Main universal human values. Scientific electronic library

In recent years, technological projects aimed at modernizing various spheres of life have been actively initiated in our society. Unfortunately, they consider exclusively the technocratic component. At the same time, all these projects fall on the old soil of outdated social values. New technological initiatives need a new concept of social relations, a new system of values, which would become the necessary cement for strengthening the innovative basis of these projects.

Recently, such a term as “universal human values” has disappeared from public circulation. I would like to recall the existence of this cornerstone concept, because... it is precisely this that will give innovation a solid foundation and create, simultaneously with technical modernization, a fundamental spiritual framework designed for the long term.

Universal human values ​​are fundamental, universal guidelines and norms, moral values ​​that are the absolute standard for people of all cultures and eras.

The stunning variety of points of view on this issue includes ideas about universal human values, as a material, spiritual, and intellectual phenomenon. Sometimes universal human values ​​are confused with the values ​​of humanity - water, air, food, flora and fauna, minerals, energy sources, etc. Or with values ​​that have state (public) status - country security, economy, healthcare, education, everyday life and etc. Therefore, some consider “values” to be stable, unchanging, while others consider them to change depending on changes in economic, political, military and other conditions, on the policies of the ruling elite or party, on changes in the socio-political system, etc.

We will consider the OC - as a timeless phenomenon, as the original fundamental axioms, which can be referred to as: “principles”, “laws”, “installations”, “commandments”, “covenants”, “credos”, “creeds”, “canons” ", "spiritual axioms", etc. This is an absolute, enduring and highly significant need of both humanity as a whole and an individual, regardless of gender, race, citizenship, social status, etc.

In direct connection with the understanding of OC is the idea of ​​two options for social relations: “There are two understandings of society: either society is understood as nature, or society is understood as spirit. If society is nature, then the violence of the strong over the weak, the selection of the strong and the fit, the will to power, the domination of man over man, slavery and inequality, man is a wolf to man, is justified. If society is spirit, then the highest value of man, human rights, freedom, equality and brotherhood are affirmed... This is the difference between the Russian and German ideas, between Dostoevsky and Hegel, between L. Tolstoy and Nietzsche” (N. Berdyaev).

One of the central and most important OCs includes life of an individual person, acting as the ontological (existential) basis of all other values.

Another important universal value is creation. It is creativity that allows a person to feel and realize himself as a creator, the creator of something unprecedented, something that has never existed before. It elevates a person, makes his “I” not only especially significant, but also unique. This is an active value. The results of creativity capture the unity of the external and internal world of man. Both primitive man, a child, and a modern adult experience special, joyful emotions when they manage to discover, invent, invent, construct, create something new that does not exist in nature, or improve what has already been created previously.

Creativity manifests itself not only in utilitarian, cognitive, research activities, but also in the moral and especially brightly in the artistic and aesthetic sphere. Already in primitive society, people painted, sculpted, sculpted, carved, decorated their homes, household items, clothing, weapons, tools, objects of worship, and themselves; they sang, played music, danced, and performed scenes of various types. This suggests that, beautiful (beauty)– can be considered as the highest aesthetic value.

People have always felt the need to search truth. In the pre-scientific era, people’s understanding of truth was very multifaceted: it included experimental and sacred knowledge, legends, beliefs, omens, hopes, beliefs, etc. Its bearers were especially respected: old men, wise men, sorcerers, soothsayers, priests, philosophers, scientists. Far-sighted rulers cared about the development of science and education... That is why truth can be put on a par with other initial values. This is the highest intellectual value, the value of man as Homo sapiens.

In unity with the considered values, it is formed and acts sense of justice. Justice is ensuring the interests of people and respecting their dignity. The affirmation of justice generates satisfaction in people. While injustice causes resentment, indignation, anger, hatred, envy, vindictiveness, etc., it pushes us to fight for the restoration of justice. This suggests that justice is the most important moral and legal value.

A number of authors in this context interpret material wealth as the highest utilitarian value for man as a physical being. (But such an interpretation of material wealth clearly does not fit into the approach we have chosen).

Two “ranks” of opposites are lined up: “life - good (good) - creativity - truth - beautiful - justice" and "death - idleness - evil - lies - ugly - injustice." In the first chain of concepts, values ​​are interconnected by a certain correspondence, kinship, they are in unity with each other, and in the second, all anti-values ​​are in their unity, correspondence, kinship.

Some authors distinguish between biological man and social man. If the first is concerned with satisfying his needs - for food, clothing, housing, reproduction of his kind... Then the second, like a rosary, goes through the options: what is profitable and not profitable... He has no internal restrictions, he, as a rule, is deprived conscience. The third type of person is the spiritual person - this, to put it briefly, a man with a conscience. In other words, with the ability to distinguish between good and evil. OC can also include the following values: as the meaning of life, happiness, goodness, duty, responsibility, honor, dignity, faith, freedom, equality...

In the modern era of global change, absolute values ​​are of particular importance. goodness, beauty, truth and faith as the fundamental foundations of the corresponding forms of spiritual culture, presupposing harmony, measure, balance of the integral world of man and his constructive life affirmation in culture. Goodness, beauty, truth and faith mean commitment to absolute values, their search and acquisition.

The Biblical moral commandments are of enduring importance: the Old Testament Ten Commandments of Moses and the New Testament Sermon on the Mount of Jesus Christ.

In the history of every nation, every culture, there is changeable and permanent, temporary and timeless. One grows, flourishes, grows old and dies, while the other, in one form or another, passes from one form to another, without changing internally, but only externally. OC is something that remains eternal and unchanged throughout history, staying in the depths of universal human culture. This is a moral axiomatics, something indisputable and universal, those spiritual pillars that "hold" the world, like the physical constants on which all scientific knowledge rests.

The very phrase “universal human values” was introduced into use by M. S. Gorbachev during perestroika as a counterbalance to the “class morality” that had previously dominated in the USSR.

There is an opinion that following universal human values ​​contributes to the preservation of the human species. At the same time, a number of universal human values ​​can exist as archetypes.

Examples

Many basic laws that exist in almost all countries relate to universal human values ​​(for example, the prohibition of murder, theft, etc.).

Many liberal principles, such as freedom of speech and human rights, are universal human values.

