Focus
The focus of attention of the ethical pole is aimed at the relationships between people, at their desires, at the way of expressing these desires.
- Ethics of emotions - facial expressions, interjections, voice intonations.The Black Ethicist is good at tracking and describing behavioral characteristics.
- Ethics of relationships - relationships, attractions, connections. The white ethicist is good at tracking and describing the psychological distance between people.
Basic ethics of relationships (Dostoevsky, Dreiser)- This is the image of a spider and its web. If any object gets into its web, the spider instantly reads the information. In life, this is expressed in the fact that a white ethicist, entering a room with people, automatically begins to read who is in what relationship with whom, who treats whom how. And since basic function greater than the person himself, he does not always realize it himself. But if we ask him to talk about the relationships in the team, then, as a rule, his story will be very close to the real state of affairs. The white ethicist will tell you who is a friend and who is an enemy, who is just an acquaintance, who is close, and who is someone’s lover, who is in a quarrel with whom and for how long, who is drawn to whom, and who is trying to distance himself from whom.
Basic Ethics of Emotions (Hamlet, Hugo)- this is the image of the sea. The sea can be calm and gentle. Or maybe cold and angry. Or it can be raging and frightening. The sea can shimmer in the rays of sunrise or sunset. Likewise, a black ethicist can rage and, on the contrary, be calm, quiet and peaceful. It can radiate positivity, or it can create a gloomy, oppressive atmosphere. A black ethicist, entering a room with people, immediately reads its emotional state - what kind of energy is in the room, whether it’s fun or sad. The black ethicist will tell you who creates or extinguishes the atmosphere. The black ethicist immediately tracks this person and distinguishes him from the crowd.
Creative white ethics (Huxley, Napoleon) can be represented as a puppeteer, in whose hands there are strings that he pulls in order to achieve certain actions from a person. A person controls a relationship as if the relationship were some kind of object that can be moved in space at will. Let's imagine this situation: there is one person, and he has a certain attitude towards another, and the other has the same attitude towards him. Both of these people are interconnected in one way or another: if one moves backward, then the other begins to feel it. When a mutual connection has been established between you and someone else - a soul thread that binds you together, you begin to feel the other person. You are internally affected by everything this person says, does or thinks. Even if he is not next to you, you still feel his attitude towards you. For example, people you don’t know well can say whatever they want about you, and it won’t hurt you, but if a person with whom you have a close relationship says the same thing, his words will hurt you.
Creative black ethics (Dumas, Yesenin) can be represented as an image of an oncoming wave. The wave energizes, refreshes, and can also push you away or, conversely, take you away with it. The wave beckons with its attractive power. The wave is the moment of maximum release of energy. To understand the ethics of emotions aspect, you need to imagine that you were able to figuratively ride a wave. We were able to not only feel the emotional state of a person, but were also able to learn to manage and control it. Imagine that in your hand there is a remote control that regulates your emotional state. A person looks sad, tired, then you press a button and emotions begin to change, a smile and cheerfulness appear. The Black Ethicist controls emotions the same way you control the volume of your TV.
The ethics of relationships is a state of (attraction-repulsion), which arises as a result of an internal assessment of the attitude of ethics to a person or object. For example, an ethicist evaluates a girl as sexually attractive, and as a result, he develops attraction to her, that is, sexual attraction (state). And when a girl communicates with him, she falls under the radiation (aura) of this state, she adopts it. The condition is like a virus, you can become infected with it. The world of white ethics is a huge web of human destinies, relationships, likes and dislikes.
The ethics of emotions is internal energy, a system of potentials (positive and negative). When these potentials are positive, we feel an emotional uplift, internal warmth; if these potentials are negative, then we feel tension, as if the energy begins to generate negative energy. Black ethics is outward nonverbal behavior. A person, under the influence of one or another potential, utters interjections, “ah sighs”, makes pauses full of emotional intensity, moves the facial muscles, making a variety of grimaces. The SE automatically reads this behavior. How do you breathe, how do you speak, are you nervous or are you calm? The world of black ethics is a sea of passions, emotions, feelings, experiences
Creating and managing an emotional atmosphere with a black ethicist
Since black ethics live in the world of emotions, this is indirectly reflected in facial expressions, rich use of them interjections And emotional coloring of speech.
Facial expressions- these are expressive movements of the facial muscles, which are one of the forms of manifestation of certain human feelings - joy, sadness, disappointment, satisfaction, etc. Movable, bright, dynamic facial expressions are an important characteristic of black ethics.
Facial expressions, like speech, are used by humans to convey information. You can say, “I feel bad now,” or you can make such a grimace that everything will become clear without words. At the same time, when a basic black ethicist is asked the question: “What’s wrong with your face?”, “Would you at least smile,” “Why are you frowning?”, then he gets a stupor, which is accompanied by a counter question: “I- I-I frowned? What made you think?
When something triggers an emotion, the facial muscles fire involuntarily. People can learn to influence these expressions and hide them more or less successfully, but this requires effort and constant training. The initial facial expression that appears when an emotion arises is not the product of conscious intent. With one movement of their eyelashes, black ethics can create an atmosphere of celebration or mourning. Other people read this well, but the bearer of the emotion does not always understand what happened.
You can strengthen the image by adding a characteristic interjection to your facial expressions: for example, purse your lips, close your eyes and give out a drawn-out “mmm.” Interjection is a part of speech that serves to express feelings (joy, surprise, indignation, irritation, bewilderment, etc.), sensations, states of mind and other reactions. Interjections perform expressive and motivating functions, expressing, for example, the speaker’s feelings (“oh! wow! wow!!!”), a call (“hey! anu!”) or a command (“scatter!”). Interjections are also substitutes for well-known definite expressions and entire sentences. Instead of “ugh” or “brr” you can say “what disgusting!”, instead of “shh” - “hush, don’t make noise”, instead of “hey” or “psst” - “come here”, “listen” or simply make an inviting gesture hand, etc.
The ethics of emotions is also emotional coloring speech: tones, halftones, that is, the whole gamut of voice intonations is a manifestation of feelings. The voice is even more important than words in characterizing human speech. When listening to a voice, the black ethicist responds well to pauses. Pauses may be too long or too frequent, and hesitations before words, especially when answering a question, always lead to suspicion.
The black ethicist himself does not always realize what caused his change own attitude to the interlocutor, but if he analyzes at what point his attitude changed, he will understand that this was due to the behavior of his interlocutor. For example, accents have changed in speech, pauses and interjections have appeared (“um”, “well” and “uh”), repetitions (“I, I, I mean that I ...”), extra syllables ( “I really liked it”) These vocal characteristics give black ethicists much more information than other psychotypes. But, I repeat, they themselves do not always realize this; the mechanism of information metabolism largely operates automatically, ahead of our conscious intentions.
For black ethicists of quadra Alpha (Hugo, Dumas), emotions are associated with the current moment, with a specific situation that is happening here and now.
Hugo is a caring person, so the brightness of his emotions will contain more warmth, kindness, and participation. Creative sensing helps to sense the kinesthetics of your interlocutors in at the moment time. Hugo's emotions are ringing, bright, dense. Hugo, with his emotions, will create an atmosphere of celebration, comfort, joy - he will not remain indifferent himself and will not leave others indifferent.
For the black ethics of the Beta quadra (Hamlet, Yesenin), emotions seem to arise “out of thin air,” as if out of nothing.
For Hamlet, this is due to the fact that the creative intuition of time helps him to grasp events that have not yet occurred. There is more artistry in Hamlet’s speech and manners, and the range of emotional tones changes in a short period of time: these include depressingly plaintive notes, playfully threatening ones, and boisterous laughter. The main feature: these shades change quickly over time. Hamlet's emotions are more dramatic, the tonality is closer to the poles, and often overacts emotionally. What emotions does Hamlet create around himself? Provocation plays an important role. For example, Hamlet can say the phrase “you scoundrel!” in such a way that it will be completely obvious that this is a sexual provocation. Hamlet is a victim, which means his behavior will be defiant and screaming. If Hamlet's emotions are directed at you, you can be sure that at the moment he is playing at least for you and a couple of other people who, perhaps, can hear it.
Yesenin foresees the development of events and clearly regulates the pace of relationships with the help of manipulative ethics of emotions. Yesenin, like Hamlet, is a victim, but time plays a more significant role, because emotions should not only not leave the interlocutor indifferent, it is important to do it on time.
People for whom the aspect of ethics of emotions is in the creative function use SE in order to change their attitude towards themselves. That is, creative SE is the manipulation of emotions.
Creative SEs (Dumas, Yesenin) are very good at conveying their desires, their needs and making an impression in such a way that a person takes over the desires of the creative SE and passes them off as their own. For example, Dumas imposes his desires, motives on others, in other words, he imposes his “wants” so that others accept them as their own desires. He very beautifully (sensorily and emotionally) explains what will happen if they do something together.
What is the reason for this mechanism of manipulation of emotions in creative SEs?
For Dumas and Yesenin, the pain function is business logic. They help others understand their desires so that they can then help satisfy their desires. Business logic is painful, you need someone to do everything necessary work so that you can enjoy the result. Introverted ethicists are masters at organizing situations in which people demonstrate their unfulfilled desires. And this leads to the fact that they are trusted very well and begin to talk about the most secret things.
The key difference between basic and creative SEs is that basic ones have a linear-assertive temperament, while creative ones have a receptive-adaptive temperament. “Basic emotions” are strong, all-encompassing, emotions on the edge. “Creative emotions” are more tactful, sensitive, not so loud, and easier to switch.
In receptive-adaptive types (Dumas, Yesenin), most of the emotions seethe inside, and only those that can be used to a certain extent to manipulate the mood of others are manifested outside.
Dumas has more sensory elements in his emotions: viscosity, softness, warmth. Emotions, as a rule, are tied to the current situation due to sensory input in the EGO block. If Dumas laughs, then it is connected with the current moment, with what is happening here and now. For Dumas, it is important that everyone feels cozy, warm, comfortable, and sincere; Dumas perfectly feels and guesses the desires of another person and, if possible, tries to satisfy them in order to maintain comfort and create a pleasant atmosphere.
