mention that K. Marx identified three qualitative types of social relations in history, in connection with which we can talk about the stages of moral progress and the establishment of the principles of humanism in the culture of human relations. “Relations of personal dependence (at first completely primitive),” writes K. Marx in “Economic Manuscripts of 1857-1858,” “these are those first forms of society in which the productivity of people develops only to an insignificant extent and in isolated points. Personal independence based on material dependence is the second major form, in which for the first time a system of general social metabolism, universal relations, comprehensive needs and universal potencies is formed. Free individuality, based on the universal development of individuals and on the transformation of their collective, social productivity into their public property - this is the third stage. The second stage creates the conditions for the third”*. These three major forms of social relations between individuals, which are rooted in the corresponding mode of production, correspond to certain historical types of morality that characterize the direction of its progress.

Personal dependence - personal independence (based on material dependence) - free individuality (based on the universal development of individuals) - this is the logic of the historical process, which is refracted in the criteria of moral progress and the development of moral culture.

Considering the ethical nature of culture, A. Schweitzer also raised the question of “ethical progress.” The essence of culture, he believed, is twofold. Culture is the dominance of man over the forces of nature and the dominance of his mind over human beliefs and thoughts. A. Schweitzer believed that the dominance of reason over a person’s way of thinking is more important than the dominance of man over nature. Only this will give us “a guarantee that people and entire nations will not use against each other the force that nature will make available to them, that they will not be drawn into a struggle for existence that is much more terrible than the one that man had to wage in a civilized state.” . One can, of course, disagree with the thinker’s statement that “ethical progress is essential and undoubted, and material progress is less essential and less undoubted in the development of culture,” but this judgment seems, rather, to be a reaction to significant “achievements of the spirit in material sphere." In other words, scientific and technological progress since the last century, as A. Schweitzer believes, was associated with the fact that “the forces of ethical progress have dried up,” and “a culture that develops only the material side without corresponding spiritual progress is like a ship, which, having lost steering, loses maneuverability and rushes uncontrollably towards disaster.”

In fact, A. Schweitzer expresses, although in a slightly different aspect, the idea that a certain ensemble of abstract demands of moral consciousness, as if floating in the air, sets quite definite moral relations and turns into a moral culture specific to a certain historical era ( antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, etc.), and for a particular society. Hence the conclusion is drawn about the greater importance of moral progress than material progress.

The presence of a value element in moral progress creates significant difficulties for understanding the development of morality as a real, empirically fixed process of replacing some mores and moral principles with others - new, more perfect, more humane, etc. With a reasonable degree of confidence, it can be argued that moral progress does not directly depend on the level of development of the productive forces, material progress or economic basis. At one or another historical stage in the development of material and spiritual culture, the criterion of moral progress is the level of development and freedom of the individual. This level is characterized by the degree of participation not only of a handful of “chosen ones,” but of the largest part of humanity both in the creation and in the development of material and spiritual culture.

Let us dwell in a little more detail on things that would seem obvious. Above we have already spoken more than once about the culture of human relations. In this case, we will talk about it in relation to human behavior. After all, each of us “behaves” in one way or another, performs some actions, actions in relation to the world around us and, above all, in relation to people. Behavior reveals the characteristics of a person’s character, his temperament, views, tastes, habits, emotions, feelings, etc.

Each person has a so-called general, characteristic tone of his usual mood. In this sense, we characterize this or that person: “a cheerful person”, “a gloomy person”, “a frivolous person”, etc., although in each of these cases situations of deviation in personal mood in one direction or another are not excluded. A stable mood, its general background, inherent in a particular individual, spreads to those around him, which is of fundamental importance, say, when recruiting so-called small professional groups (cosmonaut corps, submarine crew). In other cases, this happens, as a rule, spontaneously, without any preliminary socio-psychological work. If the behavior of individual members of a team prevents it from forming into an integral social organism, then we are talking about a difficult moral and psychological climate in the team.

There are two types of behavior - verbal (verbal) and real. Verbal behavior is our statements, judgments, opinions, evidence. Behavior expressed in words largely determines the culture of relations between people; the power of words is enormous (the poet E. Yevtushenko expressed it this way: “With a word you can detect, with a word you can save, with a word you can lead shelves”). Behavior already at the verbal level can be life-affirming or depriving human existence of meaning.