Some religions consider their laws to be universal human values. For example, Christians include the Ten Commandments as such.

It is often argued that the so-called “golden rule of morality” - “Don’t do to others what you don’t want them to do to you” - can be an example of a universal value.

In preparing the material we used: Encyclopedia of Sociology, Wikipedia, articles by V. Efimov, V. Talanov and others.

HUMAN VALUES

GENERAL HUMAN VALUES are a system of axiological maxims, the content of which is not directly related to a specific historical period in the development of society or a specific ethnic tradition, but, filling each sociocultural tradition with its own specific meaning, is nevertheless reproduced in any type of culture as a value. Problem O.Ts. dramatically resumes in eras of social catastrophism: the predominance of destructive processes in politics, disintegration of social institutions, devaluation of moral values ​​and the search for civilized sociocultural choices. At the same time, the fundamental value at all times of human history has been life itself and the problem of its preservation and development in natural and cultural forms. The variety of approaches to the study of O.Ts. gives rise to a multiplicity of their classifications according to various criteria. In connection with the structure of being, natural (inorganic and organic nature, minerals) and cultural values ​​(freedom, creativity, love, communication, activity) are noted. According to the personality structure, values ​​are biopsychological (health) and spiritual. According to the forms of spiritual culture, values ​​are classified into moral (the meaning of life and happiness, goodness, duty, responsibility, conscience, honor, dignity), aesthetic (beautiful, sublime), religious (faith), scientific (truth), political (peace, justice, democracy), legal (law and order). In connection with the object-subject nature of the value relationship, one can note objective (results of human activity), subjective (attitudes, assessments, imperatives, norms, goals) values. In general, the polyphony of O.Ts. gives rise to the convention of their classification. Each historical era and specific ethnic group express themselves in a hierarchy of values ​​that determine what is socially acceptable. Value systems are in development and their time scales do not coincide with sociocultural reality. In the modern world, the moral and aesthetic values ​​of antiquity, the humanistic ideals of Christianity, the rationalism of the New Age, and the paradigm of non-violence of the 20th century are significant. and many more Dr. O.Ts. form value orientations as priorities for the sociocultural development of ethnic groups or individuals, fixed by social practice or human life experience. Among the latter, there are value orientations towards family, education, work, social activities, and other areas of human self-affirmation. In the modern era of global change, the absolute values ​​of goodness, beauty, truth and faith acquire special importance as the fundamental foundations of the corresponding forms of spiritual culture, presupposing harmony, measure, balance of the holistic world of man and his constructive life affirmation in culture. And, since the current sociocultural dimension is determined today not so much by existence as by its change, goodness, beauty, truth and faith mean not so much adherence to absolute values ​​as their search and acquisition. Among O.Ts. it is necessary to specifically highlight the moral values ​​that traditionally represent the generally significant in its relationship with the ethnonational and individual. In universal human morality, some common forms of community life are preserved, and the continuity of moral requirements associated with the simplest forms of human relationships is noted. The Biblical moral commandments are of enduring importance: the Old Testament Ten Commandments of Moses and the New Testament Sermon on the Mount of Jesus Christ. The form of presenting moral demands, associated with the ideals of humanism, justice and personal dignity, is also universal in morality. (see VALUE).

The latest philosophical dictionary. - Minsk: Book House. A. A. Gritsanov. 1999.

See what “HUMAN VALUES” are in other dictionaries:

A set of concepts included in the system of philosophy. teachings about man and components of the most important subject of study of axiology. O.ts. stand out among other values ​​in that they express the common interests of the human race, free from national,... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

Universal human values ​​are theoretically existing moral values, a system of axiological maxims, the content of which is not directly related to a specific historical period in the development of society or a specific ethnic tradition, ... ... Wikipedia

HUMAN VALUES- a system of axiological maxims, the content of which is not directly related to a specific historical period in the development of society or a specific ethnic tradition, but, in each sociocultural tradition, is filled with its own specific... ... Sociology: Encyclopedia

Human values- the concept of the existence of values ​​accepted by all people on the planet, by the entire human race, equally present in different cultures, illuminated by the centuries-old life of people. The sets of these values ​​are different. The most recognized includes... ... Fundamentals of spiritual culture (teacher's encyclopedic dictionary)

Universal values- the concept of cultural studies, characterizing a set of ideals, principles, moral norms, rights that have priority in the lives of people, regardless of their social status, nationality, religion, education, age, gender, etc... Man and Society: Culturology. Dictionary-reference book

MORAL VALUES- the concept of ethics, with the help of which the significance of social life for society and people is characterized. historical phenomena. In Ts.m. expresses a person’s actively interested attitude towards the world and himself, as well as the problematic nature of implementing current moral... ... Russian Sociological Encyclopedia

The meaning of human existence. Concepts of value. Types of values- briefly These questions are asked by many especially acutely due to the fact that sooner or later in the life of every person there comes a moment when he realizes that life is finite. To live and act actively, a person must have an idea of ​​the meaning of life... Small Thesaurus of World Philosophy

Not to be confused with Nazism. This term has other meanings, see Nationalism (meanings). The Awakening of Wales, Christopher Williams, 1911. The image of Venus as an allegory of the birth of a nation Nationalism ... Wikipedia

Not to be confused with the term "Nazism". The Awakening of Wales, Christopher Williams, 1911. The image of Venus as an allegory of the birth of a nation Nationalism (French nationalisme) is an ideology and policy direction, the basic principle of which is the thesis of a higher... ... Wikipedia

Books

• Russia and Europe, Nikolai Yakovlevich Danilevsky. The book presents the main work of the famous Russian thinker, the founder of the civilizational approach to history and new historiosophy, Russian sociologist, culturologist, publicist,...
• Russia and Europe, Danilevsky N.. The book presents the main work of the famous Russian thinker, founder of the civilizational approach to history and new historiosophy, Russian sociologist, cultural scientist, publicist,…

“Eternal” values

1. Worldview ideals, moral and legal norms based on goodness and reason, truth and beauty, peacefulness and philanthropy, hard work and solidarity, reflecting the historical spiritual experience of all humanity and creating conditions for the realization of universal human interests, for the full existence and development of each individual.

