Hmm, yoda_daro claims that this is a test to determine their sexuality...
Instruction The frames of the film merge for us into continuous movement due to ...
Conscience is a kind of spiritual instinct that distinguishes good from evil faster and more clearly than the mind. Whoever follows the voice of conscience will not regret his actions.
In Holy Scripture, the conscience is also called the heart. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ likened the conscience to “ eye” (eye), through which a person sees his moral condition (Mt. 6:22). The Lord also likened the conscience " opponent,” which a person needs to come to terms with before they stand before the Judge (Mt. 5:25). This is last name points to distinguishing feature conscience: resist our bad deeds and intentions.
Our personal experience also convinces us that this inner voice, called conscience, is out of our control and expresses itself directly, apart from our desire. Just as we cannot convince ourselves that we are full when we are hungry, or that we are rested when we are tired, so we cannot convince ourselves that we have done well when our conscience tells us that we have done bad.
Conscience in Scripture
The will of God becomes known to man in two ways: firstly, through his own inner being and, secondly, through revelations or , communicated by God and the Lord Jesus Christ incarnate and written down by the prophets and apostles. The first way of communicating the will of God is called internal, or natural, and the second, external, or supernatural. First - psychological nature, and the second - historical.
The existence of an internal, or natural, moral law is clearly evidenced by St. Paul, saying: When the Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what is lawful, then having no law, they are their own law, for they show that the work of the law is written in their hearts (Rom. 2:14-15). And on the basis of this law, written in the hearts, written laws were formed among the pagan peoples and were drawn up, serving as a guide for public life and educating moral freedom in each individual person. Although these customs and laws were imperfect, it would still be worse without them, since it would have settled in human society complete arbitrariness and licentiousness. With a lack of care, the people fall like leaves, says the wise one (Prov. 11:14).
The presence of the natural law of morality in a person is told to everyone by his conscience. Having spoken of the work of the law written in the very nature of the Gentiles, the apostle adds: their conscience testifies(Rom. 2:15). Conscience has its foundation in all three known psychic powers: in knowledge, feeling and will. The very word conscience(to know, to know), as well as the usual expressions: conscience spoke, conscience recognizes or conscience rejects, show that there is an element of knowledge in conscience. Further, the feeling in the conscience of joy or sorrow, of peace or discontent and anxiety is akin to conscience with feeling. Finally, we express ourselves: conscience keeps me from this, or conscience forces me to do this, therefore, we relate conscience to will. Thus conscience is a "voice" (as is commonly expressed) arising from a peculiar combination of all three psychic faculties. It arises from the relation of a person's self-consciousness to self-determination and his activity.
Conscience is as important to action as logic is to thought. Or as a sense of rhyme, tact, etc. inherent in a person - for poetry, music, etc. Next, conscience is something primitive, innate to man, and not derivative, imposed. It always testifies to the likeness of man to God and the need to fulfill the commandments of God. When the tempter seduced Eve in Paradise, then immediately appeared on guard of her conscience, announcing the impermissibility of transgressing the commandment of God. Eva said: we can eat fruits from trees, only the fruits of a tree that is in the middle of paradise, God said, do not eat them and do not touch them, lest you die(Gen. 3:2-3). That is why the ancients spoke about conscience: est Deus in nobis, i.e. in conscience we feel not only the human, but also the higher-human, or divine, side. And according to the words of the wise Sirach, God laid his eye on the hearts of people (Sir. 17:7). This is the essence of the invincible power and greatness of conscience in relation to human intentions and actions. One cannot bargain with conscience, conspire, enter into deals: conscience is incorruptible. There is no need for reasoning and deductions to hear the decision of conscience: it speaks directly. As soon as a person thinks of doing something bad, conscience immediately comes to his post, warning him and threatening him. And after committing an evil deed, conscience immediately punishes and torments him. It is not in vain that they say that it is not the man who owns the conscience, but the conscience owns the man. Man is dependent on his conscience.
How does conscience work? Conscience is distinguished by its actions legislative and judging(punishing). The former is the scale for measuring our actions, and the latter is the result of this measurement. Ap. Paul calls the legislative conscience testifying about deeds (Gentiles; Rom. 2:15). And elsewhere: I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie, my conscience testifies to me in the Holy Spirit(Rom. 9:1). But in St. Scripture speaks more of a judging conscience. So Adam after the fall, Cain after fratricide, Joseph's brothers after revenge on the innocent - they all experience torment in their conscience. 2 Samuel speaks of broken heart, i.e. about the condemning conscience (ch.24:10). In the psalms of David more than once they speak of a similar state of man. The New Testament speaks of the scribes and Pharisees who brought a sinner to the Lord Savior that: they began to leave one by one, convicted by conscience(John 8:3). In the messages of Peter and Paul, in places about conscience, more is said about the conscience judging, i.e. rewarding or punishing.