Yesenins react more and create an emotional field than express emotions. This is laughter for company, this is the creation of the necessary emotional atmosphere, these are the most subtle emotions. For Yesenin, it is important to maintain interest in everyone in the company, Yesenin does not like it when someone is uncomfortable in the company, everyone should be interested, for this purpose ethical manipulation is used, tuned to a certain situation.
For linearly assertive types (Hugo, Hamlet), the main interest is that they must evoke emotions in others as brightly as possible; for them, the most cruel thing is indifference, thus they are tailored to their cold-blooded duals Robespierre and Maxim. When Hugo or Hamlet speaks, his voice shimmers with shades, he is extremely rich in intonation, and Che’s facial expressions are rich and expressive. But linearly assertive people cannot always control the emotions that they release into the surrounding space. If this is joy, then loud laughter, if disappointment, then sadness, indignation, resentment. Even a cold-blooded logician will figure out what’s what, and will not guess what this or that facial expression or phrase said by the basic SE means.
Receptive-adaptive people in this regard are quite stingy in releasing emotions into the surrounding space; one might say, these are calm, balanced people - so it seems from the outside. For close people, this is (similar to the basic ones) the whole gamut of bright emotions that they release, like a teapot - steam, when it is already too difficult to contain. But, since the SE is creative, Dumas and Yesenin can control their emotions sufficiently, this is not a big problem for them. You can throw a scandal, create a precedent, cry, laugh - the main condition is that this must be done now in order to a) for Dumas - to achieve more comfortable conditions; b) for Yesenin - to force someone to do a certain action so that Yesenin would be interested.
Scanning relationships, managing them and establishing contact with a white ethicist
The white ethicist notices how someone has offended someone, how a person or group of people experience joy, jubilation and delight from some event, how someone evokes sympathy or a feeling of embarrassment in someone.
To understand how a person treats you personally, you need to put aside the information that other people tell you about how this person treats you. For white people, ethics is everything: information, behavior, actions and thoughts - all this is an attitude. The attitude is always personalized. When they talk to you about someone's attitude, in reality they are always talking about many relationships that make up one big relationship between you and your interlocutor. The interlocutor has his own attitude towards an event or person. He has a certain attitude towards the person to whom he tells about this event or person. He has an attitude about how you might react to his attitude towards the event he is talking about. And you also have a certain attitude towards him. And so on. That is, it’s not just “like it or not.” This is a very large web in which the white ethicist sits.
White ethics not only captures these conditions, but also manages them. White ethics know how and with what you can offend, please, calm, upset, upset, anger, interest, scare or attract. They understand what can make a person angry, how his mood can improve or worsen, how he can be attracted, how he can be praised.
If white ethics has a creative function (Huxley, Napoleon), then the person himself influences the connections between people, be they love, friendship, sexual, business, etc. If it is basic (Dostoevsky, Dreiser), then the connections influence him.
For clarity, I will give an example of Dostoevsky’s direct speech: “I am tied hand and foot by this marriage. As if there are some threads between us. Yes, I am dependent on her both materially and morally. At first I wanted to break up with her. That’s what I told her: “Get off me! Let me go! I don't want to be with you anymore! I don’t understand who I am to her: friend, lover, business partner, friend or stranger. I feel obligated, but I didn’t promise her anything. Everything she did was on her own initiative. I got myself involved with this witch. And now I’m like a “puppet on a string.”
White ethics know how to create an interesting effect of understanding. As soon as you get inside the communication, as soon as feedback loops form between you and the white ethicist, it immediately becomes clear to you what this person means.
The strategy of extroverts is aimed at capturing, at expansion. Therefore, Huxley and Napoleon themselves attract you to themselves, they clearly see the outside, but are not aware of what is inside, the extrovert asks to enter the sphere of relationships under any pretext in order to find out what it is like inside. Constant availability over time reduces the attractiveness of the property. Therefore, despite the very rapid rapprochement, it is more difficult for creative ethicists to maintain relationships than for basic ones.
In Napoleon's arsenal there is external attractiveness, charm, charm, which attracts attention and “the more you look at this thing, the more hypnotized you are by it” (c). Napoleon's goal was to demonstrate his superiority, his primacy. Therefore, his manipulative ethics of relationships is ready to use any methods to achieve its main goal. In the sphere of relationships, Napoleon does not have many people he likes, but he has many fans whom he admires with his energy, his determination, and his confidence. As a rule, victims gather around him. He has competition with aggressors. Often, in an effort to take first place, Napoleon loses a lot of people close to him in spirit, who are ready to build relationships only as partners, and not as subordinates. And Napoleon does not always realize that not everyone needs to be fought. That there is already an unspoken agreement with many people, which is based on a feeling of sympathy for him as a person endowed with a number of attractive qualities. Because of his desire to see adoration in the eyes of other people, Napoleon provokes many unreasonable situations in which he thinks he can demonstrate his superiority and independence. Napoleon remains himself only in case of total victory. But not everyone wants to be in the role of the vanquished, not everyone wants to be conquered. Due to the understanding that he cannot win over everyone and due to the awareness that if he loses, it will be unbearable for him, and also to the extent of his desire, he does not try to get close to everyone. He, unlike Huxley, is more selective in this matter. Of course, in order to justify himself before his program function, Napoleon writes many people into the category of losers, establishing contact with whom is like personal humiliation.
Huxley's arsenal includes an intuition of possibilities, which allows him to select the optimal proposals for interest in dialogue. In a dialogue with him, common interests easily emerge, on the basis of which relationships begin. Huxley, unlike Napoleon, does not strive to become a leader in relationships. Moreover, he does not strive to become the head of any relationship at all. He prefers to remain free, prefers to move away from situations that would oblige him in some way. Therefore, in relationships, Huxley, trying to adapt to his interlocutor in order to be on the same wavelength, remains detached and abstract. He only charges, seduces, sets direction, but does not specify his feelings. Huxley does not identify himself with the one to whom his feelings are directed, therefore at any moment, due to circumstances beyond his control, Huxley can change his attitude. As soon as his software function receives the necessary dose of information, as soon as he finds access to all the hidden corners of the interlocutor’s soul, he loses interest in him. Huxley, as an intuitive, does not need specifics, he does not need factual confirmation that the interlocutor is completely in his power. He can predict in advance the development of the relationship, and can be satisfied in advance with the understanding that his interlocutor has opened up to him and is ready to go to great lengths. And at the same time, the understanding that a person will take the next step only on the condition that Huxley takes a counter step forces Huxley to retreat. The process gives him much more pleasure than the result.
You yourself are drawn to basic ethics. And here the fact of accessibility begins to acquire its strength only after the initial inaccessibility, which is also used by basic ethics, initially creating a mass of artificial barriers, and then mercifully condescending to a person. The strategy of introverts is aimed at protection, at preservation. Therefore, Dostoevsky and Dreiser are less accessible at the beginning of a relationship.
To illustrate two completely different strategies in the context of our topic, let's use the following metaphor: An introvert is a house (“intro” is what is inside.) An extrovert is a guest (“extra” is what is outside).
An introvert initially takes more risks when inviting people to visit them, so not everyone has access to Dostoevsky or Dreiser. If the extrovert chooses, then the introvert agrees or refuses. The last word remains with the introvert, although he and the extrovert are interdependent. The goal of Dostoevsky and Dreiser is, firstly, to deny access to the unworthy, and secondly, to make the worthy want to stay in the house. An extrovert stays if he feels very good, or leaves if he is bored and uninterested. It’s more difficult for an introvert in this regard, because no matter who comes there, you need to prepare, then clean up after him. Those. It is psychologically more difficult to let people visit you than to come to visit someone.
Next, what do you need to invite a person to your place? At a minimum, you need to find out who he is, what he is like. Here we again return to the moment of acquaintance, to why introverted ethics is so conservative - because if they don’t like you, then they won’t let you into the house, and if you try to go in yourself, you will stumble upon opposition from the introverted ethicist.
The next stage is that after changing the psychological distance, the introverted ethicist expects an external assessment of his inner world, to which he gave access to the person. And in order to get even closer to BE, you need to be able to appreciate the inner world of an introvert.
A person will be a guest for Dostoevsky or Dreiser until the introvert changes his psychological distance. As soon as the distance changes - and it changes thanks to the business initiative on the part of the guest, thanks to the actual state of affairs - then from the category of a guest a person is transformed into the category of a friend, enemy, lover, buddy, etc.
Dreiser tries to get close only to those from whom one can least expect a trick. Designed to preserve, Dreiser, as a custodian, protects himself and his loved ones from any unscrupulous relationships. Dreiser's BE has a minus sign, so it is aimed primarily at finding shortcomings. And when meeting someone, Dreiser pays attention first of all to the shortcomings, and after he is convinced of their absence, Dreiser switches to looking for advantages. The merits of a candidate for a place in Dreiser’s heart must be specific and factual: he is not just a cheerful guy, but a guy who is able to amuse those around him; This is not just an enterprising person, but a person who has taken many actions and obtained the desired result. And the more time passes, the more difficult it is for Dreiser to find a partner, because with each new year Dreiser learns about more and more shortcomings of human nature and fewer and fewer advantages.
For Dostoevsky, everything is exactly the opposite. At the beginning of his life he is more critical of people. And the more time passes, the more he understands the depravity of human nature, and the more he adheres to the commandment “Let someone who is devoid of shortcomings throw a stone at a person.” Dostoevsky is a little more critical of himself than Dreiser. His goal is to achieve harmony in relationships. The partner’s starting potential is not so important for this. Sometimes, on the contrary, a drunkard and a repeat offender attracts more attention than a decent person. After all, a decent person is not so interesting for Dostoevsky. There is nothing to do with him, but with a repeat offender, a very large field opens up for creative work: turning a hooligan into a respectable citizen of the country is worth a lot. Of course, every psychotype tries to adhere to social behavior programs, and initially girls want to find princes, boys - princesses. And only then, realizing the illusory nature of his searches, a person begins to be more critical of the people around him. But basic programs like this often turn out to be stronger voices common sense. That is why Dostoevsky so often buys into the “humiliated and insulted,” in whose help they see an opportunity to become truly useful and significant.