2. Well-being of loved ones, love, peace, freedom, respect.

3. Life, freedom, happiness, as well as the highest manifestations of human nature, revealed in his communication with his own kind and with the transcendental world.

4. “The golden rule of morality” - do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.

5. Truth, beauty, justice.

6. Peace, life of humanity.

7. Peace and friendship between peoples, individual rights and freedoms, social justice, human dignity, environmental and material well-being of people.

8. Moral requirements related to the ideals of humanism, justice and personal dignity.

9. Basic laws that exist in most countries (prohibition of murder, theft, etc.).

10. Religious commandments.

11. Life itself, the problem of its preservation and development in natural and cultural forms.

12. A system of axiological maxims, the content of which is not directly related to a specific historical period in the development of society or a specific ethnic tradition, but, filling each sociocultural tradition with its own specific meaning, is reproduced in any type of culture as values.

13. Values ​​that are important to all people and have universal significance.

14. Moral values ​​that exist theoretically and are the absolute standard for people of all cultures and eras.

Explanations:
Human values ​​are the most common. They express the common interests of the human race, inherent in the life of people of different historical eras, socio-economic structures, and as such act as an imperative for the development of human civilization. The universality and immutability of universal human values ​​reflects some common features of class, national, political, religious, ethnic and cultural affiliation.

Universal human values ​​represent a certain system of the most important material and spiritual values. The main elements of this system are: the natural and social world, moral principles, aesthetic and legal ideals, philosophical and religious ideas and other spiritual values. Universal values ​​combine the values ​​of social and individual life. They form value orientations (determining what is socially acceptable) as priorities for the sociocultural development of ethnic groups or individuals, fixed by social practice or a person’s life experience.
In connection with the object-subject nature of the value relationship, we can note the objective and subjective values ​​that are universal to mankind.

The idea of ​​the priority of universal human values ​​is the core of new political thinking, marking a transition in international politics from hostility, confrontation and forceful pressure to dialogue, compromise and cooperation.
Violation of universal human values ​​is considered a crime against humanity.

The problem of universal human values ​​is dramatically renewed in the era of social catastrophism: the predominance of destructive processes in politics, the disintegration of social institutions, the devaluation of moral values ​​and the search for civilized sociocultural choices. In New and Contemporary times, attempts have been made repeatedly to completely deny universal human values ​​or to pass off as such the values ​​of individual social groups, classes, peoples and civilizations.

Another opinion: Universal values ​​are abstractions that dictate to people norms of behavior that, in a given historical era, best meet the interests of a particular human community (family, class, ethnic group and, finally, humanity as a whole). When history provides the opportunity, each community seeks to impose its own values ​​on all other people, presenting them as “universal human values.”

Third opinion: the phrase “universal human values” is actively used in the manipulation of public opinion. It is argued that, despite the differences in national cultures, religions, living standards and development of the peoples of the Earth, there are certain values ​​that are the same for everyone, which should be followed by everyone without exception. This is a myth (fiction) in order to create an illusion in the understanding of humanity as a kind of monolithic organism with a common path of development for all peoples and ways to achieve their goals.
In the foreign policy of the United States and its satellites, talk about the defense of “universal human values” (democracy, protection of human rights, freedom, etc.) develops into open military and economic aggression against those countries and peoples who want to develop in their traditional way, different from the opinion of the world community.
There are no absolute universal human values. For example, even if we take such a basic right, spelled out in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as the right to life, then here you can find enough examples of various world cultures in which life is not an absolute value (in ancient times - most cultures of the East and many cultures West, in the modern world - cultures based on Hinduism).
In other words, the term “universal human values” is a euphemism that covers the West’s desire to impose a new world order and ensure the globalization of the economy and multiculturalism, which will ultimately erase all national differences and create a new race of universal human slaves serving for the benefit of the chosen ones (it should be noted that the representatives of the so-called golden billion will not differ from such slaves in any way).

The fourth opinion: the attitude to the concept varies from a complete denial of the existence of "Universal Values" to the postulation of a specific list of them. One of the intermediate positions is, for example, the idea that in the conditions of the modern world, where no community of people exists in isolation from others, some common system of values ​​is simply necessary for the peaceful coexistence of cultures.

NOU VPO "INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND LAW"

Faculty of Economics

Abstract on the topic:

"Human values:

illusion and reality."

Performed:

Naumova E.N.

Group VS-911-B

Moscow 2009

1. Introduction.

2. Universal values ​​in world religions:

a. In Confucianism;

b. In Hinduism;

c. In Christianity.

4. Conclusion.

1. Introduction.

Human values - This “a system of axiomatic maxims, the content of which is not directly related to a specific historical period in the development of society or a specific ethnic tradition, but, being filled in each socio-cultural tradition with its own specific meaning, is reproduced, nevertheless, in any type of culture as a value.”

The universal values ​​include human life (its preservation and development in natural and cultural forms).

There are values ​​(in connection with the structure of being):

-natural (ecological),

-cultural (freedom, law, education, creativity, communication).

According to the forms of spiritual culture, values ​​are classified into:

-moral (goodness, meaning of life, conscience, dignity,

responsibility),

-aesthetic (beautiful, sublime),

-religious (faith),

-scientific (truth),

-political (peace, justice),

-legal (human rights, law and order).

Each historical era and specific ethnic group express themselves in a hierarchy of values ​​that determine socially acceptable behavior. In the modern world, both the moral and aesthetic values ​​of antiquity, the humanistic ideals of Christianity, as well as the rationalism of the New Age and the paradigm of non-violence of the 20th century are significant. (M. Gandhi, M. L. King).

In the modern era of global change, goodness, beauty, truth and faith mean not so much adherence to absolute values ​​as their search and acquisition . In the kaleidoscope of events it is very difficult to understand what is happening, but it is even more difficult to understand what must take place. It is very easy to show that moral norms are conditioned by the historical sociocultural situation. But it is equally difficult to determine the proper direction of development of the situation. What is considered natural and what is not? It is very easy to show that any kind of decency leads to earthly failure, and bad qualities lead to material well-being. No statistics will help here: how to understand what is more in the world - good or evil? And what do we mean by good and evil? It is too easy to “show” the relativity of these concepts. It is all the more important to realize, understand and accept the absolute timeless significance of universal human values. These values ​​form the common part of the ethical prescriptions (commandments) of world religions: don't kill, don't steal, don't lie, don't take revenge, treat people well. These values ​​are clearly expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and other international documents recognized by many countries, including Russia.

