Ethics is an ancient science with a history of several thousand years. It is called by such names as "Ilmi ravish", "Ilmi ahlaq", "Akhlaq ilmi", "Odobnoma". In Europe, it is known as "Ethics", and until recently we used the same term. It was first introduced by the Greek philosopher Aristotle. When Aristotle classifies the sciences, he divides them into three groups: theoretical, practical, and creative. The first group included philosophy, mathematics, and physics; to the second group - ethics and politics; and the third group includes arts, crafts, and applied sciences. Thus, the ancient Greeks elevated the doctrine of morality to the level of science and called it “Ethics” (ta ethiga).
Today, we think it is appropriate to call this science "Ethics" in terms of scientific and modern requirements.
Ethics studies the origin and essence of morality, the moral relations of man in society. The word ‘morality’ is derived from Arabic and is the plural form of the word ‘behavior’. The term "morality" has two meanings: as a general concept it refers to the object of study of science, and as a specific concept it refers to the most comprehensive part of human behavior and behavior. If we take morality as a general concept and reflect it in the form of a circle, the smallest part of the circle is occupied by manners, the larger part by behavior, and the most comprehensive part by morality.
Etiquette - includes beautiful behaviors based on national traditions that make a pleasant impression on a person, but are not so important in the life of the community, society and humanity.
Behavior - a set of pleasant human behaviors that are important at the family, community, community level, but do not significantly affect the life of society and humanity.
Morality and is a set of positive behaviors that can serve as a model for society, time, and human history.
We will try to illustrate these points with examples. Let's say a young man, a student, is sitting in a row on the subway. An old man came out of the next station and stood in front of him. If a student immediately says, "Sit down, old man!" if he makes room, he will have done a good deed; those who looked on from the outside thanked him inwardly, saying, "Blessed is he who is a decent young man." On the contrary, if the student either looks back, or falls asleep, and does not make room for the old man, we get angry and say, "He is so rude and arrogant!" the idea passes, so it makes an unpleasant impression on us. But, at the same time, whether the student makes room for the elderly or not, there is no significant change in the lives of the passengers in the carriage, whether positive or negative.
Here is an example of the behavior: one of the heads of the family in our neighborhood, as far as possible, serves in all the activities of the neighbors, does not spare anyone's help, is open-minded, open-handed, constantly improving his knowledge Aspirational, diligent, kind to family members, etc. We call such a person a kind person and consider him as an example of our neighborhood. On the contrary, if he is rude to his neighbors, if he gets into fights at weddings, if he is a little rude, if he is punched, if he is drunk. if he comes and beats and insults his wives and children in the family, we call him a villain. His family, some individuals, suffer from his misconduct, the peace of the neighborhood is disturbed, but his behavior has no effect on the social life of the society or the history of mankind.
In terms of ethics, the issue is serious: let's say a district or regional prosecutor always works in the area of responsibility for the rule of law, justice, and, if necessary, to oppose the illegal orders of the employee and cancel them. achieve; to the common citizen he is embodied not only as a person who respects his profession, but also as a true guardian of law, a symbol of a just system; he is a man of high morals who has dedicated his life to the interests of the nation, the Motherland and the people; it serves as a model for the society in which it lives, for the further development of that society. If, on the contrary, this prosecutor, being a defender of the law, breaks the law himself, and in the name of personal gain calls white white black and black white white, he has committed immorality: it gives the impression that society is unjust. And the constant growth of this imagination will eventually lead to the decline of that society or system.
Of course, all three are moral phenomena and their opposite is relative. For example, there is a difference between the level of immorality of the prosecutor we have just given and the level of immorality of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot, who sentenced millions of innocent people to death in their own way. when it harms a nation or a country, the actions of the rulers of a totalitarian regime lead to tragedies on a global scale.