For thousands of years people different eras and social structures were looking for the most correct way to communicate with each other. The best representatives of philosophical and religious thought worked on how to bring universal human relations to harmony. As a result, it turned out that, despite the difference in eras and historical realities, the “golden rules of ethics” remain unchanged throughout the years. This is determined primarily by their universal human character.
Treat people the way you want to be treated
It is precisely this principle, which is the basis of morality and has become the “golden rule of ethics”, in one form or another, preached by all the major world religions, both of our time and of bygone times. Back in the 5th century BC, this ethical rule was formulated in the ancient Indian epic "Mahabharata". In more late period history, it was reflected in the Old Testament, and then was attested by the evangelists Matthew and Luke as the words spoken by Jesus Christ.
This seemingly simple rule is often difficult to follow. The reason lies in our natural human weaknesses, which force us to be guided primarily by our own interests and neglect those of others. Selfishness, which is inherent to one degree or another in every person, does not allow him, neglecting his own benefit, to make efforts to make another person feel good. Answer to the question: “How do I understand the golden rule of ethics and what does it mean to me?” often becomes decisive in the formation of a person as an individual.
Concepts of norms of behavior among the ancient Sumerians
Based on general principles universal human relations, throughout its history, humanity has developed its own golden rules of ethics. One of the first such attempts can be observed among the ancient Sumerians who inhabited Mesopotamia. According to the written monuments of that era that have come down to us, the sun god Utu and the goddess of justice Nanshe vigilantly monitored the observance of the inhabitants of the state.
Every year she judged people, mercilessly punishing those who, following the path of vice, committed arbitrariness, evaded rules and agreements, and also sowed enmity between people. The angry goddess also suffered from all sorts of swindlers who deceive gullible buyers in the markets, and those who, having sinned, did not find the strength to admit what they had done.
Etiquette standards in the Middle Ages
During the Middle Ages, the first manuals appeared, which formulated the basics of people's behavior in relation to civil and church authorities, as well as to household members. By this time, a certain standard of behavior in certain situations had been developed. The rules determined by it were called etiquette.
Not only the successful career of a courtier, but sometimes his very life largely depended on the ability to behave in society, observing etiquette. Even monarchs were obliged to follow similar rules that strictly regulated all aspects of communication between people. This was not ethics of behavior in the sense we accept. At their courts, etiquette took the form of a certain ritual and was intended to exalt the august persons and consolidate the class division of society. Etiquette dictated literally everything, from the shape and size of shoe buckles to the rules for receiving guests.
Rules of etiquette in Eastern countries
There are many known cases where failure to comply with the rules of etiquette caused the disruption of important diplomatic missions, and sometimes led to the outbreak of wars. They were observed most pedantically in the countries of the East, and especially in China. There were complex ceremonies of greeting and tea drinking, which often put foreigners in an extremely awkward position. In particular, this was encountered by Dutch merchants who established trade relations with Japan and China at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries.
Agreements for the exchange of goods and permission to trade were achieved by them by fulfilling numerous and sometimes humiliating etiquette requirements. It is known, for example, that the director of a Dutch trading post, together with his employees, was forced to regularly appear with gifts to the reigning person called the shogun. It was believed that in this way they expressed their loyalty and devotion.
Both in eastern countries and at the courts of European monarchs, the requirements of etiquette were so complex that specially trained people - masters of ceremonies - appeared to monitor their compliance. It should be noted that this science was not taught to everyone, but only to aristocrats. The ability to behave in compliance with all the rules of etiquette was considered a sign of social superiority and an important feature that separated the privileged strata of society from the rude common people.
Old Russian printed collections of rules of conduct
In Rus', ethical principles of behavior were first quite fully set out in the famous “Domostroy” - the immortal creation of Archpriest Sylvester. In the 16th century, he made an attempt to formulate basic rules of behavior, which included not only instructions on what should be done, but also explaining how to achieve a better result.
Very much in it echoes the biblical Ten Commandments given to Moses at the Domostroy and advice not to do to others what you do not wish for yourself. This is by no means accidental, because the “golden rules of ethics” are the foundation on which all ethical principles are based.
The next step in establishing norms in Rus' social behavior became a set of rules published during the time of Peter I, known as “The Honest Mirror of Youth...”. He included detailed explanations of how to behave in a variety of life circumstances. On its pages it was explained what is decent and what is not in society, at home, at work, and so on. There were specific instructions on the permissibility or impermissibility of certain actions when communicating with other people, during a conversation, at a table or on the street. In this book, the “golden rules of ethics” were outlined in relation to specific situations.
Harm from formalism in following ethical standards
It is important to note that, by mastering certain norms of behavior that are certainly necessary in everyday life, a person is exposed to the danger, blindly following the instructions laid down in them, of falling into a very undesirable extreme - hypocrisy and the tendency to evaluate the merits of the people around him not by their human qualities, but only by apparent respectability.
In former times, there was a fashion among the metropolitan aristocracy to adhere to a lifestyle called by the French expression “comme il faut”. By his followers, indifferent to their inner content, the ethics of behavior were reduced only to strict adherence to established high-society norms, which concerned mainly external attributes - clothing, hairstyles, manner of behavior and speech. A striking illustration of this from Russian literature is the image of Eugene Onegin in the early period of his life.
Rules of conduct among the common people
All official treatises concerning norms of behavior were aimed exclusively at representatives of the privileged classes and in no way concerned peasants and artisans. Their ethics of relations were regulated mainly by religious commandments, and their attitude towards a person was determined by his business qualities and hard work.
An important place in everyday life ordinary people dedicated to honoring the father of the family. According to unwritten, but strictly enforced laws, the sons were supposed to take off their hats in his presence, and were forbidden to be the first to sit down at the table and start eating. All attempts to contradict the head of the house were subject to special condemnation.
Women and girls were required to have physical and moral purity, the ability to bear children, the ability to manage a household and at the same time remain cheerful, thrifty and patient. The beatings they often received from their husbands were considered not humiliation, but “science.” Wives caught in adultery were severely punished as a warning to others, but, as a rule, they were not expelled from the family, so as not to deprive the children of maternal care.
Timeless laws
Over time, the way human life changed, giving way to new forms due to social and technical progress. In accordance with this, many rules of conduct that were purely formal and limited by time and class boundaries became a thing of the past. At the same time, the “golden rules of ethics” remained unchanged. Having overcome the time barrier, they have firmly taken a place in our lives today. We are not talking about the fact that some new types of the “golden rule” have appeared; simply, along with the previous ones, its modern forms have emerged.
The need for comprehensive education
Even without taking into account the observance of any specific rules of behavior by others, it is not difficult to distinguish among them cultural people, with whom there is a desire to continue communication, and ill-mannered ones, who repel oneself with overt rudeness and rudeness. This indicates their low internal culture, which cannot take shape without the purposeful development of its external forms. Every person has deep down certain desires, emotions and impulses. However, only a well-mannered person will not allow them to express themselves in public.
This determines the need to teach every person, and young people in particular, those rules of behavior that will not allow, as the outstanding Soviet teacher V.A. Sukhomlinsky put it, “to pour salt into the wounds and knock with boots where it is appropriate to hold your breath.” The lack of elementary education, which is based on culture and ethics, can do a very disservice even to a talented and in his own way remarkable person.
There is no need to mention that every person wants kindness, attention and sympathy. Wanting to receive them from others, many people nevertheless remain stingy in their manifestation. Taking offense at other people's rudeness, they do not hesitate to show it at every opportunity. It would seem that the elementary foundations of ethics, dictated by life itself, should teach a person to respond with a smile to a smile, to give way to a woman, or to be able to maintain a friendly tone during an argument, but this happens very rarely. Therefore, good manners are, as a rule, not a natural gift, but the result of upbringing.
Appearance is the key to a favorable impression
It is important to note this detail: among the factors that form the overall picture of our communication with others, there cannot be trifles. Therefore, it is extremely erroneous to believe that in this issue appearance plays a secondary role. This also follows from the conclusion of many psychologists who claim that most people tend to evaluate our strengths and weaknesses based on appearance, since it is largely a characteristic of internal content. Here it is appropriate to recall the biblical wisdom that says: “The spirit creates its own form.”
Of course, over time, when people get the opportunity to get to know each other more thoroughly, their opinion of each other, which was based on purely external perception, can either be confirmed or change to the opposite, but in any case, its formation begins with appearance, which consists of a number of parts.
In addition to neatness, charm and physical beauty, a person’s ability to dress in accordance with his age and in accordance with fashion is noteworthy. It would be wrong to downplay its role in the life of society, because fashion is nothing more than one of the standards of human behavior, although sometimes having a very short-term form. It is formed spontaneously under the influence of currently prevailing moods and tastes in society, but its influence on people’s behavior is undeniable.
In addition to reasonable adherence to fashion, a person who wants to make a favorable impression on others must take care of the proper condition of his own body. This should be understood as following and engaging in physical exercises, which will not only improve your appearance, but also give you a feeling of self-confidence. The connection between satisfaction with one’s own appearance and confidence both in solving personal issues and in professional activity. For more complete self-realization, one should take into account the need to adhere to strictly professional
Business and service ethics
Office ethics is usually understood as a whole set of norms for those engaged in a specific activity. It consists of a number of general and specific components. This includes professional solidarity, which sometimes takes on the form of corporatism, the concept of duty and honor, as well as the awareness of responsibility imposed by one or another activity. Also, office ethics determines the norms of relationships between managers and subordinates, the culture of office communication within the team and the behavior of its members in the event of certain emergency situations and conflicts.
Under business ethics It is customary these days to understand the totality of business laws, sometimes not legally formalized, but generally accepted in business circles. They are the ones who often determine the order and style of work, partnerships and documentation circulation. Ethics modern business is a set of norms developed over a long period of time historical period influenced by the cultures of different peoples and their ethnic characteristics.