It was already discussed above that the emergence of thinking, will and language was the main prerequisite for cultural genesis at the turn of the transition from Habilis to Neoanthropes. Since then, i.e., since the completion of human biological evolution, the word has become a regulator of behavior and relationships transmitted in oral and written creativity. It is not for nothing that one of the elements of the “seven arts” of educational programs of antiquity and the Middle Ages was rhetoric, the science of oratory (and, more broadly, of artistic prose in general), which remained part of humanities education until the 19th century.

The main sections of classical rhetoric, which reveal various aspects of verbal behavior, are:

1) finding, i.e. systematizing the content of speeches and the evidence used in them;
2) arrangement, i.e. dividing the speech into introduction, presentation, development (evidence of one’s view and refutation of the contrary) and conclusion;
3) verbal expression, i.e. the doctrine of the selection of words, their combination, as well as the simple, medium and high style of speech;
4) memorization;
5) pronunciation.

One can cite a great many wise sayings, proverbs, individual statements about the power of the word, the language of communication, which is clothed in the language of the culture of a historical era or of any ethnic group throughout the entire duration of its existence.

Real behavior is our practical actions, actions performed in accordance with certain rules and moral principles. In this case, we are talking about the coincidence of ethical knowledge and moral behavior, which indicates a high moral culture of the individual. Another situation is hypocrisy, discrepancy between words and deeds, etc. When comparing the behavior of a person with accepted norms and moral values, it is customary to talk about “normal” or “deviant” or deviant behavior. Therefore, in order to understand a person, the meaning of his actions, the nature of his behavior, it is necessary to penetrate into the motives that guide him in a given situation. Only by understanding the motives can one correctly judge the actions, the real behavior of a person in relation to the reality around him, and above all to other people, to himself.

The culture of behavior is also revealed in how a person is able to understand himself, evaluate his actions and their motives. M. M. Prishvin subtly noticed that if we always judge ourselves, we judge with bias: either more towards guilt, or towards justification. This inevitable fluctuation in one direction or another is called conscience, moral self-control.

Often in everyday speech we talk about “cultural human behavior” and “behavior of a cultural person.”

Cultural behavior is a person’s behavior in accordance with the norms that a given society has developed and adheres to. It includes certain manners, generally accepted ways of communicating and dealing with others. Cultural behavior presupposes correct and beautiful behavior at the table, a polite and helpful attitude towards elders and women, the ability to behave in society (both familiar and unfamiliar), adherence to professional ethics, etc.

Rules of conduct may change over time, and at the same time, behavior patterns also change. These rules taken together constitute etiquette that regulates the external manifestations of human relationships. Etiquette refers to the external culture of a person and society. It includes those requirements that acquire the character of a more or less strictly regulated ceremony and in the observance of which a certain form of behavior is of particular importance. Etiquette in modern conditions (unlike traditional societies, where it was reduced to a strictly canonized ritual) becomes more free and natural, acquiring the meaning of everyday benevolent and respectful attitude towards all people, regardless of their position and social status. Attention to the external form of culture is manifested here only insofar as it reflects ideas about beauty in the behavior and appearance of a person. Then we say that any actions and motives of human activity have both ethical and aesthetic significance (value) and therefore can be assessed, on the one hand, as beautiful or ugly, on the other, as good or evil. The main thing here is precisely the behavior, which can be, should be cultural.

However, cultural human behavior is part of the problem of the culture of human relations. Another part of it is the behavior of a cultured person. In this case, the emphasis is on the person - what is he like, cultural or uncultured? In what terms should we talk about a cultured person? Obviously, this is a person whose knowledge of ethical principles and moral standards accepted in a given society has turned into an internal conviction and has resulted in a moral feeling. The criterion of culture and good manners is the correlation of an action as a manifestation of moral feeling with the interests of another person. Therefore, more extensive than the scope of etiquette is the culture of feelings, which is formed in the process of human communication with nature, in work activity, in interpersonal contacts when objectifying monuments of material and spiritual culture.

So, the culture of ethical thinking, the culture of feelings, the culture of behavior, etiquette in their totality form an integral system of moral culture of the individual. Each of these elements is directly embodied in professional ethics. In this case, as a rule, they mean specific moral requirements associated with the characteristics of various professions.