Another pair between the criteria concepts - goodness and evil, goodness is one of the most basic categories in ethics. It explains the essence of human activity - it is manifested as the embodiment of the will of God in the human heart. That is why the trinity of "good thoughts, good words, good deeds" occupies a leading position in all the holy books, from the Avesto. Virtue is a means to the perfection of the human person, to happiness, and to the high development of society. It is determined, it emerges, because of the moral activity of man. It cannot be wrapped in a class or partisan shell. For example, the physical loss of a "class enemy," that is, a person or a group, simply because it belongs to another class, no matter how painted, cannot be a virtue. He is literally evil. Therefore, the absurdity and falsity of such an interpretation of goodness in totalitarian regimes is now well known.
Goodness and its opposite evil are not measured by the norms of ordinary, daily life, they are as comprehensive and social in nature as love. This is why goodness is associated with a moral ideal. Because of this, it embodies principles such as heroism, patriotism, humanity, courage in practice.
It should also be noted that in the concept of love and hate couple, hatred does not deny love, but rather indicates its stability, while in the pair of good and evil, both concepts completely deny each other. Not only does he deny it, but there is a life-and-death struggle between them, and this struggle manifests itself as an eternal struggle, as a force that moves the universe.
When it comes to good and evil, the question arises as to what is good and evil, and whether these two pairs are one in content. This is natural. Because so far in all the literature on ethics in the Uzbek language known to us, good and evil are not included in the list of criteria, it is presented only as a synonym for good and evil. It is true that there is no denying that many elements of the concept of goodness come from goodness, and some elements of goodness from goodness. Contrary to them, there is such a "absorption". But such evidence can never be a basis for identifying these two pairs. There is a definite difference between them: goodness, as we have said, has a social character, and goodness is not. It is a positive phenomenon that depends mainly on a person's etiquette and behavior. Because it embodies such moral values as courage, openness, and honesty. However, he cannot rise to the level of such principles as heroism, courage, patriotism. Take, for example, the work of our great poet Alisher Navoi. He devoted his life to creative work and created great works for his people, such as "Khazayn ul-Maoniy" and "Hamsa". This kindness is eternal, because Navoi's works have been entertaining millions of people for hundreds of years and calling them to perfection. At the same time, he did many good deeds - he lent to the needy, he forgave his debt, etc. His good deeds, being a wonderful positive event, are transient, and neither heroism nor great courage nor patriotism. . So it is not right to equate goodness with a major social phenomenon - goodness.
Another comprehensive criterion concept of ethics is justice. Its main difference from good and evil and good and evil is that justice itself does not understand any value, but determines the relationship between values, has the status of evaluating them. It therefore has the property of regulating society; it contains both moral and legal requirements. It can also be called a measure of quantity in a sense: it is a scale that measures reward by demand. Where there is justice, there is no room for social oppression and tyranny.
For almost a century and a half, our people have experienced injustice, national discrimination, trampling of national pride, forced acceptance of the will of others, and now, having gained independence, have begun to build a just civil society. Justice today is becoming a concept that represents the essence of our independent, future great state.
One of the broadest concepts of the ultimate sphere of influence of ethics is conscience. Conscience is, in the words of Sigmund Freud, alo me, a squeamish, high-level self who controls and controls me. If the feeling of shame stems from a person’s external, social dependence, then conscience shows his inner self-dependence. This internal connection is deeper and more permanent than the external connection: if shame is an inconvenience caused by a person's own wrongdoing over a period of time, a pang of conscience is not a simple inconvenience. but the cry, the demand of faith in humanity in the heart, in man, if you do not satisfy it, the suffering will never stop. Conscience with shame, therefore, can be likened to an iceberg in the sea - an iceberg: the part that rises to the surface in the form of shame is a hundred, maybe a thousand times smaller than the part in depth.
It is often possible to come across the phrase faith instead of the concept of conscience. Faith is actually a religious concept. But in life it is used as a synonym for the concept of conscience. For example, when someone is called a "believer", he does not think about whether he believes in Islam or not, and that person may be a Christian, not a Muslim. Because we are not talking about the piety of that person, but about his conscience, honesty, truthfulness. In this sense, faith with conscience can be called twin concepts.