The ethics of personal moral (intimate) relationships analyzes situations between two close people connected by friendship, partnership, friendship, love, sexual attachment, marriage and family. These relationships are often trusting, delicate, intimate.
Friendly relationships are formed mainly on the basis of a commonality of insignificant interests and temporary insignificant manifestations of personal sympathy. At this level, uniformity of ideas about the meaning of life and interest in each other’s fate are possible, although not obligatory. These are friendly relationships, they occur in personal meetings, telephone conversations, mutual favors, exchange of opinions, assessments of life events, and the like. Friendly relationships do not provide for the joint achievement of significant life goals, spiritual closeness, which determines the improvement of personal qualities. They are not based on strong, essential principles, and therefore are quite easily destroyed and stopped.
Friendship is stronger and richer in relationships between people than friendship. their objective basis is the need for communication, joint activities, overcoming loneliness, mental isolation. Friendship is generated by the level of needs for communication and joint activities, similar living conditions, which leads to the corresponding emotional coloring of the relationship. It manifests itself in selectivity, mutual understanding, sympathy, and readiness for mutual assistance. Friendship relationships arise on the basis of significant life circumstances, needs and interests of people than friendships.
Friendship is based on important life circumstances, commonality of views and interests, unity of life goals, ideas about the meaning of life, serious interest in each other’s fate. It consists of mutual assistance, inner closeness, affection, mutual trust, sincerity, personal sympathy, openness, selflessness, devotion and fidelity, exactingness and integrity, as well as intimate communication. Friendship is valuable in itself, and a friend is in a certain sense close person. Friends help each other not for selfish reasons, but often even to the detriment of personal interests.
Unlike blood or family ties, friendship is individually selective and based on mutual sympathy. It is often viewed as the highest moral value, the pinnacle of truly human relationships. Aristotle considered friendship to be the most essential need of life. No one, he said, chooses a life without friends, even in exchange for all the good things in life. Friendship is incompatible with pragmatism. Even A. Schopenhauer admired the phenomenon of friendship, although he doubted its possibility, considering egoism to be the fundamental property of a person.
Friends are characterized by: unselfishness, devotion, responsiveness, sincerity and cordiality, mutual trust, honesty, fidelity, the ability to keep secrets, exactingness and adherence to principles, generosity and easygoingness, the ability to forgive rash actions, respect for honor and dignity, simplicity in behavior. Having friends is an indispensable condition for satisfaction in life. Friendship is incompatible with selfishness and betrayal.
The complication of relations between the individual and society exacerbates the need for intellectual and emotional contact between people, individualizes friendship, and the idea of a friend as an alter ego (second “I”).
True friendship is based on the complementarity and mutual enrichment of people. Even with a high intellectual and moral culture, people rarely decide to single-handedly define their personal relationships as friendship, partnership or friendship. According to the German writer L. Tieck, few of them are given the gift of being true friends. The ideal of friendship is so high that few people dare to classify relationships as friendship.
Friendship is a deep, intimate feeling for a specific person. It involves high trust, revealing to a friend your secrets, intentions, states of mind, self-criticism. This does not happen between friends or comrades, even family. True, even in the communication of friends there are limits to openness; tact is needed. After all, even in “communication” with himself, each person does not fully open up.
It is necessary to prepare for friendship as a necessary component of happiness by mastering El unwritten rules, according to which friends have:
Complement, enrich each other, and not duplicate;
Help a person who is a friend;
Wish your friend happiness in word and deed;
Take care that your friend enjoys company;
Share successes and failures with a friend;
Express intellectual and emotional support to a friend;
Defend second in his absence and do not criticize in front of others;
Trust a friend and keep the secrets entrusted to them;
Be patient with his friends;
Don't bother each other;
Respect your friend's inner world.
To have a friend, you need to be a friend. Not everyone is ready for such a relationship. Among people there are those whose moral qualities are beyond doubt. People who are shy, uncommunicative, and focused on experiencing their inner world may be incapable of friendship.
Love is the most mysterious, multi-valued and complex phenomenon: “love for your children” (“maternal love”, “parental love”), “love for your people”, “love for music” and others. It is one thing to know what love is, even to be able to define the corresponding concept, another is to experience the feeling of love.
A deep and mysterious type of love is individual sexual (erotic) love - love. It is characterized by high emotional and spiritual tension, based on the comprehension of the maximum value of a person who is an object of love. It encourages complete merging, unity with your loved one. Erotic love is a complex combination of cultivated biological needs with moral, aesthetic and psychological impulses of the individual.
The idea of the simultaneous polarization and attraction of the masculine and feminine principles is expressed in the myth that Plato addressed in his dialogue "Symposium". According to its plot, when a man and a woman were one being, and later they were divided into halves. Since then, each half is doomed to look for the other (its other half) in order to become one.
Only in love and thanks to love does a person become a person. Without love, she is incomplete, deprived of real life, unable to adequately know others and herself, and act effectively and creatively. Human experience of all times and peoples testifies to the greatest human need for love. Not only artists, but also philosophers write about love, but they “write” in different ways.
The norms of relationships between people in love are so “flexible” that sometimes they do not lend themselves to moral assessments at all. In this regard, according to I. Kon, the well-known moral rules Behaviors and assessments lose their indisputability and become relative. After all, love is a manifestation of human freedom. It “takes” people beyond the generally accepted, ordinary, pragmatic attitude to reality. The feeling of love is not only moral, but also aesthetic. Love is one of the highest forms of overcoming the alienation of people, therefore it is considered the pinnacle of moral (truly human) attitude towards a person. According to Augustine (Aurelius), we know as much as we love. According to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, love “removes” all one-aspectness, all exceptions, boundaries of virtues. Love is a high art that requires self-improvement, creativity, and inner freedom from a person.
In Christianity, love is the new divine covenant, the principle, the pinnacle of human abilities. This is how love for one's neighbor should be. It is impossible if it is not based on the love of God. According to the German thinker Dietrich von Hildebrand, love unites all the basic moral principles of man: “... temperance is love that is completely given to the one it concerns. Courage is love that easily endures everything for the sake of the beloved. Justice is love , which serves only the beloved and therefore rightfully reigns. Reason is love, which soulfully distinguishes what helps it from what causes obstacles to it. But such love... concerns only God, that is, the highest good, the highest wisdom. , perfect harmony."
With the development of society, the understanding of love changed, filling it with social, primarily moral and aesthetic content, becoming a model of relationships between people. This process is not entirely progressive. According to the Austrian theologian and philosopher Andreas Laun, “the world of the free West is thoroughly sexualized, everyone calls for sex” in thoughts, words and deeds, “and the Internet, among other things, acts as a new kind of mental sexual sin... The alternative should not be prudishness and contempt for the flesh, and the testament of love between a man and a woman as a godly path to holiness - precisely thanks to marital love."
People in love are not always able to be true friends, which is explained various types their activities, areas of intellectual interests, different levels of needs, etc. Therefore, a person who loves often feels the need for friends. And there is no antagonistic contradiction in this.
In ancient Greece, there were four types of love: eros, philia, agape and storge. Eros is ardent love, physical and spiritual passion, attraction to intimacy with a loved one. This type of love is predominantly characteristic of men. Philia is love-friendship, more spiritual and calmer than eros, feelings. More common among young girls. Agape is altruistic, spiritual love, full of sacrifice and self-denial. The most similar to the mother. Storge - love-tenderness, family love, full of warm attention to your loved one.
The specifics of modern ideas about love are fully expressed by the teachings of E. Fromm. In his opinion, a person’s constant experience of his isolation, isolation from other people gives rise to anxiety, anxiety, a feeling of helplessness, and inability to realize oneself. Unity with other people working together is not personal; union with another person in sexual ecstasy is temporary; unity achieved by adapting to another person is pseudo-unity. Uniting with another person with a feeling of love, subject to the preservation of individuality, helps to overcome the feeling of isolation, loneliness, “oneself, to maintain one’s integrity.” He called the paradox of love “two beings become one and remain two.” The main idea of E. Fromm is that love is an art that requires self-improvement, dedication, readiness for action and self-sacrifice.
The specificity of morality and ethics of family relationships is determined by the specificity of contradictions and conflicts in the family. The emergence of family contradictions is due to unequal temperaments, characters, habits, preferences, worldviews and ideals of people. One of the reasons for their extinction is often the manifestation of important character traits that were unmanifested and unnoticed during the premarital period of life. Added to this may be a shortage of housing, low wages, unemployment, etc. Other causes of contradictions or conflict are the inability of spouses to find compromise solutions to misunderstandings; violation of moral norms of family life (infidelity, jealousy); psychological or biological (sexual) incompatibility; different views on raising a child (children); misunderstandings between parents and children; improper relationships of spouses with relatives, acquaintances, employees; incompatibility of interests, needs, tastes, characters, ideals. In general, most family conflicts arise over trifles. The cause of contradiction or conflict can also be fundamental issues. When solving them, it is important to find a compromise without suppressing the partner’s “I” and myself; be able to forget grievances; respect the habits, preferences, views, ideals of your spouse, and when trying to change them, do it reasonedly, tactfully, without imposing your opinion, without humiliating your dignity. Controversies should not be resolved publicly, “washing dirty linen in public.”
Moral standards of human behavior are flexible, universal, and are achieved primarily by their unwritten character. The boundaries of these norms are not subject to rigid, unambiguous definition. This promotes manifestations of human free will and greater opportunities for choice (freedom of expression).
Moral norms of personal relations are flexible compared to others, for example, with the norms of business moral relations. And the norms of friendly relations are flexible than business ones, comradely ones - than friendly ones, friendly ones - more universal than friendly and comradely ones, lovers - than everyone else. The difference between personal and extra-personal moral norms is manifested in what requests can be made to a friend, comrade, friend or loved one; what help can be offered to him (her); where and in what form he (she) can easily be received (to visit oneself, to a restaurant, to the country house, etc.); communication questions are correct; how much criticism is acceptable; jokes are decent. Even the forms of greeting friends, comrades, friends, lovers have their own specifics.