2. Universal values ​​in world religions.

a. Confucianism.

Great Chinese thinker Kung Fu Tzu (in the Latin version - Confucius ) – founder Confucianism, a religious and philosophical doctrine that dominated throughout the subsequent history of China and largely shaped the entire Chinese civilization. The teachings of Confucius, who expressed his views orally, were recorded by his students in a book "Lun Yu" ("Conversations and Judgments"). Refusing to talk about incomprehensible and divine questions (about God, the structure of the world, etc.), the thinker devoted all his attention to the problems of the social structure and virtuous human behavior.

The topic of earthly evil worried all philosophers without exception. Confucianism talks about social evil, about the misfortunes that society endures. After all, if it is poor, then every individual member of it suffers, and, on the contrary, if a society prospers, then every person included in it is prosperous.

Evil, Confucius said, has no independent cause in the universe. Our world itself is not evil, because it is the embodiment of an absolutely good and highest pantheistic principle - Sky. Heaven has established an order filled with virtue, and Evil arises from the violation of order. People should help each other, but they are at enmity; they should observe justice, but they commit atrocities; To bring harmony into life, you need to see the heavenly order and follow it to the end.

What are the principles of the heavenly order of things? The most important thing is that everyone knows them well: Confucius emphasized that he was only reminding people of what they were familiar with from early childhood.

The basic principles or cardinal virtues established by Heaven are:

- generosity (“kuan”),

- respect for elders (“di”),

- filial piety (“xiao”),

- fidelity to duty (“and”),

- devotion to the sovereign (“zhong”).

If people act not by virtue of subjective desires, which contradict each other and split society, but by virtue of the age-old established order, the same for everyone, then both society and the state will become one indestructible, welded organism. “Be generous. Don't do to others what you don't want to do to yourself."- Confucius urged. This moral principle of the ancient philosopher was called in various cultures "golden rule of morality"

b. Hinduism.

According to the Hindu religion, universal human values ​​are “the original essence of the Vedas, revealed and described by seers, sages and saints of all peoples and times.” They bring light knowledge of the true nature of man (jnana), claim self-realization (Atmajnanu) and illuminate Supreme wisdom (Brahmajnana) so that every person and the entire human race comes to the realization of the highest goal - realization. They need to not only be studied, understood and comprehended, but accepted with the whole being and followed in everyday earthly life.

Basic Virtues of Hinduism:

- Satya (truth)

- Dharma (righteousness),

- Shanti (peace, tranquility),

- Prema (love)

- Ahimsa (non-violence).

There is a person who strictly followed these principles all his life, who by his very existence set an example of behavior for anyone. This person - Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi , which first all of India, and then the whole world called Mahatma Gandhi . "Mahatma" meaning in Hindi "great soul", "great teacher".

"The moral influence which Gandhi exercised upon thinking men,- Einstein wrote, - is much stronger than seems possible in our time with its excess of gross strength. We are grateful to fate for giving us such a brilliant contemporary, showing the way for future generations.”

Gandhi was familiar with the sacred books of Hinduism and Buddhism, and also read the Koran, Old and New Testaments of Christians. He was completely delighted by the words of Christ from the Sermon on the Mount: “And I tell you not to resist evil. And if someone hits you on your right cheek, offer him the other too. And whoever wants to sue you and take your shirt, give him your cloak too.” Gandhi was a prophet, but a special prophet. He not only sought the truth and improved himself morally, but also remained the leader of the Indian National Congress of Natal, organized and led the struggle of this discriminated minority for their rights, developed and for the first time tested in practice the theory satyagrahis - nonviolent political struggle.

Gandhi's four pillars of political theory and practice:

- satyagraha,

- ahimsa,

- Swadeshi,

- Swaraj.

Ahimsa- this is non-violence, the absence of anger and hatred. “Literally speaking, ahimsa means non-killing.” In fact, this means: do not offend anyone, do not allow a single cruel thought to enter your mind, even if it concerns a person whom you consider your enemy. He who follows this teaching has no enemies.". Swadeshi, literally translated as “domestic,” is a movement for the boycott of foreign goods. Swaraj, literally translated as “one’s own rule,” meant the gradual introduction of self-government in British India until the country gained complete independence.

The core of Gandhi's entire system of political views was satyagraha, a term derived from the words “satya” - truth and “agrah” - firmness, in the literary translation “to hold fast to the truth.” In the first years after the emergence of satyagraha, Gandhi explained its essence in words "passive resistance". Meanwhile, satyagraha “is not a weapon of the weak against the strong.” According to Gandhi, a satyagrahi - a person who has comprehended the essence of satyagraha and applies this method of struggle in practice - is certainly morally superior to his opponent, and therefore stronger.

Despite the fact that Mahatma Gandhi applied his methods mainly in political struggle, some moral principles of his teachings are worthy of emulation regardless of politics:

- “Keep ahimsa in mind and heart.”

- “Satyagraha will not win as long as hatred reigns. Therefore, every morning, as soon as you wake up, tell yourself: I have nothing to fear in the world except God; There is no hatred in my heart, I will not commit injustice; I will overcome lies with truth.”

- “Don’t judge others more harshly than you judge yourself.”

- " Admit your mistakes " .

In general, Gandhi’s system of religious, moral, philosophical and political views seems in some ways incomprehensibly wise, and in others childishly naive. But Gandhi proved in practice that political struggle based on the principles of honesty and self-sacrifice is possible in principle.

c. Christianity.

In the religion of Christianity, the Biblical moral commandments are of enduring importance: 10 commandments Moses and Sermon on the Mount Jesus.

Today, none of the Christian theosophists denies universal human values, but the question of their origin remains open. It sounds like this: are they given from above, from God, or are they of earthly origin? In philosophical language, the question sounds like this: universal human values ​​are rooted in transcendental sphere(in absolute) or relative immanent sphere current reality?