Professional ethics represents, firstly, codes of conduct that prescribe a certain type of moral relationships between people engaged in any one field of professional activity, and secondly, certain ways of justifying these codes, interpretation of the cultural and humanistic purpose of a particular profession. So, let’s say, the concept of a lawyer’s professional duty includes a special, sometimes even punctual and pedantic commitment to the spirit and letter of the law, compliance with the principle of equality of all before the law. Military-statutory collectives are characterized by greater clarity, even rigidity of relations, more unambiguous adherence to statutory requirements and orders of superiors than other types of collectives, and at the same time they are characterized by a higher degree of mutual assistance and mutual assistance. All this is dictated by the nature of the activities of military-regulatory teams, increased requirements and emergency situations that arise during the performance of official duties.

Goals and objectives of the class hour:

Development of ethical standards of behavior in society in children;

Cultivating a culture of speech, behavior in public places, respect for the individual.

Description of the class hour

Discussion of the problem “Culture of behavior in public places”

Teacher: Good afternoon guys! We are already familiar with the concept of “culture of behavior”. Let me remind you that a culture of behavior is a set of formed, socially significant personality qualities, a person’s everyday actions in society, based on the norms of morality, ethics, and aesthetic culture. The culture of behavior expresses, on the one hand, the moral requirements of society, on the other, the assimilation of provisions that guide, regulate and control the actions and actions of students. The rules learned by a person turn into the education of the individual.

Consequently, a culture of behavior organically combines a culture of communication, a culture of appearance, everyday culture (satisfying needs), a culture of speech, and the ability to participate in polemics and discussions.

Most of you have already come to the understanding that following the laws of decency demonstrates respect for people, traditions and customs of different nations.

Guys, count how many people you meet every day? At home you communicate with your parents, brothers and sisters, neighbors; at school - with many teachers, schoolmates, librarians, readers; in a store - with sellers, cashiers, strangers; on the street - with passers-by: elderly, young, adults, with peers. It’s hard to count how many people you’ll see in one day: some you’ll just say hello to, others you’ll talk to, others you’ll answer a question, some you’ll ask yourself.

Conclusion: a person is in constant communication with familiar and unfamiliar people at home, at school, cinema, library, store, transport.

The behavior of another person, a friendly or rude word spoken, often leaves a mark on the soul for the whole day. Often a good mood depends on whether a person was given attention, whether they were friendly and kind when communicating with him, and how offensive it can be from inattention, rudeness, or an evil word. Life in society requires that all people follow the rules of communication that are mandatory for everyone: adults, boys and girls, calm and playful.

Discussion of “Rules Binding to Everyone”

The teacher offers students three rules and discusses them with the students.

1. Rule of accuracy. Work, social work, and entertainment are often collective, when success depends on everyone. Therefore, a well-mannered person must be precise. Precision is needed in everything: in work, studying, going to school, going to a meeting, going to the movies, the theater. Accuracy must be in the fulfillment of promises. You gave your word - keep it, you promised - come on time.

2. Rule of delicacy. Helping another person must be done delicately, without emphasizing that you are doing a good deed or bragging about it. After all, help is not provided in order to attract attention. You must be able to accept help, not refuse advice, not think that you are better than everyone else and can do everything yourself.

3. Rule of politeness. You must address other people politely, behave correctly in someone else’s home, be a hospitable host, be able to listen to others, know who you can call “you” and who you can address with “you,” be able to restrain yourself, and not be hot-tempered or irritable. It is necessary to learn to be easy to communicate; for this you need to be able to recognize a person’s state, his mood by appearance. First of all, you need to learn to recognize the mood of the closest people by their eyes: mother, father, grandmother, grandfather, brothers and sisters. And depending on what you saw, build your behavior. It is difficult and not difficult. It’s difficult if you don’t understand why you need to take other people into account and don’t want to understand their condition. It’s easy if you think that although you are still small, you can already alleviate the grief or troubles of another person, and rejoice in other people’s joys.

Discussion of the situation “Communication with people with disabilities”

Teacher: Let's look at one situation. You've probably met people with disabilities—hard of hearing, visually impaired, disabled. How to behave when meeting or communicating with them? After all, they are people just like us, therefore, they are characterized by sensitivity and kindness, a desire to communicate and be respected, and a desire to do something useful to other people. How would you behave with such people? (Guys' reasoning.)

Here are ten rules for dealing with people with disabilities that are used by public service workers in the United States. They were compiled by Karen Meyer, an employee of the US National Center for Accessibility.

When you talk to a person with a disability, speak directly to them, and not to a chaperone or sign language interpreter who is present during the conversation.