The phenomenon of violence in communication
Violence is another manifestation anticulture of communication, moreover, it is very close to marginality both in form and in essence. Violence in communication manifests itself in rejection of the partner’s right to autonomy, independence, “self”; in resorting to forceful techniques and methods of pressure; in the use of fear and coercion.
Violence as a principle of communication has always accompanied human relationships - both in social and interpersonal aspects. But it has become especially widespread, widespread and sophisticated (except for the period of primitive savagery) in our time. There are a number of reasons for this: social, psychological, moral.
Social roots of violence in communication should be sought, as noted above, in the features of the 20th century. Revolutions, wars, dictatorial and totalitarian regimes and repressions against individuals and nations - all this gradually devalued human life, made it a bargaining chip in the political games of “power fighters”, and taught people to “communicate” through the sight of a gun. Violence, which has become the norm in socio-political relations, could not but affect interpersonal relations, introducing into them habit of violence.
True, there is a point of view (B.-A. Levy, A. Glucksman) according to which the devaluation of human life is not a syndrome of the 20th century, but a slow but sure process associated with the development of Western European rationalism, which accustomed people to cold, balanced pragmatism, to suppress feelings and emotions of compassion and mercy. Just XX century. turned out to be a time when the massive scale and significance of hostility and confrontation began to crowd out normal interpersonal human relationships.
Psychological bases of violence in communication convincingly revealed Freudianism, showing that violence gives feeling of power over another, acting as a unique way of self-realization (see about this “Escape from Freedom” by E. Fromm). Moreover, the level and scope of such “self-affirmation” can be very different - from Hitler’s totalitarianism to family tyranny. The latter is especially important to keep in mind for a teacher, one of whose responsibilities is to establish contact and mutual understanding with the child’s family.
Unfortunately, family tyranny, violence and cruelty have become common phenomena in our families, turning into a field of self-affirmation for parents who compensate for their failures in “adult” life at the expense of children dependent on them. Parents take it out on them for their own failures and mistakes. But even in so-called prosperous families, communication with children from a position of force - shouting, physical punishment, humiliation - is often the norm. Therefore, when complaining about a student to his parents, the teacher must be extremely careful not to “set up” the child or provoke violence towards him.
Moral reasons for violence in communication First of all, the “protoculture” and “barriers” of communication, which were mentioned above, appear. Moreover, it condones violence and anonymity moral life associated with urbanization, which hides from human judgment the lawlessness committed by other citizens.
Regarding areas of violence, then, unfortunately, it knows no boundaries, penetrating into a variety of spheres of communication - in interpersonal and family, group and intergroup, business and political, professional and other relationships. Forms of violence can be different - psychological pressure, moral subordination, physical coercion, sexual harassment (for example, towards a working woman by a boss). Aggressive, intolerant behavior in a quarrel, conflict, insistence on one’s own at any cost is also a type of violence.
The saddest thing is that violence is sometimes perceived as norm, does not cause any protest and is not regarded as anticulture in communication, which can only be counteracted by a different approach - principle nonviolence .
Thus, to effectively realize the value of human communication, at least two things are necessary. Firstly, goodwill, desire and desire for mutual understanding. But in order for these good intentions to be recognized and captured by the other side, so that the partner can respond to them, it is necessary, secondly, a common “space of understanding”, the basis of which is a high culture of communication, requiring from each person introspection, self-criticism and work on oneself.
8.3. Ethics of intimate relationships
Friendship as the highest form of communication
Friendship recognized greatest moral and social value by most people. First essay theories of friendship as an independent relationship, which does not coincide with other types of social connections and emotional attachments, was created by Aristotle, who subjected friendship to philosophical, aesthetic and psychological analysis. According to Aristotle, friendship is the greatest value, the most necessary thing in life: no one chooses to live without friends, even in exchange for all other benefits.
Perfect, true friendship selfless. But at the same time, friendship is nurtured towards a friend “for the benefit of oneself”, therefore the attitude towards a friend does not differ from the attitude of a person towards himself. Thanks to this, friendship is also a necessary means self-knowledge: “Just as when we want to see our own face, we look in the mirror and see it, so when we want to know ourselves, we can know ourselves by looking at a friend.” A person has no one closer than a friend, Aristotle believes, therefore the number of friends has limits: close friendship is friendship with a few.
Each era brought something new to the understanding of friendship. One thing remained unchanged: at all times, friendship was considered one of the highest and at the same time rare values in human life.
True friendship was considered a great rarity by the romantics of the early 19th century. According to the German writer L. Tieck, all people love, or at least think that they love, “but only very few are given the gift of being friends in the true sense of the word.” A. Schopenhauer admired friendship and at the same time doubted its existence: “True, genuine friendship presupposes a strong, purely objective and completely disinterested participation in the joys and sorrows of another person, and this participation, in turn, presupposes a real identification of oneself with another . This is so contrary to the selfishness of human nature that true friendship belongs to things about which it remains unknown whether they belong to the realm of fables or really exist somewhere.”
Friendship- This close relationships based on mutual trust, affection, and common interests. Friendship presupposes close personal relationships between people, based on deep personal affection and sympathy, on unity of views, interests and life goals, which are expressed in the desire for long-term, diverse communication.
Unlike business relationships where one person uses another as a means to achieve his goal, friendship is a relationship self-valuable, which in itself is a good; friends help each other selflessly,“not for service, but for friendship.” Unlike consanguineous connections where people are connected by ties of blood or family solidarity, friendship - individually selective and is based on mutual sympathy. Finally, in contrast to superficial friendships. friendship - attitude deep And intimate, implying internal intimacy, frankness, trust, love. It’s not for nothing that we call a friend our alter ego (another self) .
Main criteria and properties of friendship. Proximity And emotionality, related to selectivity And exclusivity friendship, determine such criteria as unselfishness, devotion and loyalty, exactingness and integrity, sincerity and trust.
Unselfishness in friendship it presupposes relationships that are free from considerations of profit and are built on a willingness to help each other, sometimes to the detriment of their own personal interests. Devotion And loyalty Friends strengthen a person’s faith in his own strength: he knows that in difficult times a friend will not leave him in trouble and will find an opportunity to help and support. Mutual exactingness And integrity, making friendship an active force can lead to great creative success, because they contribute to the self-improvement of each of the friends. We place the highest demands on a friend (however, our demands on ourselves are not always so high: we see a friend’s shortcomings, but not always our own).
Communication between friends, in which each reveals the most important and intimate things to the other, enriches both and allows them to better understand and realize what is happening in their own souls. Therefore, a friend is extremely highly valued trust, sincerity And cordiality, generosity And flexibility, ability to keep secrets And forgive rash act. The absence of these qualities destroys friendships.
Friendship is one of the manifestations love for a person unity between people, spiritual mutual resonance. Affirming the exclusivity and incomparability of a friend is tantamount to recognizing him as an absolute value. Friendship involves respect for honor and dignity friend, honesty in relation to him. And this is the high moral essence of friendship.
Some “rules” or “laws” of friendship. True friendship rarely happens right away. Usually it is preceded by searches, failures, and fragile contacts.
How it happens choice of friends? What makes one person attractive to another, does he look for in the other his own likeness or, on the contrary, the addition of qualities that he himself lacks? Perhaps both opinions are equally valid. Understanding a friend as an “other self” presupposes similarity between them: people who differ significantly in their opinions are unlikely to be particularly close. However, alter ego is not easy second I, namely other Me: friends are not meant to duplicate, but complement and enrich each other.
The emergence of friendship contribute above all community of views, interests, ideals, life goals. And if the basis of friendship is their proximity or coincidence, then friendship often lasts throughout life, regardless of the obstacles in its path. Necessary conditions for the formation of friendship are also mutual respect, personal sympathy And affection for each other.
Are there "rules" for establishing friendship? It is believed that:
2. The marginalized approaches the other with a purely utilitarian positions (often without realizing it). The style of his relations with other “strangers”) is a “vampire style”: he uses a person (in a variety of senses, not only in the primitive material, but sometimes in the spiritual), and then acts according to the “material” principle “used” - threw it away." .
3. Marginality in communication is, as a rule, armycharacter. The marginalized person is distinguished by confidence in his own rightness and the right to reject others, pride in himself and his principles. Marginality crosses out any possibility of compromise and mutual understanding, putting forward “struggle” as the main value and program of action. This focus on confrontation can manifest itself in public life, professional activity or personal activities, but in any case it is not only unproductive, but also introduces great moral evil into the system of interpersonal relations and communication.
Thus, if we take as a basis that the culture of communication presupposes an attitude towards the Other as a subject equal to me, for whom I am ready to recognize the right to “selfhood”, “otherness” and to whom I am ready to treat with tolerance and respect, then marginality is anticulture in communication.
The culture of communication does not exist in the abstract, in its “pure form”. It is realized and manifested in various fields human activity, in specific life situations. A large place in the general range of situational life problems is occupied by those that are purely personal for each of us, intimate character.
Ethics of intimate relationships seems to be opposed to the ethics of business and professional relations, the ethics of citizenship, environmental ethics, which act as ethics of public actions, which prescribes norms and rules of behavior in situations, so to speak, “mass”, “public”, associated, for example, with political or environmental rallies, actions, movements, or with business negotiations and meetings, or with professional communication of a specialist. Unlike her ethics of intimate relationships examines the situations that arise in the relationships of two or three very close people, connected by ties of friendship, love, sexual affection, marriage and family. This is a wide range of problems, involving extremely trusting, sensitive relationship close people, not put on public display, but extremely important for each of us. They are especially significant at the beginning of life, when our future fate depends on how they develop - in the family, with a friend, or a loved one. At the same time, lack of experience and knowledge often becomes the cause of many failures at a young age, leaving an imprint on the rest of life. Therefore, this side of communication between young people cannot be ignored by the teacher.
