Human morals in the retrospective of cognitive-anthropological analysis

Статья посвящена рассмотрению проблемы морали, начиная от древних времен до современности. Проводится анализ исторических подходов к пониманию морали. Доказано, что важным в современной трансформации концептуальных основ морали возникает сам человек, когнитивная поведение которой во все века строится на исторических, правовых и религиозных программах, которые именно ее организуют и упорядочивают. Соответствующие стратегии таких программ отражают свои отдельные, присущие только им, когнитивные репрезентации, которые не только отражают нравственные представления о действительности, но и способны создавать «новую действительность», искажая старую. Подчеркивается необходимость рассмотрения этой проблемы, что обусловлено необходимостью установления причинно-следственной взаимозависимости морали и правовых норм. Трансформация морали происходит на протяжении всей истории человечества, отражая изменения в праве на каждом этапе развития человечества, ведь наступает определенное переосмысление нравственных ценностей в сочетании с идеологическими преобразованиями, происходящими в обществе. Меняется и понимание того, что является моральным. На сегодня необходимость рассмотрения этой проблемы обусловлено необходимостью установления причинно-следственной взаимосвязи между моралью человека и социальными, правовыми и культурными факторами. В статье отмечается, что в современном обществе вообще отсутствуют гарантии или рациональные пути к моральной согласия в обществе, не существует возможностей и способов установить четкую иерархию предпочтений среди моральных требований. Современное состояние морали исследователи определяют как заброшенный. Можно сказать, что наступила эпоха когнитивного порче нравов - то есть постепенное и постоянное отклонение от моральных устоев, что проявляется в поведении и мышлении человек. Эти сбои обусловлены рядом причин: предубеждениями, стереотипами, не способностью анализировать информацию, равнодушием. Мораль новейшего времени - это философско-правовая химера, ведь она начинается с уровня личного выбора поведения в свободном пространстве, границы которого могут быть установлены только правовыми нормами. Концептуальные основы нравственных законов, на сегодня, все более склонны к появлению «морали где-то посередине», «морали согласованности» или «нейтральной морали». Этот феномен родился на территории «правового лояльности» и толерантности, что стало следствием окончательного размыва целостности нравственных постулатов, которые были сформированы в течение целых веков..

Ключевые слова: мораль, право, нравственные представления, мораль человека, добро, зло.

Formulation of the problem

The birth and development of morality probably begins with the first man, because the understanding of good and evil is inherent in man himself and is its distinguishing feature from other living beings on Earth. The establishment and transformation of morality occur throughout the history of mankind because at every stage of human development there is a certain rethinking of moral values. However, there have always been significant ideological differences in the understanding of what is moral. Today, the need to consider this problem is due to the need to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between human morality and social, legal and cultural factors.

Analysis of recent research and publications

In the development of morality, we have conditionally identified several periods: ancient times, the Middle Ages, pre-revolutionary, Soviet and modern periods. The works of researchers of the modern period are mainly the works of philosophers, sociologists, psychologists: A.M. McIntyre, M. Halbwachs, D.O. Brink, A. Fuchs, Carl Gustav Jung and others.

Part of the general problem has not been solved previously. Anthropological ideas about the variability of moral ideas or the permanence of its postulates, about the moral progress or regress of mankind can be analyzed only by historical example. In the domestic scientific legal thought, there is no sufficiently thorough consideration of the historical process of moral development, which requires proper coverage.

Formulating the goals of the article

Consideration of the historical retrospective of cognitiveanthropological analysis of morality and some trends in its development, plays a significant role in the legal field, because the whole system of law is based on the understanding of morality.

Presentation of the main research material

cognitive anthropological morality law

Anthropological ideas about the variability of moral ideas or the permanence of its postulates, about the moral progress or regress of mankind can be analyzed only by historical example. The reference to the Old Testament, as the oldest document in the world, allows us to testify to the following: a moral person is either a pure God-fearing child or a wise old man endowed with all virtues (Abel, Abram, Lot, Job, Tabitha, prophets: Jeremiah, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Micah, Zechariah, etc.) or a bloodthirsty warrior, filled with the search for truth, love of truth, and the desire to atone for his sins (Moses, Samson, King David, etc.). Evil, debauchery and cruelty under the Old Testament inevitably lead to the death not only of the individual but also of individual cities, settlements and even the whole world [1]. Christian morality permeates the ancient world with reflections on the meaning of life.

The next circle of the concept of morality is covered in the man of the New Testament, starting with the first lines of the list of names of all ancestors, starting with the first man Adam - the ancestors of St. Joseph - the betrothed. The concept of «moral memory» further permeates all the ancient communicative knowledge and human action, creating a huge field for his reflection on the contradictions, criticism and constant justification of the positive moral. In addition, moral postulates become legal norms, as can be seen in the Ten Commandments of the Lord, for the violation of which it was possible to punish not by special bodies, but by any person [2]. In the words of John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople (347 - 438) «obtaining laws is a matter of mercy, compassion, grace» [3, p. 94], that is, the law in fact can not contradict morality, and obtaining the law is an indisputable benefit and a reminder of morality. Regarding the inseparability of the connection between the category «morality - law - memory», John Chrysostom reminds that «if a good law is forgotten, a person will grow up with sin, lawlessness and dirt» [3, p. 98]. Thus, Christian morality professes the eternal truth that God has and that is love, such a truth is not born in dispute and does not exist «somewhere in the middle». True love does not bring evil and pain, it creates law and this law based on love is a moral law.