When you are introduced to a disabled person, it is quite natural to shake their hand - even those who have difficulty moving their hand, or who use a prosthesis, may well shake their hand - right or left, which is completely acceptable.

When you meet with a person who has poor or no vision, be sure to identify yourself and the people who came with you. If you are having a general conversation in a group, do not forget to explain who you are currently addressing and identify yourself.

If you offer help, wait until it is accepted and then ask what to do and how to do it.

Treat disabled adults like adults. Address them by name and first name only if you know them well.

Leaning or hanging from someone's wheelchair is the same as leaning or hanging from the wheelchair owner. A wheelchair is part of the untouchable space of the person who uses it.

When you talk to someone who has difficulty communicating, listen carefully. Be patient, wait for the person to finish the phrase. Don't correct him or finish speaking for him. Never pretend that you understand if you really don't. Repeating what you understand will help the person respond to you and help you understand them.

When talking to someone who uses a wheelchair or crutches, position yourself so that your eyes and theirs are at the same level, this will make it easier for you to talk.

To get the attention of someone who is hard of hearing, wave your hand or pat them on the shoulder. Look him straight in the eyes and speak clearly, although keep in mind that not all people who are hard of hearing can read lips. When talking to those who can, position yourself so that the light falls on you and you can be clearly seen. Try not to let anything (food, cigarettes, hands) disturb you.

Don't be embarrassed if you accidentally make a mistake by saying "See you later" or "Did you hear about this...?" to someone who cannot see or hear.

Reading and discussion of T. Fish’s story “Laziness and Authority”

From my window I saw how the neighbor’s boy, third grader Lenya Zubkov, either generously scattered slaps on the heads of the smaller children, or tried to push a girl who was jumping on one leg. Then Lenya took the ball from another girl and chased her around the yard until she burst into tears.

When I asked Lenya in the evening why he was doing this, he answered, not without pride:

Unfortunately, even among adults I happened to meet people who, like Lena, thought that by being rude and shouting they could gain the authority and respect of others.

“I’m afraid, Lenya, that you might turn brown!” No matter how hard you turn out to be a seasoned bear.

- What? What? - asked the boy, who wanted to be afraid of him.

And then I told him a fairy tale written down in Karelia by my young friend Pulkin from Zaonezh.

One grandfather went into the forest. He needed wood for the arc. I was looking for a suitable tree for a long time and suddenly I saw a tree standing there - a rowan. The sun caressed him. The leaves are yellow, the berries look like they are filled with scarlet blood! The tree is beautiful: deft, nimble, resilient, pliable! It’s easy to chop and cut patterns while the sap in the tree is alive, but when it dries, it becomes like a stone and will serve for a long time and faithfully... The grandfather swung his axe, but did not have time to hit. A voice was heard:

- Ask for whatever you want. I will fulfill everything, but just don’t ruin it. I'm young: I bloomed for the first summer!

Grandfather has an ax in his belt and run. It didn’t often happen in the old days that a tree could speak with a human voice.

He ran home, fell on the bench, and couldn’t catch his breath. The old woman approached him with questions. He will tell her.

- Hey! - she shouted, - run back, grandfather! I want people to be afraid of us. So tell the rowan tree!

The grandfather tried to persuade the woman: it’s bad to live if people are afraid. Yes, where is it?

The grandfather wandered into the forest... And the woman flew into the water: “Let me show off and see how they will honor me!”

Comes to the shore. There are women cleaning fish by the boats. They looked at her, didn’t say “hello,” but screeched in all directions.

“They haven’t gotten used to my greatness yet. Look, they ran away!” - the woman grinned, leaned over the tub, and from the water, instead of a beautiful light face, a bear’s face looked at her. The nose is stretched out, the fangs are turning yellow from under the lips, the cheeks are overgrown with hair. Look, the men are already running from the mountain - some have a stake, some a spear... The woman stabbed in a bad voice, through the fence, into the field, and into the forest!

And there she hid under a snag, and spent the winter with her grandfather, the same bear. And in the spring they forgot human speech...

That's where the bears came from, boy! There are many of them in our forests. Only the women and the boys were afraid of them! And the man always had an ax with him. There was no case of a bear eating a person. Scare - it will scare. He'll fall asleep, throw brushwood, and go home. Baba Medvedeva is a bear and if she gets in your way, be afraid of her.