What are the states of the human conscience? Since conscience is a natural voice heard in the very nature of man, as a result of this, it is in close connection with the whole state of the human soul, depending on its moral development - on education, lifestyle and history in general. This idea is also confirmed by St. Scripture. The history of Revelation has as its task the clearest revelation of the law, and, moreover, in accordance with man's own knowledge of it. Ap. Paul recognizes the gradual growth of moral wisdom in man and demands it when he says: Whoever feeds on milk is ignorant of the words of truth, because he is a baby; solid food is characteristic of the perfect, in whom the senses are accustomed by skill to distinguish between good and evil(Heb. 5:13-14); and further: And do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may know what is the will of God, which is good, acceptable, and perfect.(Rom. 12:2). The development and perfection of conscience depends both on the education of the mind and on the perfection of the will. Strict justice, in particular, the love of truth and the coordination of practical actions with theoretical knowledge - these are the main foundations of clarity, sharpness and liveliness of conscience (conscientiousness). And there are external aids to this: the instructions of the parents, the voice and example of the best part of society, and most importantly - the Holy. Scripture, clearly and in all purity revealing moral truths and justly denouncing human vices.
If conscience is dependent on general condition a person, mental and moral, formed under the influence of the environment, both an individual and entire nations, which is very often perverted, then for this reason the voice of conscience is heard different people quite different, sometimes contradictory. It is known from history that people sometimes commit the most cruel acts, even terrible crimes, referring to the voice of their conscience. Let us recall, for example, the Inquisition, the custom of pagan peoples to kill weakly born children and decrepit old people, and so on. Yes, and among us often one with a clear conscience does something from which the conscience of another is indignant. Finally, in the same person, conscience can speak differently at different times. From this it follows that the conscience is not manifested in the same way for everyone, that its voice can be true and untrue, both in varying degrees. That's why app. Paul in his epistle to the Corinthians speaks of a weak or deluded conscience, the conscience of idols, i.e. a conscience that recognizes idols as real powers (1 Cor. 8:7,13). Next, the opinion of those who think that a person’s conscience contains “a complete and organized moral law, the same and always equal content” cannot be accepted, and therefore, in cases of error and moral damage, he should only look at his conscience in order to understand his delusion, your perverted state and turn to a better path.
The history of the life of pagan peoples and their conversion to Christianity does not support this view. History shows both that not all peoples have the same code of commandments, and that when converting pagans to Christianity, the matter was not limited only to a reminder of the contents of their conscience. There was a difficult and lengthy work in the whole being of the pagan, a continuous and persistent influence on all his consciousness. That is why the struggle of the missionaries with pagan superstitions and customs is far from being easy, as it would be if this theory of conscience were true. But, nevertheless, this struggle is possible, it gives results, and the pagans are converted to Christianity. And this is a sign that the opportunity is open for all people to correct their conscience and be guided by its correct and pure instructions. Every person is the image and likeness of God.
Truth or fallacy, confidence or doubtfulness (probability) - these are the properties of the legislative conscience. We call the judging conscience calm or restless, peaceful or disturbing, comforting or painful. In the Holy In Scripture, it is called a good, pure, blameless conscience or evil, vicious, defiled, burned. Before the Jewish Sanhedrin, St. Paul testified that he lived with all good conscience before God until this day(Acts 23:1). Ap. Peter exhorts Christians to have a good conscience, so that those who reproach your good walk in Christ may be ashamed by the things for which you are reviled as evildoers.(1 Pet. 3:16 and 21). In the Epistle to the Hebrews, Rev. Paul expresses confidence that we have a good conscience, because we want to behave honestly in everything(13:18). He commands to have sacrament in a clear conscience(1 Tim. 3:9). And I myself strive to have an undefiled conscience before God and people(Acts 24:16), he says of himself. In the letter to the Hebrews, the apostle calls the conscience evil or vicious when he calls proceed with a sincere heart, with full faith, sprinkling [the Blood of Christ], cleansing the heart from an evil conscience. (Heb. 10:22). In his epistle to Titus, the apostle calls the conscience "defiled" when he speaks of people: their mind and conscience are defiled. They say that they know God, but by deeds they deny, being vile and rebellious and incapable of any good deed.(Titus 1:15). burned but in conscience the apostle calls those false verbalists through which in the last times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and teachings of demons(1 Tim. 4:1-2). Burning signifies here the painful consciousness of guilt.
According to the strength or energy, the conscience is called resolute or scrupulous. It is akin to a suspicious conscience. It is characteristic of people who are prone to despondency and do not trust the means of cleansing from sins. Under the influence of passions and the noise of the world, conscience is often hard to hear to a person and becomes muffled. If you often drown out the voice of conscience, then it becomes quieter, the conscience gets sick, dies, and such a process ends with the death of conscience, i.e. a state of dishonesty.
But, speaking of the state of conscience, we do not understand the absence of the punitive power of conscience in a person, but only the absence of conscience, i.e. the trampling of all divine and human laws and rights, the withering away of every moral feeling. Of course, the storms of passions and the noise of this world can drown out the punitive voice of conscience. But even in this case, the judging conscience is expressed in a person. It then manifests itself in secret despondency, melancholy, melancholy, in a state of hopelessness. And when the passions and noise of the world subside (which happens throughout life, but especially before death), then an evil conscience falls upon a person with all its fury. It then produces anxiety and timidity in a person, and an agonizing expectation of a future reward. Cain, Saul, Judas, Orestes can serve as models. So conscience is either a comforter or a tormentor.