The true manifestation of intimate interpersonal communication, in which its value and features are most fully realized, is Friendship And Love.
the most favorable age for establishing intense and lasting contacts, the peak of friendship is, as a rule, adolescence and early youth, school and student years;
before making friends, you need to feel sympathy for a person, a desire to communicate with him, and this sympathy must be mutual;
Mutual sympathy alone is not enough for friendship: a common cause is also needed. or. at least common interests;
the first step in establishing friendly relations does not have to be personal contact; friendship can begin with correspondence, including computer correspondence;
it is possible that friendship may begin with conflict;
It is very important at the very beginning of friendship not to be deceived in your feelings: a person should feel, that someone else needs him.
Once formed, friendships do not develop automatically; it is advisable that the teacher shows students how important it is to take care of maintaining friendship. Being the deepest, most intimate relationship, friendship necessarily presupposes trust, manifested in revealing to another one’s secrets, intentions, states, i.e. V self-disclosure.
The degree of self-disclosure in communication with strangers, parents, or a close friend will vary. Maximum self-disclosure is achieved precisely in communication with friends. Although this also has its limits. As a rule, frankness is perceived positively. But you should know that too complete and hasty self-disclosure, which does not correspond to the stage of development of the relationship, is perceived as a violation of the boundaries of intimacy or an attempt to invade the inner world of another, which prompts him to withdraw and even break off contact. Therefore, in friendly communication it is always necessary tact.
Friendly communication between people depends on personal properties, which are formed independently of our will and desires and therefore cannot be blamed or credited to us. So, they shouldn’t interfere with friendship sociability or isolation, at the same time, friendship is incompatible with selfishness And betrayal.
Friendship has its own moral code . Necessary be able to make friends, and for this you should adhere to some unwritten rules of friendship:
share your successes and failures with a friend;
help a friend if necessary;
try to make your friend feel good in your company;
show a friend emotional support;
be confident in a friend and trust him;
protect a friend in his absence and not criticize him publicly;
keep secrets entrusted to a friend;
be tolerant of the rest of his friends;
do not be annoying and do not lecture;
respect the inner peace and freedom of a friend.
Love as attitude and attraction
A lot has been said and written about love. There are formulas of love, scientific definitions, philosophical treatises... And yet for each new generation entering life, philosophy and ethics of love - This is a secret behind seven seals, a fortress that you must conquer yourself, going through a difficult path of gain and loss. And since it is at a young age that it is so important not only to learn the great mystery of this mysterious feeling, so diverse and unpredictable, but also to be able to develop in oneself ability to love, so we will dwell on the analysis of the phenomenon of love in more detail. After all, as A. Blok said, “only a lover has the right to the title of man.”
In a broad sense Love- this is the property and right of a free person - a moral and aesthetic feeling, expressed in a disinterested and selfless desire for one’s object, in the need and readiness for dedication. A person who loves becomes more sensitive to beauty. A special aesthetics of love- a person’s desire for a perfect life, which is built according to the laws of beauty, goodness, freedom, and justice. Moreover, this craving for harmony and ideal affects both the mind and the deep emotional layers of the human soul.
A special place in the system of human relations occupies erotic love - one of the most powerful experiences in the intimate life of a person, which may (or may not) become the guarantee and basis of her happiness. We are talking about the love of two people, a love that longs for complete fusion, unity with the loved one. It is by its nature exceptional and therefore acts as highest moral value. At the same time, this is a real earthly attitude and attraction relatively independent desire and need and in this capacity it is the highest form of interpersonal communication.
Love connecting a man and a woman is a complex set of human experiences that arise as a result of the fusion of biological needs, transformed by culture, with the moral, aesthetic and psychological aspirations of the individual. Where do these feelings come from? Perhaps love is a person’s “hunger” for a person, a feeling of incredible inner necessity in it, the strongest of all emotional needs.
The idea of polarization and at the same time the attraction of masculine and feminine principles is most strongly expressed in the myth retold by Plato in the dialogue “Symposium”: once a man and a woman were a single being - an androgyne. Then they were divided into halves, and now each of the halves is doomed to look for the other in order to again form a single whole with it.
But a person in love needs not just a being of a different sex, but a being that has aesthetic appeal, intellectual and emotional-psychological value, a common morality, and sexual and erotic attraction. If at least one of these components is missing, love “will not happen” or its illusion will arise, which will inevitably collapse and die.
It is difficult to understand love, and even more difficult to explain it. She brings joy to man, makes his life pleasant and beautiful, gives birth to bright dreams, inspires and elevates. At the same time, love is the source of many sufferings and even tragedies. It is associated with anxiety, jealousy, and anxiety. In love, opposite feelings are united: suffering and pleasure, joy and sadness, delight and disappointment. “Love is a deceitful country” and at the same time the most alluring of feelings. It gives not only intense pleasure, but at the same time severe pain, not only the most acute happiness, but also the most severe grief. Along with the ups in love there are always downs; it seems to be split into contradictions, full of endless secrets and mysteries. Its poles and contrasts merge into a mass of unique combinations, and it is impossible to predict which of these combinations a person will get.
Love story. The first theories of love appeared almost twenty-five centuries ago in Ancient Greece - from Socrates, Plato, Aristotle.
According to Plato, love is a dual feeling that combines the opposite sides of human nature: a person’s craving for beauty lives in it - and the feeling of something missing, defective, the desire to make up for what a person does not have. For Plato, love is a ladder that leads to the meaning of life, to immortality. It turns a person into a part of the world whole, connects him with earth and sky, with the foundations of all life. It makes a person more than he is - it raises him above himself, puts him between mortals and immortals. This is how the idea of the great uplifting power of love first arose.
In ancient Greek antiquity, there were four types of love: eros, philia, agape, storge, with which it is advisable to introduce young people.
Eros - ecstatic love, physical and spiritual passion, violent craving for possession of a loved one. This passion is more for oneself; there is a lot of egocentrism in it. She is “masculine type”, it is rather the feeling of an ardent youth or young man; it is less common in women.
Philia - love-friendship, a more spiritual and calmer feeling. Psychologically, she is closest to the love of a young girl. Among the Greeks, philia united not only lovers, but also friends.
Agape - altruistic, spiritual love, full of sacrifice and self-denial, built on condescension and forgiveness, similar to maternal love. This is love not for oneself, but for the sake of another, not only a loving feeling, but also the ideal of humane love for one’s neighbor.
Storge - love-tenderness, family love, full of gentle attention to the beloved. It grew out of natural affection for relatives and emphasizes the carnal and spiritual kinship of lovers.
In the Middle Ages, the essence and meaning of love was defined through measure. But how and with what is possible measure love? An all-consuming passion, offspring, or something else? This is very difficult to determine. And no one could do this more accurately than St. Augustine, who said: “The measure of love is love without measure.”
The appearance of love in her current understanding, many researchers associate it with the relatively recent past - those deep processes that took place in Europe at the beginning of the 2nd millennium, when, after a long period of barbarism, a gradual spiritual upsurge began in society. Philosophy and art are developing, people's lifestyles are changing. One of the indicators of these changes is the emergence chivalry, who became the patron and bearer of a developing culture and special cult of love.
This cult had its own god - Cupid, its goddesses - Beautiful Ladies, its servants - troubadours, its fans - knights. In the code of knightly love there was a canon of exploits, a canon of glorification and praise of the Lady, a canon of love for life; They had their own rituals, customs, and morals. Only after several months of courtship, following the rules, the knight slowly rose from one level of intimacy to another, depending on his merits to his beloved. Knightly love was primarily spiritual, psychologically developed. Its center was in the knight’s soul, being for him the main source of love joys.
In Russian ethical thought The philosopher devoted much attention to the study of the phenomenon of love Vl. Soloviev. He defines love as “the attraction of an animate being to another for the purpose of union with him and mutual replenishment of life.” From the reciprocity of relations he deduces three types of love. The first is love that gives more than it receives - descending Love. The second is love that receives more than it gives - ascending Love. Third - when both balanced.
In the first case, this is, for example, parental love, based on pity and compassion; it includes the care of the strong for the weak, the elders for the younger; outgrowing family - “fatherly” relationships, it creates the concept of “fatherland”. The second case is the love of children for their parents, it rests on a feeling of gratitude and reverence; outside the family, it gives rise to ideas about spiritual values. The emotional basis of the third type of love is the fullness of vital reciprocity, which is achieved in sexual love; here pity and reverence are combined with a feeling of shame and create a new spiritual appearance of a person.
It is interesting that Solovyov believed that “sexual love and reproduction of the species are in an inverse relationship with each other: the stronger one is, the weaker the other.” He deduced the following dependencies from this: strong love very often remains unrequited; with reciprocity, strong passion sometimes leads to a tragic end, leaving no offspring; happy love, if very strong, also usually remains fruitless.
Vl. Soloviev saw five possible ways to develop love - two false and three true. The first false path is “hellish” - painful unrequited passion. The second (also false) is “animal” - indiscriminate satisfaction of sexual desire. The third way (the first true one) is marriage. The fourth (also true) is asceticism. The fifth - the highest path - is Divine love, when what appears before us is not a gender - “half a person”, but a whole person in a combination of male and female principles. In this case, the person becomes a “superman”; this is where he decides the main task of love is to perpetuate the beloved, save him from death and decay.
Modern ideas about love. For the most part, they are based on the existentialist understanding the essence of man and his existence, which, in turn, is connected with the eternal question of how to overcome one’s “separateness”, how to go beyond one’s own individual life and find unity with another. It is in this “human situation”, in the very essence of man - in his desire for unity sees the origins of love E. Fromm.
The experience of separation gives rise to anxiety, he believes. To be separated means to be rejected, helpless, not to be able to realize one's human powers. However, the unity achieved by working together is not interpersonal; the union achieved in sexual ecstasy is transitory; unity achieved in adaptation to another is pseudo-unity.