The transcendental sphere has one characteristic: it is invisible. It seems to be bad, since you can’t touch it. But if we take into account that the “transcendental thirst” of man (according to Christian anthropology) cannot be satisfied by anything finite (visible), then the absolute should not be visible (a visible absolute would be finite, and therefore not an absolute). Only if there is a common point of reference, a common criterion (one absolute) can we talk about the universality (universality) of moral requirements.

As history shows, this idea is the most difficult for humanity to assimilate - the idea of ​​the unity of the human race, solidarity, a unified system of ethical and universal values, respect for the human person. This general ethical minimum, necessary for the very existence of human society, is well known. This is the so-called natural morality, the maxim of which is expressed in what has been known since the time of Confucius "golden rule of morality", in virtues known since antiquity: courage, moderation, wisdom, justice. Ancient morality, like any natural morality, was normative in nature.

In the "Old Testament" the moral standard is strictly observed through God's chosen people in a pagan environment. There is nothing in Old Testament history that resembles modern human rights ( religious tolerance), there was a merciless war against idolatry. But still, in the “Old Testament” there were the beginnings of universal human ethics. There are often words " Truth" And " justice", and these concepts began to spread to strangers.

Christian ethics includes the achievements of both ancient and Old Testament ethics. The righteousness of the apostles was to surpass the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees. The idea of ​​natural morality is reflected in the statement of the apostle: “When the pagans, who do not have the law, do by nature what is lawful, then, not having the law, they are a law unto themselves. They show that the work of the law is written in their hearts, as their conscience and their thoughts testify.”(Rom. 2:14-15).

It is important to note that it is in the biblical Christian tradition that the unity of the human race is affirmed, originating from one source, the same ancestors (no matter how they are understood: literally or generally allegorically). Jesus Christ Himself gives the commandment : “As you want people to do to you, do so to them.”(Luke 6:31), which includes the long-known "golden rule of morality". But Christian ethics is not only normative, like natural ethics, it is paradoxical, which is clearly expressed in "Sermon on the Mount". You should love your enemies, give away your property, and not worry about tomorrow.

It would seem that these two ethical systems (natural and Christian) do not contradict each other. Christian ethics should, it seems, include the best achievements of universal human ethics and complement them with the boundless heights of Christian maximalism. The question arises: is not Christian ethics self-sufficient? This approach assumes an exclusive paradigm: either/or. If the gospel pearl is found, then everything else seems unnecessary.

Thus, it happens that people who profess Christianity often deny culture and universal human values, opposing them to the heights of the Christian ideal. They tend to create a subculture and do not feel responsible for the state and development of civil society. This situation is explained by several reasons.

religious reason: all natural sciences and secular culture are oriented towards this (earthly) life. Christianity is more oriented not towards this life, but towards the hereafter. With too strict a dualism between earthly and heavenly in the prospect of salvation on the other side, earthly culture loses its meaning. All that remains is asceticism and strict morality.

social reason: secular society in our era of narrow specializations has assigned a certain function to the church, which does not involve interference in culture, since culture is dealt with by other specialists.

philosophical reason: the absolutism of religious values ​​is opposed to all other values, as obviously “weaker” (too strict dualism of the earthly and the heavenly). Nothing can stand comparison with the absolute.

The degree of Christianization of society can be judged not only by attendance at churches, but also in relation to the weak: the elderly, children, disabled people, religious minorities and the smallest minority - an individual who may find himself defenseless before the state or any group. This is precisely the area where universal human values ​​coincide with Christian ones. Justice is both a universal concept and a Christian one. And the tool for realizing universal human values ​​is a legally formalized concept of human rights, focused, first of all, on protecting the weak (the strong will protect themselves anyway).

3. Universal human values ​​today.

In the modern world, there are two diametrically opposed points of view on the question of the existence of universal human values. First of which: there are no absolute universal values. Values ​​and a system of ethics are developed by an ethnic group in relation to its own society, based on the experience and nature of interaction of people within this community. Since the conditions of existence of different communities are different, it is incorrect to extend the ethical system of one community to the whole world. Each culture has its own scale of values ​​- the result of its living conditions and history, and therefore there are no universal human values ​​that are common to all cultures.

An example of ethical behavior among cannibals was eating the corpses of a defeated enemy after a battle, which action had a mystical meaning. Supporters of the above point of view believe that a cannibal cannot be blamed for such behavior.

Defenders another points of view appeal more to real situations of interaction and coexistence of different cultures. Since in the modern world no community of people (except, perhaps, a specially created reservation) exists in isolation from others, but, on the contrary, actively interacts with them, for the peaceful coexistence of cultures it is necessary to develop some common system of values, even if it did not exist a priori .

For the cannibal culture to coexist peacefully with the vegetarian culture, they need to develop some system of common values, otherwise coexistence will be impossible.

There are also third a point of view that follows from the first. Its adherents claim that this phrase is actively used to manipulate public opinion. Opponents of US foreign policy argue that in the foreign policy of America and its satellites, talk about the defense of “universal human values” (freedom, democracy, protection of human rights, etc.) often develops into open military and economic aggression against those countries and peoples who they want to develop in their own traditional way, different from the opinion of the world community. In other words, according to this point of view, the term “universal human values” is a euphemism that covers the West’s desire to impose a new world order and ensure the globalization of the economy and multiculturalism.

There are certain reasons for the emergence of such a point of view. European standards are being adopted throughout the planet. These are not only technical innovations, but also clothing, pop music, the English language, construction technologies, trends in art, etc. Including narrow practicality, drugs, the growth of consumer sentiment, the dominance of the principle - “don’t stop money from making money” and etc. In fact, what today is commonly called “universal human values” are, first of all, values ​​that were established by Euro-American civilization. Having undergone crises of varying intensity and consequences, these ideologies have become excellent soil on which a unified consumer society has grown in the West, and in Russia, is actively being formed. In such a society, of course, there is a place for such concepts as goodness, love, justice, but the main values ​​in it include other “virtues” that are important primarily for achieving material well-being and comfort. Spiritual values ​​become secondary

Another terrible feature of modern civilization is terror. Terrorist evil cannot be justified. But you can try to understand its reasons. Each of the tragedies is another episode of an intercivilizational war, in which on one side of the invisible front line there is Western, that is, American-European civilization, and on the other is that world, or rather, the most radical and extremist part of it, to which the values ​​of this civilization are alien.