Viktor Pulka's tale was longer and more beautiful. But even in my retelling, its meaning in the end seemed to reach Leni. True, at first he objected:

- Firstly, mountain ash cannot speak humanly. Secondly, the bears happened in a completely different way. Thirdly, nature also needs bears!..

Well, after objecting a little, Lenya finally started thinking. And now, perhaps, he will try to gain authority in a completely different way. Which one?

Teacher: Why did the writer decide to tell Lena a fairy tale? What other way can Lenya gain authority? (Guys' reasoning.)

Summarizing. The teacher draws a conclusion about how you can gain authority among others, how you need to behave in society, with friends.

Morality is the desire of an individual to evaluate conscious actions and human states on the basis of a set of conscious norms of behavior inherent in a particular individual. The expression of the ideas of a morally developed person is conscience. These are the deep laws of a decent human life. Morality is an individual’s idea of ​​evil and good, the ability to competently assess the situation and determine the typical style of behavior in it. Each individual has his own criteria of morality. It forms a certain code of relations with a person and the environment as a whole, based on mutual understanding and humanism.

What is morality

Morality is an integral characteristic of the individual, which is the cognitive basis for the formation of a morally healthy personality: socially oriented, adequately assessing the situation, having an established set of values. In today's society, the definition of morality is in general use as a synonym for the concept of morality. The etymological features of this concept show its origin from the word “character” - character. The first semantic definition of the concept of morality was published in 1789 - “Dictionary of the Russian Academy”.

The concept of morality combines a certain set of personality qualities of the subject. What is paramount is honesty, kindness, compassion, decency, hard work, generosity, and reliability. Analyzing morality as a personal property, it should be mentioned that everyone is able to bring their own qualities to this concept. For people with different types of professions, morality is formed by a different set of qualities. A soldier must be brave, a fair judge, a teacher. Based on the formed moral qualities, the directions of behavior of the subject in society are formed. The subjective attitude of the individual plays a significant role in assessing the situation from a moral perspective. Some people perceive civil marriage as absolutely natural; for others it is considered a sin. Based on religious studies, it should be recognized that the concept of morality has retained very little of its true meaning. Modern man's idea of ​​morality is distorted and emasculated.

Morality is a purely individual quality, which allows a person to consciously control his own mental and emotional state, personifying a spiritually and socially formed personality. A moral person is able to determine the golden standard between the self-centered part of himself and sacrifice. Such a subject is able to form a socially oriented, value-determined civic and worldview.

A moral person, when choosing the direction of his actions, acts solely according to his conscience, relying on formed personal values ​​and concepts. For some, the concept of morality is the equivalent of a “ticket to heaven” after death, but in life it is something that does not particularly affect the success of the subject and does not bring any benefit. For this type of people, moral behavior is a way to cleanse the soul of sins, as if covering up their own wrong actions. Man is an unimpeded being in his choice, he has his own course in life. At the same time, society has its own influence and is able to set its own ideals and values.

In fact, morality, as a property necessary for the subject, is extremely important for society. This is, as it were, a guarantee of the preservation of humanity as a species, otherwise, without norms and principles of moral behavior, humanity will eradicate itself. Arbitrariness and gradualism are the consequences of the disappearance of morality as a set of principles and values ​​of society as such. The death of a certain nation or ethnic group is most likely if it is headed by an immoral government. Accordingly, the level of living comfort of people depends on developed morality. A protected and prosperous society is one in which values ​​and moral principles are respected, respect and altruism come first.

So, morality is internalized principles and values, based on which a person directs his behavior and performs actions. Morality, being a form of social knowledge and attitudes, regulates human actions through principles and norms. These norms are directly based on the point of view of the impeccable, the categories of good, justice and evil. Based on humanistic values, morality allows the subject to be human.

Rules of morality

In everyday use, the expressions morality have identical meaning and common origins. At the same time, everyone should determine the existence of certain rules that easily outline the essence of each of the concepts. Thus, moral rules, in turn, allow the individual to develop his own mental and moral state. To some extent, these are the “Laws of the Absolute” that exist in absolutely all religions, worldviews and societies. Consequently, moral rules are universal, and their failure to comply entails consequences for the subject who does not comply with them.

There are, for example, 10 commandments received as a result of direct communication between Moses and God. This is part of the rules of morality, the observance of which is justified by religion. In fact, scientists do not deny the presence of a hundred times more rules; they boil down to one denominator: the harmonious existence of humanity.

