Moral traits. Definition of morality as a system of values, principles and foundations

Morality is a system of purely conditional rules of behavior in society, based on the prevailing perception of good and evil. In a broad sense, morality is a system of coordinates that allows you to direct people’s actions in such a way that the results of their actions bring benefit to all humanity as a whole. From a psychological point of view, morality is- the deep part of the human psyche, which is responsible for assessing current events, namely for recognizing good and evil. Quite often the word “morality” is usually replaced with the word “Morality”.

What is human morality? The concept (definition) of morality in simple words - briefly.

Despite enough simple essence The term “morality” has a huge variety of definitions. One way or another, almost all of them are correct, but perhaps the simplest answer to the question “What is morality?” there will be this statement:

Morality is a person's attempt to determine what is right and wrong regarding our actions and thoughts. What is good and bad for our existence.

If by and large everything is more or less clear with the term, then the very concept of what is moral and what is immoral causes a lot of controversy. The fact is that the concepts of evil and good are not always absolute and their assessment depends solely on the modern paradigm accepted in society.

For example, in the middle “dark” centuries, when society was poorly educated, but very religious, burning people suspected of witchcraft was a very highly moral act. It goes without saying that in modern era, science and law, this is considered terrible stupidity and a crime, but historical facts no one canceled. And there was slavery, holy wars, various kinds and other events that were perceived by certain parts of society as something normal. Thanks to such examples, we understood that morality and its norms are very conditional rules that can change to suit the social order.

Despite the above examples and the sad historical experience in assessing certain events, now we have, in a certain respect, a more or less adequate system of moral values.

Functions of morality and why do people need morality?

Despite the many philosophical and scientific theories, the answer to this question is very simple. People need morality for further successful coexistence and development as a species. It is precisely because they exist general concepts, about what is good and what is bad, our society has not yet been swallowed up by chaos. Thus, we can say that the function of morality is to form general rules behavior or laws, which in turn maintain order in society.

As an example of a moral principle that is understandable to absolutely everyone, we can cite the so-called: Golden Rule morality.

The golden rule of morality says:

« Don't do to others what you don't want done to you.»

There are several interpretations of this principle, but they all convey the same essence.

Norms and examples of morality.

A huge number of aspects can be attributed to the norms and examples of morality, some of them will be highly moral absolutely everywhere, and some will be controversial, taking into account the differences in cultural characteristics. Nevertheless, as an example, we will cite precisely those moral norms that are beyond doubt.

Moral standards in society:

• Honesty;
• Bravery;
• Ability to keep one's word;
• Reliability;
• Generosity;
• Restraint (self-control);
• Patience and humility;
• Mercy;
• Justice;
• Tolerance for Differences ();
• Self-respect and respect for other people.

Morality is a set of duties, obligations and prohibitions that we voluntarily impose on ourselves, regardless of the expected reward or punishment and without hoping for anything. Let's imagine that they announced to us: tomorrow the end of the world is coming. The information is accurate and beyond doubt. With this news, politics will die on the spot - it cannot exist without a future. But morality? Morality in its main features will remain unchanged. No end of the world, even one on the threshold, gives us the right to mock the crippled, slander, rape, torture, kill, in a word, give free rein to our selfishness and anger. Morality does not need the future. The present is enough for her. She does not need hope, content with will. “An act out of a sense of duty has its moral value not in the goal that can be achieved through it,” Kant emphasizes, “but in the maxim according to which it was decided to do it.” Its value does not depend on the expected consequences, but solely on the rule in accordance with which it is performed. He is free from all inclinations and egoistic calculations, does not take into account any of the objects of the “faculty of desire” and abstracts from the final goals “which can be achieved through such an act” (“Fundamentals of the Metaphysics of Morals”, section I). If a person acts to achieve fame, happiness, his own salvation and at the same time does not violate any moral norms, it still cannot be said about him that his actions are moral. This or that act has genuine moral value, Kant explains, only insofar as it is completely disinterested. This means that it must be carried out not simply in accordance with duty (it can be driven by self-interest; for example, a merchant conducts business honestly so as not to lose customers), but precisely guided by duty, in other words, respect for the moral law or, what is the same , the law of humanity. The approaching end of the world does not change anything - until the very end we will all be guided by what has universal value in our eyes and is obligatory for everyone, that is (which again is the same thing) we will respect humanity in ourselves and in others. This is why morality knows no hope, and sometimes simply leads to despair. “Morality does not need any religion,” Kant insists, just as it does not need any goals: “morality is self-sufficient” (“Religion within the limits of reason alone,” Preface). Hence the secular nature of morality, even in relation to believers; hence the absolute nature of her dictate; in any case, we perceive it precisely as an absolute. Whether there is one or not, it does not change anything about the need to protect the weak. Therefore, we do not need to understand what our existence is like in order to act humanly. Now let us imagine (Kant offers this example) that God exists and is known to every living person. What will happen in this case? “God and eternity would constantly stand before our eyes in all their dangerous grandeur.” No one will dare disobey God anymore. The horror of hell and the hope of heaven will give unprecedented power to the divine commandments. And fearful, selfish obedience will reign in the world in the image of an absolute moral order: “There would, of course, be no violations of the law, and what the commandment requires would be fulfilled.” But morality will disappear. “Most lawful actions would be done out of fear, only a few in hope, and none out of a sense of duty, and the moral value of actions, to which alone the entire value of the individual and even the value of the world in the eyes of the highest wisdom can be reduced, would cease to exist altogether” ( "Practical Reason", Part I, Book 2, Chapters 2.9). Thus, not only do we not need hope to fulfill our duty, we are able to act in obedience to duty only if we do not hope for anything. Contrary to popular belief, morality has nothing to do with religion, especially with fear of the gendarme or scandal. And even if historically morality was associated with the Church, the state and public opinion, its true formation - and this is one of the best merits of the Enlightenment - becomes possible only as it is liberated from these institutions. Spinoza, Bayle and Kant talk about the same thing, each in his own way.