We have given all the excerpts from the Holy Scriptures relating to human conscience. It remains to point out only one place in the message of St. Paul to the Corinthians; it reads like this: I mean conscience, not my own, but another; for why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience? (1 Cor. 10:29). In these words, conscience is presented as an individual instance: this means that each person has a conscience only for himself. It follows from this that I must beware of raising the voice of my conscience to the level of the law for others, and thus injure my conscience. I must treat both my own conscience and the conscience of others with attention and condescension.
The nature of conscience
Conscience is the universal moral law
The presence of conscience testifies to the fact that indeed, as the story goes, God, already at the very creation of man, inscribed in the depths of his soul His image and likeness(Gen. 1:26). Therefore, it is customary to call conscience the voice of God in man. Being a moral law written directly on the heart of a person, it acts in all people regardless of their age, race, upbringing and level of development.
Scholars (anthropologists) who study the manners and customs of backward tribes and peoples testify that so far not a single tribe, even the most savage, has been found that would be alien to one or another concept of morally good and evil. In addition, many tribes not only highly value goodness and abhor evil, but for the most part agree in their views on the essence of both. Many, even savage tribes, stand as high in their concepts of good and evil as the most developed and cultured peoples. Even among those tribes in which deeds are raised to the degree of virtue, disapproving from the prevailing point of view, in everything else related to moral concepts, complete agreement with the views of all people is noticed.
About the actions of the internal moral law in people St. apostle Pavel in the first chapters of his epistle to the Romans. The apostle reproaches the Jews that, knowing the written Divine law, they often violate it, while the pagans “not having(written) law, by nature they do what is lawful ... They show(this) that the work of the law is written in their hearts, as evidenced by their consciences and thoughts, which now accuse, now justify one another”(Rom. 2:15). App here. Paul explains how this law of conscience alternately rewards and punishes a person. So, every person, whoever he is, Jew or Gentile, feels peace, joy and satisfaction when he does good, and, on the contrary, feels anxiety, sorrow and oppression when he does evil. Moreover, even the pagans, when they do evil or indulge in debauchery, know from an inner feeling that God's punishment will follow for these actions (Rom. 1:32). At the coming terrible judgment, God will judge people not only according to their faith, but also according to the testimony of their conscience. Therefore, as teaches ap. Paul, and the Gentiles can be saved if their conscience testifies before God of their virtuous life.
Conscience has great sensitivity to good and evil. If man had not been corrupted by sin, he would not need a written law. Conscience could correctly guide all his actions. The need for a written law arose after the fall, when a person, darkened by passions, no longer clearly hears the voice of his conscience. But essentially, both the written law and the internal law of conscience say the same thing: “as you want people to do to you, do to them”(Mt. 7:12).
In daily relationships with people, we subconsciously lose more of a person's conscience than written laws and rules. After all, you can’t keep track of any crime, and sometimes unrighteous judges have a law - “what was the drawbar: where you turned, it went there.” Conscience contains within itself the eternal and unchanging law of God. Therefore, normal relationships between people are possible only as long as people have not lost their conscience.
About maintaining the purity of conscience
“Keep your heart above all things, for out of it are the fountains of life”(Proverbs 4:23). With these words Holy Bible urges a person to protect his moral purity.
But what about a sinful person who has stained his conscience; is he forever doomed? Fortunately not! The great advantage of Christianity over other religions is that it opens the way and provides the means to fullcleansing conscience.
This path is to repentantly cast down your sins before the mercy of God with a sincere intention to change your life for the better. God forgives us for the sake of His Only Begotten Son, who on the cross offered atonement for our sins. In the sacrament, and then in the sacraments of confession and communion, God completely cleanses the conscience of a person “from dead works” (Heb. 9:14). That's why it's great importance gives these sacraments.
In addition, the Church of Christ possesses that grace-filled power that makes it possible for conscience to improve in sensitivity and clarity of manifestations. “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God”. Through a clear conscience, God's light begins to act, which guides the thoughts, words and actions of a person. In this grace-filled illumination, man becomes an instrument of God's Providence. He not only saves himself and improves spiritually, but contributes to the salvation of people who associate with him (let us remember Saints Seraphim of Sarov, John of Kronstadt, Elder Ambrose of Optina and other righteous people).
Finally, a clear conscience is the source of inner joy. People with a pure heart are calm, friendly and benevolent. People with a pure heart already in this life are looking forward to the bliss of the Kingdom!
“Not the greatness of power,” says St. John Chrysostom, - “not a lot of money, not the vastness of power, not a bodily fortress, not a luxurious table, not magnificent clothes, not other human advantages bring complacency and joy; but this happens only as a fruit of spiritual well-being and a good conscience.”
What is remorse?
Committing a sin for the first time, a person feels a certain [internal] conviction, experiences. Having committed the same sin again, he experiences less conviction, and if he. is inattentive and continues to sin, then his conscience hardens.
The devil often finds an excuse for sins, and instead of confessing: “I did this to trample my conscience,” she justifies herself: “I did this so that the Elder would not be upset.” He turns the tuning knob to a different frequency so we don't see his wrongdoing. One woman, having come to confession, sobbed inconsolably and repeated the same phrase: “I didn’t want to kill her!” “Listen,” her confessor began to reassure her, “if you have repentance, then God has the forgiveness of sin. After all, He forgave the repentant David.”