Authentic "the answer to the problem of human existence" is contained in the achievement of a very special, unique type of unity - merging with another person while maintaining one’s own individuality. It is this type of interpersonal unity that is achieved in love , which unites a person with others, helping him overcome feelings of isolation and loneliness. At the same time, love “allows a person to remain himself, to maintain his integrity. In love there is a paradox: two beings become one and at the same time remain two” (E. Fromm). But love is not a happy accident or a fleeting episode; love is an art that requires self-improvement, dedication, readiness to act and self-sacrifice from a person.
This is exactly what E. Fromm talks about in the book “The Art of Love”: “Love is not a sentimental feeling, which every person can experience, regardless of the level of maturity he has achieved. All attempts at love are doomed to failure if a person does not strive more actively to develop his whole personality in order to achieve a productive orientation; satisfaction in love cannot be achieved without the ability to love one's neighbor, without true humanity, courage, faith and discipline."
E. Fromm highlights five elements inherent in love: giving, caring, responsibility, respect and knowledge. The paradoxical nature of Fromm's approach to the phenomenon of love and at the same time its productivity for educating a young person ability to love makes you convert special attention teachers to the author's argumentation.
1. “Loving is mainly about giving and not about receiving. Giving- this is the highest manifestation of power... I feel abundant, spending, alive, happy. Giving is more joyful than receiving.” For Fromm, love is not just a feeling, it is, first of all, the ability to give another the strength of one’s soul. But what does it mean give? The answer to this question is full of ambiguity and confusion.
The most widespread misconception is that to give means to give up something, to become deprived of something, to sacrifice something. But this is how the act of giving is perceived by a person who takes the position of authoritarian ethics and is oriented toward appropriation. He is ready to give only in exchange for something; to give without receiving anything in return means for him to be deceived.
What can one person give to another? He gives himself, the most precious thing he has gives his life. This should not mean that he sacrifices his life to another. He gives him his joy, his interest, his understanding, his knowledge, his humor, his sadness - all the experiences and manifestations of what is alive in him. This giving your life it enriches the other person, increases his sense of vitality. Moreover, he does not give in order to take in return: giving in itself can bring pleasure. At the same time, by giving, he evokes something in the other person that comes back to him: he encourages the other person to also become a giver, and they both share the joy that together they have brought into life. Therefore true love is the strength of a person capable of giving, the power that gives rise to reciprocal love. Thus, Love - This activity, action, a way of self-realization, which consists in giving and not taking.
2. At the same time Love - This statement And fruitfulness. She creative Essentially, it resists destruction, conflict, and hostility. Moreover, love is a form productive activity, showing care and interest in the object of love, emotional response, expression of diverse feelings towards him (emotional “resonance”).
That love means caring is most evident in the love of a mother for her child. None of her assurances will convince us that she really loves if she does not care about the child, neglects his feeding and care; but when we see her care for the child, we believe in her love. This also applies to the love of animals and flowers. “Love is an active interest in life and the development of what we love” (E. Fromm).
Fulfillment of these requirements requires a high level moral culture personality and psychological readiness to friendship. Not all people are capable of this feeling. And not because they cannot give without receiving anything in return, not because they have a more developed ego, and not even because they lack the wisdom to accept another person. Cause inability to friendship may be rooted in psycho-emotional characteristics of the individual.
Thus, extroverts, oriented outwardly, to the world of external objects, easily and quickly establishing contacts with people, have a pronounced need and ability to make friends and have many friends. But introverts, shy and uncommunicative, whose subtle mental organization is more aimed at experiencing their inner world, find it difficult to get along with people. The fear of being misunderstood makes them remain lonely. If such people have a friend, then for the rest of their lives, and having once experienced disappointment, they no longer try to look for a new friend.
People who share friendly relations are different, so they cannot be approached with the same standards. Having a friend is a great blessing. But in order to have this benefit, you need to constantly work on yourself, learn tolerance and stability in relationships. There is a wise rule: If you want to have a friend, be one! In other words, be a good friend yourself, respond to your friend’s joys and sorrows, think about how to make his life happier. Don’t spare your time, energy, and most importantly, your soul for this.
This aspect of love responsibility , is a response to the expressed or unexpressed needs of a human being. To be “responsible” means to be able and willing to “respond.” A loving person feels responsible for his neighbors, just as he feels responsible for himself. In love, responsibility concerns, first of all, the mental needs of another person. As A. de Saint-Exupéry said, “we are forever responsible for everyone we tame.”
Responsibility could degenerate into a desire for superiority and domination if there were no respect in love. “Respect is not fear and reverence, it is the ability to see a person as he is, to recognize his unique individuality.”
Respect presupposes non-exploitation. “I want the person I love to grow and develop for himself, in his own way, and not to serve me. If I love another person, I feel oneness with him, but with him as he is, and not with him as I need him as a means to my ends.”
5. “It is impossible to respect a person without knowing him: care and responsibility would be blind if knowledge did not guide them.” Fromm considered love as one of the ways to understand the “secret of man,” and knowledge - as an aspect of love, which is an instrument of knowledge that allows one to penetrate to the very essence.
Thus, Love - This active interest in the life of the one we love. But at the same time love is also the process of self-renewal and self-enrichment. True love enhances the feeling of fullness of life and expands the boundaries of individual existence.
Some Distinctive Properties of Love . Love can manifest itself in a wide variety of forms, at any age, between people very similar and very different, and at the same time it has its own distinctive properties, which make it possible to develop certain recommendations to help young people recognize it among other feelings and be able to cultivate and save it.
1. Love should be distinguished fromfalling in love - “the sudden collapse of the barriers that existed until that moment between two strangers” (E. Fromm).
Unites love and infatuation passion, which unexpectedly pushes two almost strangers towards each other. Passion may not require respect, community of interests, or unity of moral principles. But the fate of passion depends not only on sexual attraction. And after a stranger becomes close, the barriers and surprise of rapprochement disappear, the impulse of passion may remain as fleeting love, so be it all-consuming love. At the same time love It may be hotter than love, it may burn a person more strongly, but, as a rule, it does not penetrate into the depths of the soul and therefore fades away faster. This is a “me-centric” feeling, a “for oneself” feeling. Love it strikes a person deeper, penetrates into the most hidden corners of his soul, fills it entirely and therefore lives longer and changes a person more.
2. Love in its essence -spiritual state , which gives a person the right to physical intimacy. And then the eternal and natural question is legitimate - Why do people love each other? Recognize that love is a mutual attraction to each other’s mental and physical qualities, or that love is only for high manifestations human qualities, means either reducing the explanation to general phrases, or telling a deliberate lie. It is believed that one falls in love with a person who, to a greater extent than others, embodies the ideal of a lover. However, this approach does not explain why people love those who are unkind, deceitful, stupid, and generally far from ideal. One thing is certain - these contradictions point to a certain law of love, which is yet to be revealed - her unpredictable and at the same time demanding selectivity.
After all, it is known that one loves by difference, by contrast, even by antagonism of inclinations, when the qualities of one are replenished, neutralized or corrected by the qualities of the other. But they also love by likeness, by the identity of characters and interests, which increases the steadfastness of those who love in the harsh trials of life. The flashes are amazing love at first sight generally dismissing the question “why?” Sometimes it is not even clear who we love - the person himself or our own. "optical illusion" when love increases the merits of a loved one, and reduces the disadvantages.
3. Along with “optical illusion,” love has such a property as clairvoyance . The lover sees depths in his beloved that he himself often does not know about. Clairvoyance of love is both the feeling of a person’s hidden depths and the unconscious sensation of his hidden peaks. It's like a sense of its merits, which can manifest themselves through love. Therefore, love is understanding a loved one, which very often amazes lovers: how deeply he understands me, how accurately he guesses my desires, how he grasps at a glance what I want to say.
Such superintuition, which love gives birth to empathy with the feelings of another person give an amazing state of complete human intimacy, the “fusion” of two souls. Therefore, one of the most ancient and beautiful properties of true love is harmony “I” and “not I”, the desire of lovers for complete fusion.
4. Love is not “one-dimensional”; it seems to consist of two counter flows. The first one is ours love “for another”: a strange, almost physical feeling of being one with him; the ability to feel what is happening in the soul of another; a restless desire to do everything for a loved one, to sacrifice oneself in order to protect him. For such love you need a talent for feelings, which not everyone has.
Second stream - love “for oneself”. It is capable of stirring up all the amazing richness of our sensations; through its prism, the world is perceived cleaner, more acutely, it empowers life person with meaning, because awareness of the absolute value of another person gives meaning to one's own existence.
Therefore, the contradictory, fairly widespread opinions and prejudices that love selfish (most often men think this way) or altruistic (women claim). The fact is that altruism is just as “one-centered” as egoism, only the center is not in oneself, but in another person. Therefore, altruistic love quickly becomes a kind of “illness” of the soul, similar to unrequited love: the “composition of feelings” in it is shifted, truncated, the person here lacks the joys of reciprocal care, approval, support, affection. It undermines the soul, poisons the feeling.
5. In love you can highlight two aspects:internal, psychological - the ability to emotionally experience feelings of love, and external, social - real relationships that arise between lovers. In practice, they are closely interrelated and have a mutually shaping effect on each other.
Indeed, many things are associated with the concept of love. intimate psychological feelings, state and deactions, directed at another person. Love is accompanied by confusion, curiosity and fear, ecstasy and indifference, selflessness and selfishness, delicacy and cynicism, arrogance and modesty, apathy and inspiration. Tenderness is often accompanied by embarrassment, respect and admiration. Ecstasy is almost always inseparable from violent passion and from an unquestioning readiness to surrender; indifference is the result of premature exhaustion and vulgarization of relationships.
IN socially love is one of the few areas in which a person is able to feel and experience his absolute indispensability. In many social roles and the functions of a particular person can be replaced, changed, but not in love. Here the individual has the highest value, the highest value compared to others. Only in love can a person feel the meaning of his existence for another and the meaning of another’s existence for himself. Love helps a person to manifest himself, revealing and increasing everything positive and valuable in him.