Related materials:

Essentially morality is the opposite of conformity, fundamentalism and moral order, including such sluggish forms of it, which today are commonly called “political correctness”. Morality is not the law of society, government or God, much less the law of means. mass media or Church. Morality is a law accepted by an individual for himself personally, which means the law is free, as Rousseau would say (“obedience to the law prescribed to oneself is freedom”), or autonomous, as Kant would say (the individual obeys only “his own and at the same time universal law”). This freedom or autonomy is relative, which in no way prevents us from feeling in practice its absoluteness (arising not from knowledge, but from will) and unconditional necessity. All morality is historical. But the historicity of morality does not at all abolish morality itself, but, on the contrary, makes its existence possible, as well as our subordination to it, because we exist in history and are a product of history. Even if this is relative autonomy, it is worth more than slavish adherence to one’s inclinations and fears.

Related materials:

What is morality?

This is a set of rules that a person determines or must determine for himself, not in the hope of reward and not out of fear of punishment, which would be selfishness, not with an eye on others, which would be hypocrisy, but freely and disinterestedly, for that one reason that to him these rules seem to be universal (suitable for every rational being), without hoping for anything and fearing nothing. “Loneliness in the universe,” Alain said about this. This is morality.

Related materials:

Mathematical thinking)

Is morality universal?

It is never completely universal. Everyone knows that morality varies depending on era and place. But morality is capable of acquiring a universal character without encountering contradictions along the way, and in fact this is gradually happening. If we leave aside some particularly painful archaisms, more burdened by religious or historical conditions than by moral assessments proper (the sexual question and the position of women), then we will have to admit that the content put into the concept “ good man", is not very different - and in the future it will differ even less - from what this expression is understood in America or India, Norway or South Africa, Japan or the Maghreb countries. This is a person who is more sincere than deceitful, more generous than selfish, more courageous than a coward, more honest than deceitful, more gentle and compassionate than rude and cruel. These concepts were not formed yesterday. Already Rousseau, rebelling against the relativism of Montaigne, against his own vision of his relativism, called people to moral convergence that could overcome cultural differences: “Oh Montaigne! You, who boast of sincerity and love of truth, answer me frankly and truthfully, how frank and truthful a philosopher can be, is there a country on earth where it would be considered a crime to remain faithful to what you believe in, to be merciful, benevolent and generous, where is a kind person would be subject to contempt, and treachery would be honored? Montaigne did not find the country, and he did not look for it. It is enough to re-read everything he wrote about the American Indians, with whom we treated so monstrously - about their courage and constancy, about their “kindness, love of freedom, honesty and sincerity” (“Experiences”, book III, chapter 6). Humanity does not belong to anyone in particular, and Montaigne’s relativism is at the same time universalism, in which there is no contradiction (after all, morality applies to all humanity, and “every person has everything that is characteristic of the entire human race,” book III, chapter 2). And the entire history of mankind, no matter what continent it takes place on, speaks of the same thing.