Recognizing two virtues: mental (intellectual) and moral, Aristotle believed that the first arises from exercise in learning, and the second arises from habit. Aristotle in his work «Ethics» tries to prove that none of the charities in man can be innate, but only received: «because legislators, accustoming to the laws of citizens, make them virtuous, because such is the desire of any legislator». Hence (according to Aristotle) - every decency arises, develops and is neutralized, and the repetition of the same deeds creates a moral foundation. Aristotle's idea of a person's responsibility for moral or mental incapacity remains cognitive-revolutionary at all times. Leaving the critique of this view from psychology and philosophy, in our opinion, the reasonableness of this idea follows precisely from the origins of the Aristotelian approach to the acquisition (teaching) of charity (morality). Otherwise, the correctness of bringing a person to justice for something independent of him would seem doubtful [4, p. 20, 35].

Morality according to Thomas Aquinas is a phenomenal combination of Christian and Aristotelian morality. According to his perfectionist theory, the good for man is to seek good and avoid evil. In this regard, morality according to F. Aquinas permeates all three types of laws: eternal (God's law), natural law (reflection of eternal law in intelligent beings), human law (state laws that keep people from evil through force and fear). He also divided morality into one that reflects the relationship between people and inner morality, which means a person's attitude to himself, his passions, desires [5, p. 57, 61].

John Locke tries to use the formula to prove that man is not only the unity of physical and mental, but also - it is his memory of bad and good, from which it is concluded that the existence of moral and metaphysical parallels of human nature [6, p. 78], which in turn gives reason to doubt which of the existing moral theories can be considered justified if it is rightly proved that there is no concept of «correct personality» [7, p. 98]. We can say that such arguments prove the identity of morality to human nature.

However, the unity of construction according to J. Locke «physical body - soul-memory - morality» gives birth to thoughts on the next mandatory component of man - the moral responsibility of the person to himself, the pangs of conscience and soul generated by his memory.

Exploring the personality as a multifaceted component, the philosopher D. Parfit, in my opinion, becomes closer to modern philosophy, because he notes that the pangs of conscience - is an unnecessary and unnecessary burden [8, p. 168] The similarity of the position is also noted in the philosophy of G.O. Grotia, according to which justice (morality) is fiction, because a person is primarily for his own benefit and it is impossible to teach him to think and act in agreement with another [9, p. 45].

According to the theory of I. Kant, the moral law can be obtained only through philosophy [10, p. 49] with which many scholars agree, and this is understandable, since only the mind can create morality, but, in our opinion, today's philosophy sometimes goes beyond the Christian good and thus distorts the understanding of morality. According to Spinoza's philosophy, morality is born of good [11, p. 43], but in this case, the human mind, in turn, must be pure for true knowledge of what is good.

We see an extended vision of morality in the philosophy of I. Bentham (morality in action) and J. Mill (morality in rules), the purpose of which is to obtain pleasure and happiness. Moreover, I. Bentham emphasizes the condition of the general usefulness of morality [12, p. 49], and J. Mill - on the need to focus on the norms developed by society [13, p. 187]. In addition, J. Mill, exploring morality in the field of human primordial desire for a happy life, rightly sees moral universality as a kind of anthropological reflection of human activity.

Historically, morality has been identified with such categories as honor and dignity. For example, in the Middle Ages on the battlefield was dominated by a knightly army, guided by the provisions of the code of honor and noble dignity (but only relatively equal in origin to the enemy). The role of protector of the civilian population was first taken over by the church (although in the first place the priests tried to protect themselves and those on whom their wealth depended). In 989, a council of Catholic hierarchs was held in Sharr Abbey, which proclaimed the immunity of the civilian population during hostilities and decided that those guilty of looting peasant houses and churches, stealing cattle and killing unarmed people would be excommunicated [14, p. 266].

Another view of morality - the bourgeois rationalist model of morality, was widespread in Western Europe, whose representatives (F. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, etc.) tried to establish a new, vague argument, but only replaced by a metaphor model of morality «superman», which has nothing like it. with the Christian morality of the Orthodox population of historical Russia and could not be accepted by our ancestors. Similarly, the emotional - sensory moral theory of emotivism - specific to this historical period (Moore, Pritchard, A. Ayer, C. Stevenson, B. Russell, M. Schlick, R. Carnap, etc.) did not take root. Later, Sartre, Merleau-Pontita, and their followers, refuting such models, proposed their own, existentialist-Marxist model of morality. Accepting the revolutionary meaning of Marxism,

In Soviet times, morality appears in the form of a series of requirements for a person, which are devoid of persistence and which rather resemble situational prescriptions for a particular group of people or for society as a whole. We can say that this period is characterized by a general idea of morality, where it is accepted as defining and exhaustive for the person. At the same time, the heterogeneity of morality is lost. The nature of morality in Soviet times was the judgments of the commune, the precepts that came from under the ruling elite and which gave the right to appeal its provisions or to sharp criticism from society, which became a great misfortune. Thus, one «hand» of the Soviet government constantly issued slogans about goodness, conscience, honor and other virtues, and the other suppressed, punished severely for any manifestations of humanity that did not fit into the framework of its ideology. All the slogans were thus picked up by Soviet scientists, deployed within the permitted canons of «non-contradiction and coherence», but they all remained in the air because they no longer had a foundation on which to build morality for centuries. According to A. McIntyre, the ideology of Marxism itself thus suffered from «deadly moral impoverishment» [15, p. 4].