Joys cover sin, drive it deeper, but it continues to work from within. Thus, a person tramples on his conscience and therefore begins to harden, and his heart is slowly salted. And then the devil finds an excuse for him in everything: “This is a trifling matter, but this is a natural thing ...” However, such a person does not have peace, because the frustration driven into the depths does not stop. He feels uneasy in himself, has no inner world and silence. He lives with incessant torment, suffers and cannot understand what is the reason for all this, because his sins are covered from above, driven deep. Such a person does not understand that he is suffering because he has committed a sin.
Conscience in psychology
Psychology deals with the study of the properties of conscience and its relationship with other mental abilities of a person. Psychology tries to establish two points: a) Is conscience natural property the person with whom he is born, or is it the fruit of upbringing and is conditioned by the living conditions in which a person is formed? and b) Is conscience a manifestation of the mind, feelings or will of a person, or is it an independent force?
Careful observation of the presence of conscience in a person convinces us that conscience is not the fruit of education or the physical instincts of a person, but has a higher, inexplicable origin.
For example, children show conscience before any upbringing by adults. If physical instincts dictated conscience, then conscience would induce people to do what is beneficial and pleasant for them. However, conscience very often compels a person to do exactly what is unprofitable and unpleasant for him. No matter how the wicked enjoy with impunity and no matter how good, praiseworthy people suffer in this temporary life, conscience tells everyone that there is a higher justice. Sooner or later everyone will be rewarded for their deeds. That is why for many people the most convincing argument in favor of the existence of God and the immortality of the soul is the presence in man of the voice of conscience. 
As for the relationship of conscience with other human forces, with his mind, feeling and will, we see that conscience not only tells a person about what is in itself good or bad in a moral sense, but also obliges he will certainly do good and avoid doing bad, accompanying good actions with a feeling of joy and satisfaction, and vicious actions with a feeling of shame, fear, and mental anguish. In these manifestations of conscience, cognitive, sensual and volitional sides are revealed.
Of course, reason alone cannot consider some actions as morally good and others as morally bad. It tends to find one or another of our and other people's actions either smart or stupid, expedient or inexpedient, profitable or unprofitable, and nothing more. Meanwhile, something prompts the mind to oppose the most, sometimes advantageous, opportunities to good actions, condemn the former and approve the latter. He sees in some human actions not only a benefit or miscalculation, like mathematical calculations, but gives a moral assessment of actions. Does it not follow from this that the conscience acts on the mind with the help of moral arguments, acting, in essence, independently of it?
Turning to the volitional side of the manifestations of conscience, we observe that the will itself is the ability of a person to desire something, but this ability does not command a person what to do. The human will, as far as we know it in ourselves and in other people, very often struggles with the demands of the moral law and struggles to break free from the fetters that constrain it. If the volitional manifestation of conscience were only the exercise of human will, then in this case there would be no such struggle. Meanwhile, the requirements of morality certainly control our will. She may not fulfill these requirements, being free, but she cannot renounce them either. However, the very non-fulfillment by the will of the requirements of conscience does not go unpunished for her.
Finally, the sensuous side of conscience cannot be regarded as merely the sensuous faculty of the human heart. The heart craves pleasant sensations and avoids unpleasant ones. Meanwhile, violation of the requirements of morality is often associated with strong mental anguish that tears apart the human heart, from which we cannot get rid of, no matter how much we wish and try. Undoubtedly, the sensuous faculty of conscience cannot be regarded as a manifestation of ordinary sensibility.
Penance: Medicine for a sick conscience
Films about conscience:
The account is non-evening. From 17 September. Faith and conscience
About conscience
How to wake up your conscience?
category of ethics, embracing the problems of morality. self-control of the individual, the ability of a person to independently formulate moral prescriptions for himself, demand their fulfillment from himself and evaluate his actions. In other Greek. mythology S. gets fantastic. the image in the form of an image of the Erinyes, the goddesses of damnation, revenge and punishment, pursuing and punishing criminals, but acting as a benefactor (eumenides) in relation to the repentant. In ethics, the problem of personal S. was first posed by Socrates, who considered him the source of morality. judgments of a person, his self-knowledge (ancient Greek ??????????, like Latin conscientia, means both S. and awareness). In this form, Socrates advocated the liberation of the individual from the unconditional power over him of society. and tribal traditions. However, only in modern times, the category of S. acquires great importance in ethics, which reflected the process of liberation of the individual from feudal estates, guilds and churches. regulation during the development of bourgeois. relations. The issue of personal S. is one of the focus. in the ideology of the Reformation (Luther's idea that the voice of God is present in the minds of every believer and guides them regardless of the church). Materialist philosophers of the 17th–18th centuries (Locke, Spinoza, Hobbes, and other materialists of the 18th century), denying the innate character of socialism, draw attention to its dependence on societies. upbringing, living conditions and interests of the individual. Limiting themselves to stating this dependence, they, as a rule, come to a relativistic interpretation of S. Locke, for example, says that "... if we take a look at people as they are, we will see that in one place some feel remorse conscience due to the commission or non-commission of acts that others elsewhere consider worthy "(Izbr. filos. proizv., v. 1, M., 1960, p. 99). A similar idea is expressed by Holbach (see System of Nature, Moscow, 1940, p. 140). The relativistic