And what is strictly prohibited. These rules do not necessarily have legal force. Those who violate them are not always punished by the state and its structures, but may become an outcast in society. In these cases, they say that the person has violated the moral principles accepted in his environment. A striking discrepancy between laws and moral principles is duels, with the help of which the nobility in the past resolved many disputes. Such fights were prohibited by law in many countries, but refusal to duel in the eyes of this class was often an offense much more serious than breaking the law.

The concept of morality was formed in Ancient Greece. Socrates called the science of man morality, as opposed to physics, which dealt with natural phenomena. This is part of philosophy that tries to answer the question about the true purpose of man. This has been tried again. According to the definition of Epicureans and hedonists, the true purpose of human existence is happiness. The Stoics developed their own concept and defined this goal as virtue. Their position was reflected in the views of philosophers of later eras - for example, Kant. The position of his “philosophy of duty” is based on the fact that a person cannot simply be happy, he must earn this happiness.

There are ideal and real moralities, and the second does not always coincide with the first. For example, the basis of Christian morality is the Ten Commandments. Ideally, every Christian should follow them. However, numerous wars, including religious ones, were a clear violation of the prohibition to kill. Each warring country also had other moral standards that were more consistent with the needs of society in a particular era. It was they, in combination with the commandments, that constituted real morality. Modern philosophers view morality as a way to preserve a particular society. Its task is to reduce conflict. It is primarily considered as a theory of communication.

The moral principles of each individual person are formed in the process of education. The child learns them primarily from his parents and other people around him. In some cases, the assimilation of moral norms occurs in the process of adaptation of a person with already established views to another society. Migrants, for example, constantly face this problem.

Along with public morality, there is also individual morality. Each person, performing one or another action, finds himself in a situation of choice. He is influenced by the most various factors. Submission to moral standards can be purely external, when a person performs some action only because it is accepted in his environment and his behavior will arouse sympathy among others. Adam Smith defined this kind of morality as the morality of feeling. But the motivation can also be internal, when a good deed evokes in the person who performed it a feeling of harmony with himself. This is one of the principles of the morality of inspiration. According to Bergson, an action must be dictated by a person's own nature.

In literary criticism, morality is often understood as the conclusion that follows from the description. For example, a moral exists in a fable, and sometimes even in a fairy tale, when in the final lines the author explains in plain text what he wanted to say with his work.

Video on the topic

Sources:

• New Philosophical Encyclopedia

The debate about the relationship between morality and morality among philosophers has been going on for a very long time. For some researchers these concepts are identical, for others they are fundamentally different. At the same time, the terms are close to each other and represent a unity of opposites.

Concept of morality and ethics

Morality is a system of values ​​established in a particular society. Morality is the obligatory observance of universal social principles a separate person. Morality is an analogue of law - it allows or prohibits certain actions. Morality is determined by a specific society; it is established based on the characteristics of this society: nationality, religiosity, etc.

For example, those actions that are permitted in Western countries (USA, UK) will be prohibited in the countries of the Middle East. While Western societies do not set strict standards for women's clothing, Eastern societies do, and it would be considered offensive for a woman to appear bareheaded in Yemen.

In addition, morality meets the interests of a specific group, for example, corporate morality. Morality in this case determines the behavior model of a corporate employee, shaping his activities in order to increase the organization's profits. Unlike law, morality is oral in nature and often moral norms are not enshrined in writing.

Moral categories include philosophical concepts such as goodness, honesty, and politeness. Moral categories are universal and inherent in almost all societies. A person who lives in accordance with these categories is considered moral.

The relationship between morality and ethics

Morality are philosophical categories that are close in meaning, and debates about the relationship between these concepts have been going on for a very long time. I. Kant believed that morality is a person’s personal beliefs, and morality is the implementation of these beliefs. He is contradicted by Hegel, who believed that moral principles are the product of man’s inventions about the essence of good and evil. Hegel perceived morality as a product of social consciousness that dominates the individual. According to Hegel, morality can exist in any society, while morality appears in the process of human development.

At the same time, comparing the philosophical approaches of Hegel and Kant, one can notice one common feature: Philosophers believed that morality comes from internal principles person, and morality concerns interactions with the outside world. Based on the philosophical definitions of the concepts of morality and morality, we can conclude that with the help of morality and morality, society evaluates the behavior of an individual, evaluates the principles, desires and motives of a person.

Video on the topic

Morality is a conditional concept of rules, principles, assessments, norms based on the paradigm of assessments of evil and good, which was formed in a certain period of time. This is a model of social consciousness, a method of regulating the behavior of a subject in society. It develops both in individual and social forms of subjective relations.

The concept of morality from the point of view considered by psychologists is a fragment of the human psyche, formed at a deep level, responsible for assessing events occurring in various planes with the meaning of good and bad. The word morality is often used as a synonym for the word morality.