Intercivilizational confrontations are not at all a distinctive feature of the present time. They have always existed. But the main difference between the modern “war of the worlds”, unfolding in the era of globalism, is that this confrontation is developing into a global one, that is, much larger and more dangerous. And the battlefield becomes the Earth. Will this completely abolish the universality of human values?.. Can we at least hope for a better outcome?.. It is impossible to make forecasts.

4. Conclusion.

What can we say in conclusion?

I believe that some universal human values ​​still exist, if only because all of humanity belongs to the same biological species. Each new stage in the development of mankind creates its own system of values ​​that most adequately corresponds to the conditions of its existence. However, it inherits the values ​​of previous eras, incorporating them into the new system of social relations. Universal human values ​​and ideals fixed in cultural universals ensure the survival and improvement of mankind. Human norms can be violated and in fact they are very often violated. There are plenty of examples that honest people turn out to be fools, that a career is made on lies, hypocrisy and impudence, that nobility leads to ruin, and meanness ensures wealth and honor. But the fact remains that, although it is easier for a thief and a scoundrel to live, and it is difficult and unprofitable to be decent, but, despite this, decency and nobility, kindness remain generally recognized spiritual values.

Bibliography:

1. Modern philosophical dictionary. - M., 1996.

2. Gusev D.A., “Great Philosophers” - M., 2005.

3. Hegumen Veniamin, “Christianity and universal values” - orthodoxia.org

4. Dymina E.V., "The world of values ​​and the problem of understanding reality" - www.ssu.samara.ru/%7Enauka/PHIL/phil.htm

5. Oleksa Pidlutsky, “Mahatma Gandhi. Barefoot winner of the empire" - www.zerkalo-nedeli.com/nn/razdel/574/3000

6. Wikipedia (free encyclopedia), “Universal human values” -

Sometimes in the literature the question is raised about innate values. Let’s say right away: only natural, natural data can be innate. needs of people. Values ​​are outside human consciousness, therefore they cannot be innate. For a different reason, but the same must be said about the value orientations of people: like any ideas, understanding, etc., they are all acquired. The process of origin, establishment, definition, formation, formation, modification, change of individual value orientations occurs throughout life, is carried out on the basis of the unity and interaction of the specifics of existing natural, social conditions of life of people and their individual characteristics on the basis of their practical, cognitive, evaluative and normative activities . Of course, this process is primarily influenced by the social environment, including training, education, media propaganda, art, communication with other people, etc. But this influence is uniquely refracted in each person through his own characteristics: the state of physical and psychological health, temperament, character traits, inclinations, abilities, inclinations, habits, conformist predispositions, likes, dislikes, interests, needs, intentions, desires and much more. Therefore, people develop (as V.A. Kuvakin calls them) anti-values, pseudo-values, and completely original, purely individual value orientations, and the awareness of perceived group-wide and universal human values ​​acquires a somewhat specific expression, unique nuances.

From here it is clear that any person can use values count almost anything, and arguing about many individual values ​​is completely useless (there is no arguing about such values ​​as “taste is not an issue”). But about universal human issues, one can and should both argue and substantiate them, especially since in this matter there is a lot that is far-fetched, unfounded, and unfounded.

Many authors consider certain moral (perhaps, more precisely, moral-religious?) principles and norms to be universal human values, meaning by them, among other things, the commandments of Moses. But it is known that these and similar commandments have never been and are not generally accepted and the absolute standard for everyone people and states.

Others argue that universal human values ​​were and are faith (apparently religious), democracy, law and order, justice, humanism, freedom, love, family, the meaning of life, duty, responsibility, honor, dignity, conscience, nobility, mercy, compassion and so on. There is euphoria, obvious utopianism, Manilov-like dreams, as the authors try, completely without evidence, to pass off private values ​​as universal values. But they are neither generally recognized nor common among people. Moreover, there were and are many misanthropes, chauvinists, misanthropes, biryuks, unscrupulous, dishonest people, militarists (aggressors), dictators, convinced bachelors, parasites, etc.

What, for example, do specific authors classify as universal human values? It must be said that they usually use the terms “universal values” and “absolute values”, and sometimes the term “highest values” as synonyms. But judge for yourself based on the ideas of a number of authors.

Thus, highlighting three stages in the development of philosophy (VII, VI centuries BC - XVI century AD; XVII century - 60s of the XIX century; 2nd half of the XIX century century - XXI century), G.P. Vyzhletsov states that their highest values ​​were, respectively, GOOD, HAPPINESS (including freedom “from”), FREEDOM (“for” or spiritual) [see: 12, pp. 63-65]. In our opinion, this is an obvious reduction (simplification). In addition, the same author calls faith, love and beauty the highest values ​​[see: ibid., p.24], as well as goodness, justice, peace, usefulness [see: ibid., p.25].

The most numerous set of values, divided into groups, is announced by A.O. Boronoev and A.O. Smirnov: “Recognition of personalities in us by fellow citizens, fellow tribesmen is associated with the identification of bearers of values ​​in us. Five of their groups are distinguished: socially-targeted (Holiness, Spirituality, Knowledge, Mastery, Deed, Glory, Power, Wealth); social-instrumental (Law, Freedom, Justice, Solidarity, Mercy); personal-instrumental (Life, Health, Strength, Dexterity, Beauty, Intelligence); subjectively targeted (Matter, Energy, Space); universal (Thinking Spirit, Society, Man)” [Cit. from: 20, p.16].

Many of the values ​​that are not attributed to universal human values ​​are included by other authors, as we will now see.

According to E.M. Udovichenko, “Basic (fundamental) values ​​usually include the so-called universal values: life and death, goodness, truth, beauty, love, the meaning of life, honor, nobility, dignity, freedom, the self-worth of each individual.” In addition, as essential, which “can be defined as values ​​from values,” the author names “the meaning of life, the attitude towards a person as a goal (personal self-worth), moral freedom” [see: ibid., p. 3].

Attribution of death to the number of values ​​(and even more so - universal) is, at least, very controversial. It cannot be a universal human value, because the vast majority of people had and still have a negative attitude towards it, are afraid of it, and do not want death for themselves.