Since ancient times, many peoples have had the concept of a certain “Golden Rule”, which carries the basis of morality. Its interpretation includes dozens of formulations, but the essence remains unchanged. Following this “golden rule,” an individual should behave towards others the way he treats himself. This rule forms the concept of a person that all people are equal regarding their freedom of action, as well as the desire to develop. Following this rule, the subject reveals its deep philosophical interpretation, which states that the individual must learn in advance to realize the consequences of his own actions in relation to the “other individual”, projecting these consequences onto himself. That is, a subject who mentally tries on the consequences of his own action will think about whether it is worth acting in such a direction. The Golden Rule teaches a person to develop his inner sense, teaches compassion, empathy and helps to develop mentally.

Although this moral rule was formulated in ancient times by famous teachers and thinkers, it has not lost the relevance of its purpose in the modern world. “What you don’t want for yourself, don’t do to someone else” – this is how the rule sounds in its original interpretation. The emergence of such an interpretation is attributed to the origins of the first millennium BC. It was then that a humanistic revolution took place in the ancient world. But as a moral rule, it received its “golden” status in the eighteenth century. This injunction emphasizes the global moral principle according to the relationship to another person within various interaction situations. Since its presence in any existing religion has been proven, it can be noted as the foundation of human morality. This is the most important truth of the humanistic behavior of a moral person.

The problem of morality

Looking at modern society, it is easy to notice that moral development is characterized by decline. In the twentieth century, the world experienced a sudden decline in all laws and moral values ​​of society. Moral problems began to appear in society, which negatively affected the formation and development of humane humanity. This decline reached an even greater development in the twenty-first century. Throughout human existence, many moral problems have been noted, which in one way or another had a negative impact on the individual. Guided by spiritual guidelines in different eras, people put something of their own into the concept of morality. They were capable of doing things that in modern society terrify absolutely every sane person. For example, the Egyptian pharaohs, who were afraid of losing their kingdom, committed unthinkable crimes, killing all newborn boys. Moral norms are rooted in religious laws, adherence to which shows the essence of the human personality. Honor, dignity, faith, love for the homeland, for man, loyalty - qualities that served as a direction in human life, to which part of the laws of God reached at least to some extent. Consequently, throughout its development, society tended to deviate from religious commandments, which led to the emergence of moral problems.

The development of moral problems in the twentieth century is a consequence of the world wars. The era of decline in morals has been going on since the First World War; during this crazy time, human life became devalued. The conditions in which people had to survive erased all moral restrictions, personal relationships devalued just like human life at the front. The involvement of humanity in inhumane bloodshed dealt a crushing blow to morality.

One of the periods when moral problems appeared was the communist period. During this period, it was planned to destroy all religions, and, accordingly, the moral norms embedded in it. Even if in the Soviet Union the development of moral rules was much higher, this position could not be maintained for long. Along with the destruction of the Soviet world, there was a decline in the morality of society.

In the current period, one of the main problems of morality is the fall of the family institution. Which brings with it a demographic catastrophe, an increase in divorces, and the birth of countless children out of wedlock. Views on the family, motherhood and fatherhood, and raising a healthy child are regressing. The development of corruption in all areas, theft, and deception is of certain importance. Now everything is bought, exactly as it is sold: diplomas, victories in sports, even human honor. This is precisely the consequences of the decline in morality.

Education of morality

Moral education is a process of purposeful influence on a person, which involves influencing the consciousness of the subject’s behavior and feelings. During the period of such education, the moral qualities of the subject are formed, allowing the individual to act within the framework of public morality.

Education of morality is a process that does not involve breaks, but only close interaction between the student and the teacher. You should cultivate moral qualities in a child by your own example. Forming a moral personality is quite difficult; it is a painstaking process in which not only teachers and parents, but also the public institution as a whole take part. In this case, the age characteristics of the individual, his readiness for analysis, and processing of information are always taken into account. The result of moral education is the development of a holistically moral personality, which will develop together with its feelings, conscience, habits and values. Such education is considered a difficult and multifaceted process, summarizing pedagogical education and the influence of society. Moral education implies the formation of a sense of morality, a conscious connection with society, a culture of behavior, consideration of moral ideals and concepts, principles and behavioral norms.

Moral education takes place during the period of education, during upbringing in the family, in public organizations, and directly involves individuals. The continuous process of moral education begins with the birth of the subject and lasts throughout his life.