interpretation of S., which has an anti-feud among the enlighteners. and anticleric. orientation, proclaiming the freedom of personal S., nevertheless deprives in means. to the extent of S. of her personal, "internal" nature, makes her an object of influence of the state and society as a whole (although the educators do not deny that S. is the prerogative of the individual. Holbach defines S. as an assessment, to-ruyu "... we in our own soul give to our actions" - "Pocket Theology", M., 1959, p. 172). In contrast, the idealistic ethics developed the idea of an autonomous personality, which determines morality regardless of society. law. Thus, Rousseau believes that the laws of virtue "are written in the hearts of all" and that they are sufficient for knowledge. ..go deep into yourself and, in the quiet of passions, listen to the voice of your conscience" ("On the Influence of Sciences on Morals", St. Petersburg, 1908, p. 56). Kant considers a truly moral law for a rational being only that which it gives to itself The idea of personal autonomy ultimately led to an a priori interpretation of S. According to Kant, S. is not something acquired. to which the only criterion of morality is the S. of the "pure I", and the subordination of C. L. to external authority is shamelessness. Subsequently, this individualistic interpretation of S. was taken to the extreme in existentialism, in the ethical concept of which is denied the universal character of the moral law: for example, Sartre considers the only criterion of morality to be the following of an "absolutely free" individual plan, the rejection of a person's "bad belief" in the existence of a. l. objective criteria. The tivist understanding of S. was already given by Hegel, who at the same time showed the contradictory nature of S. S. t. sp. Hegel, S. "has its truth in the immediate certainty of itself", "determines, based on itself." But this S.'s self-reliance entails "the arbitrariness of an individual", which can "give ... its conscientiousness" to any content. Therefore, Hegel points out, S. acquires its reality only in “universal self-consciousness” thanks to the “general environment” (society) in which a person is located (see Soch., vol. 4, M., 1959, p. 339– 52). However, recognizing the priority of societies. consciousness over the personal, Hegel interprets it objectively and idealistically, as the embodiment of the abs. spirit, but its immediate. considers religion to be an expression in the mind of the individual: “So, conscience in the greatness of its superiority over a certain law and any content of duty ... is a moral genius that knows that the inner voice of its immediate knowledge is the voice of the divine ... This lonely worship is at the same time time is essentially the worship of the community ... " (ibid., pp. 351-52). Feuerbach finds the materialistic an explanation for the fact that S. appears to a person as the voice of his inner self and at the same time as a voice coming from outside, entering into an argument with a person and condemning his actions. He calls S. the "other I" of man, but points out that this alter ego does not come from God and does not arise "by a miraculous way of spontaneous generation." "For, as belonging to this community, as a member of this tribe, this people, this epoch, I do not possess in my conscience any special or other criminal statute. .. I reproach myself only for what the other reproaches me ... or at least I could reproach me if I knew about my actions or if I myself became the object of an action worthy of reproach "(Selected Philosophical Prod., t 1, M., 1955, p. 630). The Marxist understanding of S. reveals its social nature and shows its determinism by the conditions of a person’s life activity and his ideological and social position. “A republican has a different conscience than a royalist, a possessor - different than for the poor, for the thinker - different than for the one who is incapable of thinking "(Marx K., see Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 6, p. 140) Ultimately, the sources of conflicts in personal socialism should be sought in social contradictions that in one way or another affect the individual and are reflected in his consciousness, contradictions between the interests of different classes, between social and personal interests, between the reflection of sociohistorical necessity in the will of societies. institutions and understanding of the private person put before the individual the need for his own. ora, alternatives to which constitute the problem of his personal self. It is in this sense that Lenin’s instruction should be understood that “the idea of determinism, establishing the necessity of human actions, in no way destroys either the mind, conscience of a person, or the assessment of his actions” (Soch. , vol. 1, p. 142). Marxism does not deny the specifically personal character of socialism; it only reveals its content: the higher the measure of societies. development of the individual, her social activity and consciousness, the greater the role played by S. in her life. The conditions for this development of the individual are the elimination of class-antagonistic. relations in society and then the development of the communist. relations, as they are approved, legal coercion will gradually give way to morals. influence, and this influence itself will increasingly coincide with the commands of personal S. and therefore, in the overwhelming majority of cases, will be carried out through personal awareness by the individual. "...At human relations punishment will in fact be nothing more than a sentence that the guilty pronounces on himself ... In other people, on the contrary, he will meet natural saviors from the punishment that he imposed on himself..." (K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 2, p. 197). Lit.: Great Definition
Incomplete definition ↓
In our constantly changing world, there are fundamental concepts, to lose which means to lose yourself ... One of these eternal and unchanging concepts is our conscience.
What kind of quality of the soul is this, deep, pure, eternal, called conscience? Wikipedia says that this concept denotes a person's ability to moral self-control; an inner voice that dictates to a person how to and what not to do. This spiritual quality helps to connect the mind and emotions together, and is expressed in the form of emotional experience.
What is conscience? The definition found in the official literature is somewhat dry for such a deep moral phenomenon, isn't it?
From the point of view of psychology
Many well-known psychologists in their works have repeatedly addressed the topic of morality. So, Eric Berne believed that there are three ego-states of a person:
- Adult.