6. One of the really significant problems of love is problem of power.
Love can be compared to a small, complex state. All kinds of relationships are possible here: democracy, anarchy, absolutism, and even despotism. But on one condition: if this form is accepted voluntarily by both parties. In the initial, “festive” time of love, each of us with pleasure obeys to the whims of a beloved creature, sincerely and inspiredly plays at being a slave, joyfully yielding to each other. But over time, the holiday ends, and now everyone resentfully demands what was not given to them. But love is when I take care of you, and you take care of me. Love is not for egocentrics. Therefore, there is nothing sadder and more hopeless in love than a long and exhausting struggle for power.
7. Of particular interest is the question of freedom and necessity in love. Love is a sphere of freedom of a special kind. Her freedom and necessity are in herself. After all, the highest moral dignity of love is direct-intuitive sincerity of feeling, consecrated spiritual understanding. Love does not tolerate any violence, any external dependence or dictate.
You can force a person into marriage or cohabitation or buy them. But no one can force love neither another, nor oneself. Love is incorruptible.
Freedom in love is expressed in wealth its manifestations. Admiration, admiration, tenderness, and the delight of self-sacrifice give love a variety of individual colors. But all of these are different forms of love feelings, which are essentially aimed at the same thing - at the potential spiritual capabilities of the loved one; even if they are not destined to be realized.
Love is a completely original life, through which we realize and learn the meaning of life in general and our own autonomy. True Love opens a person's eyes, freeing him from cliches and stereotypes of vision, raising him above utilitarian interests and everyday existence. Love develops personality, makes it wise and courageous. Perhaps this happens because true love often arises when circumstances and prohibitions interfere with it, and therefore it develops through overcoming various obstacles. And then love is the criterion of our capabilities, abilitiesbe person .
And finally, the main and unconditional “property” of love is that love in all its varieties is always happy, Only dislike, absence and deficiency of love are unhappy:
Ethics of family relations
In the system of moral education, an important role is played by the preparation of young people for family life, which in turn will require from them a certain cultures of feelings And communication culture.
Of course, a family begins with love of two - love, the goal of which is not selfish satisfaction, but joy based on the joy of another person, when the lover experiences happiness by giving pleasure to the loved one or reducing, stopping his suffering. The formula of such love is simple: if I feel good because you feel good, and if I want you to feel better and I do this, then I love you. If my chosen one is guided by the same formula in his relationship with me, then he loves me too. The ability to love thus directly depends on ability to empathize, from the ability to think first of all not about yourself, but about your loved one, the ability to take care of him, to know that this is your happiness, and not to think about rewards. This skill does not come naturally. V.A. Sukhomlinsky noted that there is no special science of love - there is science of humanity. Whoever has mastered its alphabet is ready for beneficial spiritual, psychological, moral and ethical relationships, including in family life.
When two lovers decide to tie the knot, the last thing they think about is how suitable they are for each other. But it gradually becomes clear that in life together, not everything turns out as dreamed: after all, two characters meet, two individuals, each of which begins to assert itself over time. And then it turns out that in marriage and family relations much depends not only on reciprocity of love, but also from moral, psychological, sexual and even everyday culture partners.
Moral culture in family relationships manifests itself through moral qualities spouses, acting as a real confirmation of their love, such as kindness, caring for a loved one. Kindness is inseparable from tact, which presupposes the ability to understand the needs and experiences of another, to anticipate everything that could cause trouble or pain to a loved one. A tactful person tries to prevent unfavorable situations that lead to discord and quarrels, can cause pain to another and does not contribute to the strengthening of love and marriage. To develop a sense of tact, you need to put yourself in another person's place. This, in turn, becomes the basis tolerance, necessary in a marriage where completely different people meet and are “doomed” to be together: from different families, with different views, habits and interests. The most important moral quality loving people is also responsibility for a loved one. Organically combining restraint of desires and self-discipline, it prevents selfish actions that could cause offense or harm to a loved one.
Psychological culture, along with certain moral qualities, it contributes to the “grinding in” of characters, the “polishing” of feelings, the formation and improvement of harmonious relationships between spouses in the process of their communication. Of course, for a happy marriage it is desirable psychological compatibility partners, which has a biological basis. This is an innate type of temperament, and the ways in which partners react to this or that life situation, and the degree of their impressionability and anxiety. But even if partners are poorly compatible with each other, then psychological culture requires them to: respect the individuality of the other and fit to each other in various family situations, without breaking or “re-educating” each other. This process of “adjustment” occurs daily and hourly, requiring persistent and painstaking work by each spouse, first of all, on themselves.
Sexual culture of spouses assumes the presence of sensual attraction, respect and understanding of the partner’s desires, the ability and willingness to satisfy them, psychological emancipation and trust in intimate moments. Unfortunately, a significant portion of marriages (from one third to half) break up due to lack of sexual harmony, due to the inability to lead a sexual life in marriage that would satisfy both spouses. And this inability, as a rule, is based on incorrect sex education, on insufficient knowledge about how this aspect of family life should be organized. A significant part of the blame for this falls not only on family education, but also on school education, or more precisely, the lack of proper sex education, accompanied by the self-removal of teachers from this vitally important problem for young people.
Everyday culture of family relationships based on care, attention, empathy and a sense of responsibility. It manifests itself in the ability and readiness not only to “fairly” distribute family responsibilities, without dividing them into “male” and “female,” but also to lend a shoulder, shouldering the burden of another.
Not everyone can build happy, prosperous family. Egoists, selfish people, insincere, deceitful, spoiled people who cannot and do not want to work, most likely will not cope with this work. But, fortunately, there are not so many of them. There are many more who cannot create a happy family simply because they don’t know how, don’t know how to do it, although they sincerely want to. And shouldn't school teach them this?
What does it represent happy family life? Of course it is love, unity, mutual understanding, mutual assistance,harmony. At the same time, a happy family does not mean a cloudless existence without conflicts and quarrels. Perhaps, in reality there are no conflict-free families. But there are quite a lot of happy, prosperous marriages that lasted 30-50 years. Moreover, there is a relationship between the number of years lived together and the number of conflicts - the greater the first value, the less the second.
The problem of family conflicts lies not in the fact that they should not exist (this is not real), but in perceiving them correctly and getting out of them with dignity. The inevitability of family conflicts (and one must be prepared for this) is determined by the fact that two previously strangers decide to start a family, uniting their destinies. At the same time, they each come to each other with their own “baggage” - character, habits, upbringing, ideals and expectations. It takes some effort and time to turn these two “my luggage” into one common one - “ours”. And of course, this cannot happen without quarrels, conflicts and resentments. Only after the “common baggage” has been created, the number of quarrels and conflicts decreases, or they disappear altogether.
However, in some families this does not happen. On the contrary, falling in love (and sometimes love) passes, the feeling of mutual respect decreases (some unattractive sides, traits, details that were not noticed during the premarital period have become clear), and mutual adaptation, “grinding in” of characters, does not occur. And the number of quarrels increases, their severity intensifies, the impact on the soul increases.
TO main causes of conflicts include the following:
violation of the ethics of marital relations (infidelity, jealousy);
mental or biological (sexual) incompatibility;
incorrect relationships between spouses and others (relatives, acquaintances, colleagues);
incompatibility of interests and needs;
different positions in relation to raising a child;
presence of deficiencies or negative qualities for spouses;
Lack of mutual understanding between parents and children.
However, it is not enough to know the cause of conflicts; it is important to learn
correct behavior during any of them, regardless of their cause. There are certain rules of conduct for spousesduring a quarrel, dispute or conflict.
1. Don't strive forvictory It is necessary to remember: your victory is the defeat of your spouse, the defeat of the person you love. Is it really that sweet to win over your loved one? And then, the defeated one is a member of the same family, therefore, any victory of one is a defeat of the family as a whole. It will be much more valuable and beneficial for the family, for both spouses, to change the goal of the conflict - not to prove that they are right in the dispute, but to convince the spouse not to commit the action that caused the conflict.
Maintain respect for your spouse in a family dispute. Even in moments of resentment, jealousy, anger, you must remember: after all, just recently this person was the most dear to you in the world, and you were happy with him...
Have a “short memory” for all family quarrels and grievances. The sooner everything bad is forgotten, the more prosperous and happier the family turns out to be. Therefore, it is strictly forbidden to mention the reasons for the quarrel that have already been sorted out and clarified. And if the conflict is resolved and reconciliation occurs, then whatever the offense inflicted by one spouse on the other, it should be forgotten forever.
There is nothing more dangerous to the well-being of a family than accumulation of grievances, “sins”, mistakes, etc. Firstly, they literally clog the soul, displacing from it all the good that was, and secondly, they force the second spouse to engage in a similar process - collecting mistakes, from which, naturally, no one not insured. It is forbidden hold a grudge - The sooner you react, the less time to build up on it, the more painless its elimination will be. In some situations, when the conflict can be perceived especially acutely, this resentment is worth forgive.
Be able to timely and honestly ask yourself - and answer honestly: what actually represents the “highest value” for you? Over-salted soup or preserving family peace? And then it turns out that the current situation is only an insignificant reason for irritation, and the real reason is not at all in the second spouse. Of course, there are things that cannot be forgiven, there are principles that to concede means to renounce one’s own self. But family conflicts, as a rule, do not occur on the basis of “high matters”, but happen because of little things that the spouses themselves may find funny the next day.
Do not bring habits from your past life with you into your young family and show tolerance to the habits of others. These habits can be different, sometimes very unpleasant for the second spouse. Nevertheless, one cannot be a maximalist in demanding that they be abandoned immediately. We must remember that habits are formed over years and it is quite difficult to get rid of them. It is even more unacceptable to associate an ingrained habit with the depth and sincerity of feelings: “If you don’t quit smoking (meeting with friends, watching hockey), then you don’t love me.”
Learn to make correct comments to each other. The inability to make comments is especially characteristic of women, who not only do not think about their form, but also allow themselves remarks that degrade a person’s dignity in the presence of strangers. At the same time, the psychological and ethical culture of the family requires that critical remarks, even if they are fair, be expressed face to face. Moreover, it should be remembered that constant harsh criticism of one spouse by another leads to psychological discomfort, emotional breakdowns, alienation, and therefore destroys marital contact.