What is morality

The word "morality" originates from the classical Latin language. It is derived from "mos" Latin word meaning - character, custom. Referring to Aristotle, Cicero, guided by this meaning, formed the words: “moralis” and “moralitas” - moral and ethics, which became equivalent to expressions from Greek language: ethics and ethical.

The term “morality” is mainly used to designate the type of behavior of society as a whole, but there are exceptions, for example, Christian or bourgeois morality. Thus, the term is used only in relation to a limited group of the population. Analyzing the relations of society in different eras existence to the same action, it should be noted that morality is a conditional value, variable in connection with the accepted social order. Each nation has its own morality, based on experience and traditions.

Some scientists have also noted that different rules Morals apply not only to subjects of different nationalities, but also to subjects belonging to an “out-group.” The definition of a group of people in the vector “friend”, “stranger” occurs at the psychological level of the individual’s relationship with this group in various senses: cultural, ethnic, and others. By identifying himself with a specific group, the subject accepts those rules and norms (morality) that are accepted in it; consider this way of life more fair than following the morality of the whole society.

Man knows a large number of meanings of this concept, which is interpreted from various points of view in various sciences, but its basis remains constant - this is a person’s definition of his actions, the actions of society in the equivalent of “good or bad”.

Morality is created on the basis of the paradigm adopted in a particular society, since the designations of “good or bad” are relative, not absolute, and the explanation of the morality or immorality of various types of acts is conditional.

Morality, as a combination of rules and norms of society, is formed over a long period on the basis of traditions and laws adopted in a particular society. For comparison, you can use the example associated with the burning of witches - women who were suspected of using magic and witchcraft. In a period such as the Middle Ages, against the background of adopted laws, such an action was considered a highly moral act, that is, good. In the modern paradigm of adopted laws, such atrocity is considered an absolutely unacceptable and stupid crime against the subject. At the same time, you can put such incidents as holy wars, genocide or slavery. In their era, in a particular society with its own laws, such actions were accepted as the norm and were considered absolutely moral.

The formation of morality is directly related to the evolution of various ethnic groups of humanity in its social key. Scientists who study the social evolution of peoples consider morality to be the result of the influence of the forces of evolution on the group as a whole and on individuals individually. Based on their understanding, behavioral norms prescribed by morality change during the evolution of humanity, ensuring the survival of species and their reproduction, and guaranteeing the success of evolution. Along with this, the subject forms in himself a “pro-social” fundamental part of the psyche. As a result, a feeling of responsibility for what was done, a feeling of guilt, is formed.

Accordingly, morality is a certain set of behavioral norms that is formed over a long period of time, under the influence of environmental conditions at a certain moment it forms a set of established ideological norms that contribute to the development of human cooperation. It is also aimed at avoiding the individualism of the subject in society; formation of groups united by a common worldview. Sociobiologists consider this point of view in a number of species of social animals; there is a desire to change behavior aimed at survival and preservation of one’s own species during the period of evolution. Which corresponds to the formation of morality, even in animals. In humans, moral norms are more sophisticated and diverse, but they are also concentrated on preventing individualism in behavior, which contributes to the formation of nationalities and, accordingly, increases the chances of survival. It is believed that even such norms of behavior as parental love are consequences of the evolution of human morality - this type of behavior increases the level of survival of offspring.

Studies of the human brain conducted by sociobiologists determine that the parts of the subject's cerebral cortex that are involved when a person is preoccupied with moral issues do not form a separate cognitive subsystem. Often, during the period of solving moral problems, areas of the brain are activated that localize the neural network responsible for the subject’s ideas about the intentions of others. To the same extent, the neural network responsible for the individual’s representation of the emotional experience of other individuals is involved. That is, when solving moral problems, a person uses those parts of his brain that correspond to empathy and compassion, this indicates that morality is aimed at developing mutual understanding between subjects (an individual’s ability to see things through the eyes of another subject, to understand his feelings and experiences). According to the theory of moral psychology, morality as such develops and changes as the personality develops. There are several approaches to understanding the formation of morality at the personal level:

– cognitive approach (Jean Piaget, Lorenz Kohlberg and Eliot Turiel) – morality in personal development goes through several constructive stages or areas;

– biological approach (Jonathan Haidt and Martin Hoffman) – morality is considered against the background of the development of the social or emotional component of the human psyche. Interesting for the development of the doctrine of morality as a psychological component of personality is the approach of psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, who suggested that morality is formed as a consequence of the desire of the “superego” to get out of a state of guilt.

