Number DOI: http://doi.org/10.33209/2519-4348-2707-9627-2023-11-134

VB. – № 11, 2023. – P. 53-66

Summary

Morality is a system of purely conditional rules of conduct in society, based on the established paradigm of perception of good and evil. In a broad sense, morality is a coordinate system that allows people to direct their actions in such a way that the results of their actions bring benefits to all mankind as a whole. From the point of view of psychology, morality is a deep part of the human psyche, which is responsible for assessing events, namely the recognition of good and evil. Quite often the word «morality» is replaced by the word «morality». This article is devoted to the analysis of modern theories about the motivation of moral action. Of course, this motivation is related to ideas about the origin of morality. A short digression into the history of the issue and the methodology of its consideration by Orthodox moralists of the end of the XIX – beginning of the first half of the XX centuries is offered. Particular attention is paid to the critique of consequentialism – a theory especially popular in the mid-twentieth century, which proposed to assess the moral motivation for the immediate goal in terms of expected results. An example of consequential conduct may be a false testimony to save the lives of innocent people, although false testimony under oath threatens a witness with government punishment. The historical forms of consequentialism were eudemonism, hedonism, utilitarianism, and rational selfishness. Most political arguments in the modern world are consistent in form. One of the main difficulties of consequentialism is caused by the paradox that a commitment to consequentialism may not work as well as other paradigms: for example, religious societies may have more order and pleasure than secular ones. It also points to recent attempts to return to Aristotle’s theory of charity in terms of prudence. It is concluded that only Christian discourse allows us to discuss issues in the general field and only Christ, as the embodied Love of God, provides a real basis for moral life and motivation for moral action.

Key words: Jesus Christ, hristianity, love, morality, Orthodoxy, consequen-tialism, virtue, motiva-tion, deed, utilitarianism, eudemonism.

References:

1. Apresjan R.  (1995). Normativnye modeli moral’noj racional’nosti. Moral’ i racional’nost’. M. [in Russian].

2. Aristotel’. (2000) Politika. [in Russian].

3. Artem’eva O. V. (2009). Teoreticheskie osnovanija jetiki dobrodeteli. Filosofija i jetika. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov k 70-letiju akademika RAN A. A. Gusejnova. M. [in Russian].

4. Artem’eva O. V. (2005). U istokov sovremennoj jetiki dobrodeteli. Jeticheskaja mysl’. M. Vyp. 6. [in Russian].

5. Bibliia. (2004). Knyhy Sviashchennoho Pysannia Staroho i Novoho Zavitu: v ukrainskomu perekladi z paralelnymy mistsiamy / Pereklad Patriarkha Filareta (Denysenka). K.: Vydannia Kyivskoi Patriarkhii Ukrainskoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvy Kyivskoho Patriarkhatu [in Ukrainian]. 

6. Kant I. (1965). Kritika prakticheskogo razuma. Sochinenija: v 6 t. T. 4. Ch. 1. M.: Mysl’ [in Russian].

7. Kant I. (1965). Osnovy metafiziki nravstvennosti. Sochinenija: v 6 t. T. 4. Ch. 1. M.: Mysl’ [in Russian].

8. Losskij N. O. (1949). Uslovie absoljutnogo dobra. Parizh: YMCA-PRESS [in Russian].

9. Lushnikov D., svjashh. (2021). Religija i moral’ v sovremennoj zapadnoj racional’noj teologii // Osnovnoe bogoslovie. M.: Izd-vo «Poznanie» [in Russian].

10. Stelleckij N., prot. (2009). Nravstvennoe pravoslavnoe bogoslovie. T. I. M. [in Russian].

11. Hardin R. (1995). Predely razuma v moral’noj teorii. Moral’ i racional’nost’. M. [in Russian].

12. Holms R. (1995). Moral’ i obshhestvennoe blago. Moral’ i racional’nost’. M. [in Russian].