- Parent.
- Child.
The adult is responsible for logical thinking and mind; The child is for interest, research and entertainment, but the Parent ... The Parent is the voice of conscience, the moral principle of a person.
Some psychologists call the feeling of guilt innate in a person, some believe that morality is part of the mind, and someone considers it a derivative of the development of civilization.
So this is a fundamental concept, interesting and complex. This is a sense of moral responsibility for one's own behavior and everything that happens in the human world.
The meaning of the word "conscience", which various official sources offer us, is a boring thing. And how to clarify the definition of this abstract psychological term in simple terms?
The version of a cheerful ten-year-old girl who recently read Pinocchio is very interesting. In her opinion, conscience is Jimmy's cricket, which you accidentally swallowed, so it got stuck in your head ... As you can see, there are many versions, there are even quite funny ones, but only the person himself can answer what morality and morality mean specifically for him. ..
Related concepts and phrases
Do not confuse remorse and shame. They have the following important differences:
- Shame is a public phenomenon, while guilt is deeply personal.
- Remorse of conscience appears as a result of developed moral responsibility, and shame is the result of the influence of society.
- Guilt is a condemnation of one's act, and shame is a condemnation of one's personality.
And what then is called "clear conscience"? According to psychologists, a feeling of a clear conscience arises when a person is confident in his complete and unconditional sinlessness. It is here that such a problem as the relativity of moral concepts appears. What is normal for one person may not let another sleep well at night. Indeed, morality is a more than complicated thing ...
And how is it - to live according to conscience, so that the soul is always pure? The answer is simple. You should try to follow the moral code recognized in the place where you live. Sounds cynical? Alas. As already mentioned, morality is a very relative thing ...
To live according to conscience means to observe the internal laws of honor, a code that is terrible to break, otherwise the moral support under your feet will disappear and you will fall into lawlessness and emptiness ...
In this case, there is only one advice: listen to your heart and hope that it will help you make right choice. Author: Irina Shumilova
CONSCIENCE
Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .
In other Greek. mythology S. gets fantastic. the image in the form of an image of the Erinyes, the goddesses of damnation, revenge and punishment, pursuing and punishing criminals, but acting as a benefactor (eumenides) in relation to the repentant. In ethics, the problem of personal S. was first posed by Socrates, who considered him the source of morality. judgments of his person (ancient Greek συνείδησις, like Latin conscientia, means both S. and awareness). In this form, Socrates advocated the liberation of the individual from the unconditional power over him of society. and tribal traditions. However, only at the time of S. acquires a great deal in ethics, which reflected the liberation of the individual from the feudal estates, guilds and churches. regulation during the development of bourgeois. relations. The issue of personal S. is one of the focus. in the ideology of the Reformation (Luther's idea that the voice of God is present in the minds of every believer and guides them regardless of the church). Materialist philosophers of the 17th–18th centuries (Locke, Spinoza, Hobbes, and other materialists of the 18th century), denying innate S., turn to its dependence on societies. upbringing, living conditions and interests of the individual. Limiting themselves to stating this dependence, they, like , come to a relativistic interpretation of S. Locke, for example, says that "... if we take a look at people as they are, we will see that in one place some feel pangs of conscience due to the commission or non-commission of acts that others elsewhere consider worthy "(Izbr. filos. proizv., v. 1, M., 1960, p. 99). Holbach expresses a similar one (see "The System of Nature", M., 1940, p. 140). The relativistic interpretation of S., which has an anti-feud among the enlighteners. and anticleric. orientation, proclaiming the freedom of personal S., nevertheless deprives in means. to the extent of S. of her personal, "internal" nature, makes her an object of influence of the state and society as a whole (although the educators do not deny that S. is the prerogative of the individual. Holbach defines S. as an assessment, to-ruyu "... we in our own soul give to our actions "-" Pocket ", M., 1959, p. 172).
In this idealistic developed the idea of an autonomous personality, which, regardless of society, determines morals. law. So, Rousseau believes that the laws of virtue are "written in the hearts of everyone" and to know them it is enough "... to delve into oneself and in the quiet of passions listen to the voice of one's conscience" ("On the influence of sciences on", St. Petersburg, 1908, p. 56). Kant considers truly morals. law for a rational being is only that which gives to itself. The idea of individual autonomy eventually led to a priori. interpretation of S. According to Kant, S. is not something acquired. Everyone, as a moral being, has a conscience from birth. The idea of individual autonomy was expressed even more sharply by Fichte, with t. sp. to-rogo unities. the criterion of morality is the S. "pure I", and the subordination to. external authority - dishonesty. Subsequently, this individualistic S.'s interpretation was taken to the extreme in existentialism, in ethical. the concept of which the universal nature of morals is denied. law: for example, Sartre considers unity. criterion of morality "absolutely free" individual plan, the refusal of a person from "bad faith" in c.-l. objective criteria.