B.L. looks more modest. Nazarov in listing values: “Human rights, like law in general, ... go back to the category of universal human values. ... Universal human values ​​are characterized by the concepts of absolute good and evil, beauty, etc.” .

According to D.A. Leontyev, “... universal, “eternal” values ​​(truth, beauty, justice)....”.

G.P. Vyzhletsov identifies the highest values ​​in accordance with the levels in the holistic structure of value in general (with the levels of “ideal”, “norm” and “significance”): faith, love, beauty; goodness, justice, peace and usefulness. In addition, he writes: “The main spiritual value that determines a person’s life in society and in the state is conscience” [see: ibid., p. 30].

V.V. Ilyin believes that “humanitarianism is the highest value of existence, capturing nobility in aspirations, essential and meaningful in life”, that “... the highest value of the social order is human development, measured by indicators - life expectancy, literacy..., purchasing power parity” and that “Ideals are the highest values...”.

Believing that the highest values ​​are not constant, A.K. Rychkov and B.L. Yashin, in relation to different eras for Russia, states: “Russia of Nicholas II: feudal-capitalist relations, the highest values ​​of society - Faith, Tsar and Fatherland. Soviet Russia: socialist relations, highest values ​​(at least declared) - democracy, social equality, communism. Modern Russia: capitalist relations, highest values ​​- freedom, democracy, material wealth."

In his two-hundred-page book, Yu.A. Schrader did not consider it necessary (or perhaps he simply turned out to be unable?) to give at least some definition, at least some definition of the concept of “value,” but nevertheless writes about a number of universal human values, including the fact that “ St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of two values ​​that should guide human behavior. The first value is the salvation of the soul and the achievement of the ability to contemplate God as the highest good. And the second value is the benefit of other people.” In addition, he declares honesty, decency, justice to be universal human values, originating from the Old Testament commandments, the salvation of the soul as an absolute value, freedom as one of the highest values, and the ability to find a reasonable compromise with people as a fundamental ethical value. The author does not explain or prove all these ideas, since he adheres to the orthodox theological point of view, believing that “man is created in the image and likeness of God,” his moral behavior and free choice are subordinate to God, that the highest value is God. .

The philosophy of the Russian religious renaissance, notes G.P. Vyzhletsov, “... revealed in universal human values ​​their spiritual content as the internal basis of human unity. Having seen the value principles of human existence not in the cognizing mind, albeit in the world, but in divine spirituality, Russian philosophers (from V.S. Solovyov to N.O. Lossky) showed the deep interconnection and organic unity of the great triad of the 20th century: Spirit - Freedom - Personality".

So what did we see? A unique variety of original opinions. Why does this happen?

Apparently, due to the significant inconsistency prevailing in the literature, and sometimes lack of clarity in the definition of the concept of “value” and in delimiting it from the concept of “value orientation”, such discord is obtained in the identification of universal (absolute, highest) values. In addition, philosophical views, political beliefs, religious beliefs or lack thereof, and the personal preferences of the authors also have an influence.

But the main reason for this disagreement is that the authors attribute certain phenomena to universal (absolute, highest) values ​​according to the principle “it seems so good to me (it seems)”, i.e. purely declarative, unsubstantiated, unfounded, without logically deducing them from the corresponding grounds.

But these thoughts of A.K. Rychkova and B.L. Yashin about the highest values, in our opinion, are both interesting and true: “in the value system of any person there are values ​​that he recognizes as higher values. For one person, the highest values ​​are God, faith and related religious values. For another, the highest value is the “golden calf”, material wealth, for the sake of which he is ready to deceive, meanness and even kill. For the third, the highest values ​​are Freedom, Justice and Democracy. For the fourth, this is a scientific truth, which for him is not only more valuable than friendship, but may be more valuable than his own life.” Yes, this is so, because, firstly, in this case we are definitely not talking about universal human values, but about individual ones, and, secondly, words A“for... a person the highest values ​​are” can be understood somehow, that we are talking about authentic values, as well as the fact that this person wrong something takes for highest values ​​(understanding, most likely, by “highest” - “the most important”).

Supporters of a number of philosophical teachings, declaring some values ​​absolute and supreme, “derive” this from the innate (a priori) nature of ideas or from the Universe, the World Spirit, God. It is completely unknown and incomprehensible where in what world, how TRUTH, GOOD, GOOD, etc. exist as such, how when a priori ideas crept into our consciousness or who introduced them into it. All this, like God, can be and is only a matter of faith, assumption, assumption, conjecture, therefore it is impossible to prove or justify all this. In relation to other values ​​that really and naturally exist, but which some authors call absolute and supreme, apparently they are affected by the political, moral and other beliefs and preferences of authors who are inclined to idealize them too much and exaggerate the place and role of certain values.

But the point is not this, but the question is, are the terms “absolute” and “supreme” suitable for characterizing values ​​and their types?

We showed above that the term “higher” (and therefore “average” and “lower”) is incorrect to refer to certain values. In our opinion, if we are to divide values ​​according to their place and role, then it is better to divide them into more And less socially or individually important, significant in clearly defined aspects or situations, circumstances.

What about absolute ones?

TRUTH, GOOD, GOOD... Where are they? "At all"? In general, they do not and cannot exist by themselves. They are always in relation to something, someone, they are always someone's, they are with people, society, humanity, they are in them, in their connections, relationships.

GOD... He is God insofar as there is a World, as it is believed, created and ruled by Him. There can be no God without relation to the World and with the World, and all arguments about God, His omnipotence, omniscience and other super-qualities, regardless of the World, completely lose their meaning.

So, as we have justified above, there are no absolute values, just as there are no absolute truths. But in universal human values ​​there is an absolute moment (moment!), which is what is in them - constant, stable, preserved in time and space and being in unity with their relative moment, i.e. with what is modified and specified in them.