Another important criterion is homework. Duty is, in essence, the attitude of a particular individual towards society, the state and individuals, the obligation to them. It is inextricably linked with concepts such as conscience, faith and responsibility, as mentioned above. In general, at the heart of every human action in life is the concept of duty - loyalty to duty or betrayal. There are such comprehensive concepts of duty as human duty, Muslim duty, Christian duty, childhood duty, common to all periods, as well as professional ethics such as journalistic duty, medical duty, scientific duty. Another distinctive aspect of the concept of duty is its defining feature in time and society. For example, duty requirements that are considered positive in one system or society may have a negative meaning for another system or society. A clear example of this is the fact that the duty of a citizen of the former Soviet Union to the current regime at that time is now considered a very negative phenomenon.
It should also be noted that in some cases, duty goes against the many desires of the individual: it deprives him of the pleasures of life. For example, when Furqat served the colonial ideology, his life could have been a pleasant one. But he faced the heavy fate of immigration as a duty to the Fatherland, to the nation: he was expelled from the country by the colonialists and not re-admitted. Furkat died abroad.
Sometimes, because of duty, people are forced to give up their love, the one they love with all their heart. So, duty is the most ‘hard hand’, the most ‘ruthless’ within the criteria of ethics.
Another criterion is honor. The concept of honor is related, on the one hand, to duty and, on the other hand, to the concept of dignity. Because honor is essentially determined by a person's awareness of his or her dignity, whether that dignity is recognized or not by society. Goho confuses it with the concept of shame, and there are cases. But in fact, it is a relatively narrow, relatively non-violent concept of honor. For example, an Aryan person is a person who goes above and beyond the call of duty. A poor man, on the other hand, is an arrogant man who does not pay attention to what is said in his honor, but goes about his business, and infiltrates unspoken places. The stone of honor is heavy - it has a social character, it is comprehensive. In the path of honor, a person can even sacrifice his life, people fight for their honor, family honor, nation honor. Many works of art have been created about it. Team honor is also important in areas such as work and sports; where it is associated with the notion of honor. It all stems from a sense of self-control, a sense of self-control so as not to lose the respect of those around you.
As we have seen above - all of the key criteria concepts are of an evaluative nature. There are a number of other important ethical concepts that are distinguished by the fact that they require their own solution, that is, by their problematic nature. Concepts such as ideal, happiness, meaning of life are among them. We will dwell in more detail on the concept of the moral ideal of being the most comprehensive among them.
At first glance, the ideal also seems to have an evaluation feature. But in fact it is based on comparison. The antiquity is that the non-ideal, the imaginary person, the reality is real, existing, the events in life are compared, that is, what exists is measured by what does not exist. Because the ideal can’t exist in life - it’s obvious to everyone. Moreover, the ideal does not exist in the present or in the future, the condition of its existence is the past. But, nevertheless, man strives for the ideal, compares his life to it, imitates it. It is the highest moral requirement in human life, the fulfillment of which leads a person to perfection. Of course, this is not the case in life, but man attains relative perfection in the process of living this ideal, striving for the ideal.
With the secular ideal, or rather the socio-moral ideal, the religious ideal, while seemingly similar at first glance, is in fact very different. For example, for Muslims - Muhammad, for Christians - Jesus, for Judaism - Moses is ideal. They are ideally never change, forever. Socio-ethical ideals, on the other hand, can and do change in many cases. For example, during the Soviet era, Lenin, the founder of that system, was interpreted as the highest moral ideal and was accepted by many. And now "Power is in justice!" Our great ancestor Amir Temur, who knew the motto "the meaning of life", is widely accepted as a socio-moral ideal, the ideal symbol of a just head of state. Hence, socio-ethical ideals can change depending on the requirements of a particular system. His activity consisted of masked dirt. Although social ideals such as Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler did not last long, they were ideal in any case, and many who were deceived saw them as role models.