Criticism of the relativistic and subjectivist understanding of S. was already given by Hegel, who at the same time showed the contradictory nature of S. S. t. sp. Hegel, S. "has its truth in the immediate certainty of itself", "determines, based on itself." But this S.'s self-reliance entails an "individual person" who can "give ... his conscientiousness" to any content. Therefore, Hegel points out, S. acquires its own only in "universal self-consciousness" thanks to the "general environment" (society), in which a person is located (see Works, vol. 4, M., 1959, pp. 339–52 ). However, recognizing the priority of societies. consciousness over the personal, Hegel interprets it objectively and idealistically, as the embodiment of the abs. spirit, but its immediate. considers religion to be an expression in the mind of the individual: "So, conscience in the greatness of its superiority over a certain law and any content of duty ... is moral, knowing that the inner voice of its immediate knowledge is the voice of the divine ... This lonely worship is at the same time in essence, the worship of the community ... " (ibid., pp. 351-52).
Feuerbach finds the materialistic the fact that S. appears to a person as the voice of his inner self and at the same time as a voice coming from outside, entering into and condemning his actions with a person. He calls S. the "other I" of man, but points out that this alter does not come from God and does not arise "by a miraculous way of spontaneous generation." "For, as belonging to this community, as a member of this tribe, this people, this epoch, I do not possess in my conscience any special and other criminal statute ... I reproach myself only for what he reproaches me ... or at least he could reproach me if he knew about my actions or he himself became the object of an action worthy of reproach "(Izbr. filos. prod., vol. 1, M., 1955, p. 630).
The Marxist understanding of socialism reveals its social nature and shows it as the conditions for the vital activity of man and his ideological societies. position. “A republican has a different conscience than a royalist, a possessor has a different conscience than a have-not, a thinking person has a different conscience than one who is incapable of thinking” (Marx K., see Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 6, p. 140). The sources of personal S.'s collisions should be sought, ultimately, in social contradictions that affect the individual in one way or another and are reflected in his consciousness. Contradictions between the interests of different classes, between societies. and personal interests, between the reflection of socio-historical. the need for the will of societies. institutions and understanding of the private person put before the individual own. choice, alternatives to which constitute the problem of his personal S. It is in this sense that Lenin’s instruction should be understood that “the idea of determinism, establishing the necessity of human actions, in no way destroys either the mind, conscience of a person, or the assessment of his actions” (Soch. , vol. 1, p. 142). Marxism does not deny the specifically personal nature of socialism; it only reveals its content: the higher the society. development of the individual, her social activity and consciousness, the greater the role played by S. in her life. The conditions for this development of the individual are the elimination of class-antagonistic. relations in society and then communist. relations, as they are approved, legal coercion will gradually give way to morals. influence, and this influence itself will increasingly coincide with the commands of personal S. and therefore, in the overwhelming majority of cases, will be carried out through personal awareness by the individual. "... In human relations, in fact, it will be nothing more than a sentence that the delinquent pronounces on himself ... In other people, on the contrary, he will meet natural saviors from the punishment that he himself imposed on himself ... "(Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 2, p. 197).
Lit.: Lenin V.I., On communist morality, M., 1961; Kant I., Critique of practical reason, St. Petersburg, 1908; his, Fundamentals to the metaphysics of morals, M., 1912; Karring G., S. in the light of history, trans. from German, St. Petersburg, 1909; Kropotkin P. A., Ethics, part 1, P.–M., 1922; Hegel G. V. F., Phenomenology of Spirit, Soch., vol. 4, M., 1959, p. 339–61; his own, Philosophy of Law, vol. 7, M.–L., 1934; Sartre J.-P., Existentialism is, M., 1953; Volchenko L. B., Marxist-Leninskaya about S., "VF", 1962, No 2; Arkhangelsky L. M., Categories of Marxist Ethics, Sverdl., 1963; Berbeshkina Z. A., The problem of S. in Marxist-Leninist ethics, M., 1963; Sartre J. P., L "être et le néant, P., 1943; Revers W. J., Charakterprägung und Gewissensbildung, Nürnberg, 1951; Hollenbach J. M., Sein und Gewissen, Baden-Baden, 1954; Das Gewissen des Kindes, Stuttg., 1956; Niebuhr R., An interpretation of Christian ethics, N. Y., 1956; Moral and immoral society, N. Y.–L., 1960; Brunner E., Gott und sein Rebell, Hamb., 1958.
O. Drobnitsky. Moscow.
Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .
CONSCIENCE
CONSCIENCE - the ability of a person, critically evaluating himself, to realize and experience his inconsistency with what is due - failure to fulfill his duty. Phenomenological manifestations of conscience are internal emotional discomfort (“reproaches, pangs of conscience”), guilt and. From a cultural and historical point of view, the idea and concept of conscience are formed in the process of understanding various mechanisms self-control. Unlike fear (before authority, punishment) and shame (which also reflects a person's awareness of his inconsistency with certain accepted norms), conscience is perceived as autonomous. Historically, conscience is rooted in and akin to shame; however, already early attempts to comprehend the experience, which later will be called “conscientious”, testify to the desire to differentiate shame itself and single out as something special “shame in front of oneself” (Democritus, Socrates) - a kind of exteriorized version of that control mechanism that will be called conscience. In ancient Greek mythology, this function was performed by the Erinyes; in “Orestes” by Euripides, it was interpreted as “consciousness of perfect horror”. The corresponding Greek the word - sineidesis (συνειδησιζ] - goes back to the verb ουνείδηνατ, which was used in expressions that indicated a person’s responsibility to himself for his unholy deeds. Also, the Latin word conscientia (which is a kind of tracing paper from Greek) was used to denote not only consciousness in general , but also consciousness or memories of committed bad deeds or consciousness that evaluates its own actions as worthy or unworthy.