At present, many domestic authors, authors of other CIS countries, in every way treat the ideals and norms of socialist and communist morality and praise the moral norms of the Orthodox religion in the propaganda demagogic declaration of tolerance. But, excuse me, let’s take the “Moral Code of the Builder of Communism.” No matter how utopian, adventurous the statement “the current generation of Soviet people will live under communism”, but out of the thirteen points (principles) of this code, ten do not at all contradict religion and the norms, ideals, principles of a democratic society itself:

Voluntary work for the benefit of society: he who does not work does not eat;

Everyone’s concern for the preservation and enhancement of public wealth;

High consciousness of public duty, intolerance to violations of public interests;

Collectivism and comradely mutual assistance: each for all, all for one;

Humane relations and mutual respect between people: man to man is a friend, comrade and brother;

Honesty and truthfulness, moral purity, simplicity and modesty in public and private life;

Mutual respect in the family, concern for raising children;

Irreconcilability to injustice, parasitism, dishonesty, careerism, money-grubbing;

Friendship and brotherhood of all peoples of the USSR, intolerance towards national and racial hostility;

Fraternal solidarity with the working people of all countries, with all peoples [see: 31, p. 411].

But the Holy Scripture is one thing, and another is the socio-political system established at the end of the 20th century in the vast majority of the former countries of the Socialist Commonwealth with the ideology of the ruling forces that profess, impose on society, and implement completely different moral and political principles, instilling through the media, educational institutions, literature, forms of entertainment, etc., in their countries the principles of private individualism, selfishness, elitism, permissiveness, nationalism, the pursuit of wealth, acquisitiveness, cutthroat competition, etc. And many religious figures are drawn into the new system and begin to serve its principles. So it turns out: part of the population (mostly mature and elderly) continue to live as adherents of previous values, another (mostly young people) accepted the system of principles of “wild bourgeois society” imposed “from above”, and the third part (the rest) is disoriented , in different versions, compiles values ​​from both systems.

At a meeting of the State Council on December 26, 2006, President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin especially noted: “The ideological vacuum created after the collapse of socialist ideology is being filled and it will definitely be filled. But it will be filled either with extremism, chauvinism, nationalism and national intolerance that destroys us, or with the active support of universal humanistic, universal values.”

Well, firstly, about the “crash” - this is clearly wishful thinking, because this ideology dominates in a number of countries and is state-owned (for example, in countries such as the PRC, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba). Secondly, despite all the attempts of Western propaganda, the official media of the Russian Federation, domestic clergy, former hidden enemies of Soviet power, all those “offended” by it, the mass of the adult population in today’s Russia, to one degree or another, prefers socialist ideology, having voted in the “Name” competition Russia" for the nominations of I.V. Stalin and V.I. Lenin, who out of 50 candidates received 3rd and 10th places, respectively. Thirdly, why such a tough alternative: either extremism, nationalism, or universal human values? Isn't there a "third"? For example, the “values” of the current masters of Russia, the “new Russians”, the newly-minted gentlemen: “all means are good for me”, “after us even a flood”, “patriotism is a fiction”, “my homeland is where I feel good”, etc. .? What about the propaganda on screens, on stages, in the media of the “values” of violence, sadism, debauchery, etc.? What about anti-tolerance in the relationships of ministers of different faiths towards each other? Etc.

a) Dogmas, commandments of the corresponding Holy Scripture (for example, the 10 commandments of Moses in Christianity);

b) one or another set of moral norms (including prohibitions, including the so-called “Golden Rule”);

c) a number of freedoms and individual rights.

The first is unconvincing, since the commandments do not coincide in different religions, moreover, they are not significant for non-believers and atheists. What if we take the factual side? How many thieves, robbers, rapists, seducers, lovers of other people's wives, users of prostitutes, envious people, children who hate their parents - who are also believers!

The second is also not suitable for the role of universal human values. Well, how many in the past were and are there now politicians, entrepreneurs, figures of great sports, art, etc., who sincerely adhered and now adhere to the “Golden Rule of Morality” and followed it?! What about other humane moral standards?! It is not without reason that it is believed that “politics is a dirty business.” But is entrepreneurship, big-time sports, modern art, journalism, and legal proceedings clean, always respectable in everything?

The third is nothing more than an ideal. Rights and freedoms were and are enjoyed as real, at best, only by those who had and have wealth and power.

As if justifying the legitimacy of the categorical declaration by different authors of certain phenomena, phenomena, objects as universal human values, G.P. Vyzhletsov writes: “...values ​​are impossible to prove logically and scientifically.” In our opinion, if axiology can claim to be scientific, then everything in it must be proven and justified.

So we will try to substantiate our point of view on general scientific values.

So, significant disagreement on the issue of universal human values ​​arises, first of all, from the insufficient definition of the meaning of the terms “universal” and “value”, and hence the content of the concept “universal value”.

According to logic as a science, before you reason about anything, argue, prove something, refute, criticize, etc., you need to find out the meaning of terms, phrases, expressions, the content of concepts that will be used in these thought processes. Let's try to find out and agree on what to call “universal human value” and what “universal human value” means. Next, we will reveal what the main types universal human values, why exactly they are such, what are the relationships and connections between them.

Since axiological activity directly depends on cognitive activity, values ​​cannot be that which is incomprehensible to our thinking, which is unreal, impossible, unfeasible, unattainable, unrealizable, imaginary, fantastic, utopian, chimerical, etc. ***

Regarding the meaning of the term “universal”, one must keep in mind at least three interrelated aspects:

1) universal (in the sense: universal) as something that concerns every normal person(from primitive man to modern man, from child to elderly);

2) universal as that which represents an absolute, eternal, enduring need and importance for humanity as a whole(i.e. as not summative, but holistic, systemic education);

3) universal as something that must certainly be the focus of attention each state and his multifaceted policies.

Taking these aspects into account, let us define the concept of “universal human values” as follows. Human values ​​- these are real *** for people, universal, enduring, consistent with legal laws and moral principles and norms, material and spiritual means, methods, conditions that can satisfy and satisfy human material and spiritual needs, and therefore are certainly necessary, desirable, and have eternal essential significance for each individual, for humanity in in general, for any state expressing the essential interests of the society of its country and its citizens.

Since such values ​​for all individuals, humanity, all states (societies), despite their interconnections, interactions still have significant features, we believe that it is necessary to distinguish three types universal human values: 1) universal human values; 2) the values ​​of humanity; 3) national values.

The starting point among them is the system of universal human values.