In Christianity, conscience is interpreted as "God's power", as an indicator of moral duty (Rom. 2:15) - first of all, duty to God (1 Pet. 2:19). At the same time, the Apostle Paul speaks of conscience as a value consciousness in general, and thereby recognizes that those who adhere to different faiths have different consciences (1 Cor. 8:7,10), and therefore the conscience needs Christian purification (Heb. 9:14 ) achieved through faith and love. In medieval literature, the deepening of the analysis of the phenomenon of conscience was mediated by the appearance of a special term - sindeiesis - and the formulation of an additional one in relation to the traditional lat. conscientia concepts. In scholastic philosophy, this concept denotes the commanding power of the soul, the inner knowledge of principles, which, in contrast to the “law of reason” (lex rationis), is inspired by God in man. Conscience synderesis, in contrast to conscience-conscientia, that is, a person to evaluate specific actions as good (good) or evil (bad), was interpreted as: a) the ability (or habit) of judging the correctness of actions from the point of view of “original correctness”, a feeling which is preserved in the human soul despite the fall, and b) the ability of the will to commit right action. At the same time, the epistemological of these abilities was interpreted differently (by Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, Duns Scotus). The controversy around this concept revealed the various functions of conscience, more broadly - moral consciousness: awareness of values as the general foundations of behavior and specific actions in which the accepted values are affirmed or violated, i.e., the correlation of specific actions with values. The distinction between conscientia and synderesis was preserved in part by early Protestant moral theorists. In many new European teachings, conscience is presented as a cognitive and moral force (reason, intuition, feelings), the fundamental ability of a person to make value judgments, to realize himself as a morally responsible being, intentionally defined in relation to good. For Kant, conscience denotes practical reason in the sense of the medieval concept of synderesis. The development of this line naturally led within the framework of new European philosophizing to the formation of a broader concept of moral consciousness (in many languages the word “conscience” is related and consonant with the words denoting “consciousness”, “knowledge”), highlighting its cognitive, imperative and evaluative functions. Along with this, attempts are being made to specify the actual concept of “conscience”. In the most general terms, it is interpreted as an “inner voice”; the differences relate to the understanding of the source of this “voice”, which is perceived either as independent of the “I” of a person, or as the voice of his innermost “I”, or as an “other self”. Related to this are various theoretical attitudes regarding the nature of conscience. 1. Conscience is the generalized and internalized voice of significant others or culture, and its content is culturally and historically fluid; in this vein, conscience can be interpreted as a specific form of shame (T. Hobbes, F. Nietzsche, 3. Freud); in its extreme form, the proposition about the external conditionality of conscience is found in the conclusion that conscience is from the political views or social position of the individual (K. Marx). 2. Conscience expresses a person's feeling of disagreement with himself (J. Locke) and thus acts as one of the certificates of a person's personality and self-consciousness (J. Butler, G. Leibniz). This interpretation is close to the understanding of conscience as the voice of an impartial rational person (J. Rawls). 3. Conscience is not only metaphorically, but also essentially interpreted as “the voice of another”; “through the mouth of conscience”, as it were, the Universal Law, the highest Truth, speaks, this is the voice (“call”) of transcendent forces: the guardian angel (Socrates), God (Augustine), natural law (Locke), the use of Desein (M. Heidegger).
These statements are not completely mutually exclusive. The first focuses on the mechanisms of historical and individual development conscience; in the other two, on the phenomenology of a less and more mature conscience. As a form of moral self-awareness and self-control, conscience expresses a person's awareness of the failure to fulfill his duty, the imperfection of good; in this respect, conscience is associated with feelings of responsibility and duty, and also, no less, with the ability to be responsible and fulfill one's duty. Reproaches of conscience indicate to a person his alienation from the ideal and cause a feeling of guilt. In its highest state, conscience means the disappearance of duty in free good will.
These differences are accompanied by differences in understanding the content of conscience and the role it plays in the moral life of a person. Conscience can be interpreted negatively and positively. How does a negative conscience appear reproachful and warning, even frighteningly warning (Nietzsche), critical of the past, judging (Kant). In a positive interpretation, conscience, contrary to popular notions about it, also appears as calling, encouraging care and “determination” (Heidegger). The interpretation of conscience as the voice of God predetermines the understanding of it as a call to perfection; accordingly, conscience is perceived by a person as the will to perfection and is the main manifestation of the inner liberation of the individual. The perfectionistic dominant of conscience in individual moral experience is revealed in such a moral self-puzzling of a person, in which he turns out to be determined precisely in relation to the morally best.
The expressions “clear conscience” or “clear conscience” in ordinary speech denote a person’s awareness of the fulfillment of his obligations or the realization of all his possibilities in this particular situation. In essence, in such cases it is about dignity. The interpretation of the actual phenomenon of “pure conscience” is different in different normative-value contexts. Firstly, a “clear conscience” confirms to the externally oriented mind that it conforms to external requirements, and therefore evokes a sense of well-being and security,