What are moral standards

Fulfillment of moral norms is the moral duty of the subject; violation of these measures of behavior represents a feeling of moral guilt.

Moral norms in society are generally accepted measures of subject behavior that arise from formed morality. The totality of these norms forms a certain system of rules, which in all respects differ from the normative systems of society such as customs, rights and ethics.

In the early stages of formation, moral norms were directly related to religion, which prescribes the meaning of divine revelation to moral norms. Each religion has a set of certain moral norms (commandments) that are mandatory for all believers. Failure to comply with prescribed moral standards in religion is considered a sin. In various world religions, there is a certain pattern in accordance with moral standards: theft, murder, adultery, and lies are undeniable rules of behavior for believers.

Researchers studying the formation of moral norms put forward several directions in understanding the meaning of these norms in society. Some believe that compliance with the rules prescribed in morality is a priority in the guise of other norms. Followers of this trend attribute certain properties to these moral norms: universality, categoricalness, immutability, cruelty. The second direction, which is being studied by scientists, suggests that the attribution of absolutism, generally accepted and obligatory moral norms acts as someone.

In terms of the form of manifestation, some moral norms in society are similar to legal norms. So the principle “thou shalt not steal” is common to both systems, but by asking the question why a subject follows this principle, one can determine the direction of his thinking. If a subject follows a principle because he is afraid of legal liability, then his act is legal. If the subject confidently follows this principle, because theft is a bad (evil) act, the vector of direction of his behavior follows the moral system. There are precedents in which compliance with moral standards is contrary to the law. The subject, considering it his duty, for example, to steal medicine in order to save his loved one from death does the morally right thing, while absolutely breaking the law.

Studying the formation of moral norms, scientists came to a certain classification:

– norms affecting questions about the existence of an individual as a biological being (murder);

– norms on the independence of the subject;

– norms of trust (loyalty, truthfulness);

– norms relating to the dignity of the subject (honesty, justice);

– norms about other moral norms.

Functions of morality

Man is a creature with freedom of choice and he has every right to choose the path of following moral standards or vice versa. This choice of a person who puts good or evil on the scales is called a moral choice. Having such freedom of choice in real life the subject is faced with a difficult task: to follow the personal or blindly follow the ought. Having made a choice for himself, the subject bears certain moral consequences, for which the subject himself is responsible, both to society and to himself.

Analyzing the features of morality, we can extract several of its functions:

– Regulation function. Following moral principles leaves a certain mark on the consciousness of the individual. The formation of certain views of behavior (what is allowed to be done and what is not allowed) occurs even with early age. This kind of action helps the subject to adjust his behavior in line with usefulness not only for himself, but also for society. Moral norms are capable of regulating the individual beliefs of the subject to the same extent as the interaction between groups of people, which favors the preservation of culture and stability.

– Evaluation function. Morality evaluates actions and situations occurring in a social society in terms of good and evil. The actions that have taken place are assessed for their usefulness or negativeness for further development; after this, each action is given an assessment from the moral side. Thanks to this function, the subject forms the concept of belonging to society and develops his own position in it.

– Function of education. Under the influence of this function, a person develops an awareness of the importance of not only his own needs, but also the needs of the people who surround him. A feeling of empathy and respect arises, which contributes to the harmonious development of relationships in society, understanding the moral ideals of another individual, contributes to a better understanding of each other.

– Control function. Determines control over the use of moral norms, as well as condemnation of their consequences at the societal and individual levels.

– Integration function. Following moral standards unites humanity into a single group, which supports the survival of man as a species. It also helps maintain integrity spiritual world personality. Key Features morality are: evaluative, educational and regulatory. They are the ones who display social significance morality.

Morals and ethics

The term ethics has Greek origin from the word "ethos". The use of this word denoted actions or actions of a person that were powerful to him personally. Aristotle defined the meaning of the word "ethos" as the virtue of a subject's character. Subsequently, it was customary that the word “ethicos” is ethos, meaning something related to the temperament or disposition of the subject. The emergence of such a definition led to the formation of the science of ethics - the study of the virtues of the character of the subject. In the culture of the ancient Roman Empire there was a word “moralis” - defining a wide range of human phenomena. Later, a derivative of this term “moralitas” appeared - relating to customs or character. Analyzing the etymological content of these two terms (“moralitas” and “ethicos”), it should be noted that their meanings coincide.

Many people know that such concepts as “morality” and “ethics” are close in meaning, and they are also often considered interchangeable. Many people use these concepts as extensions of each other. Ethics is first and foremost philosophical direction, which studies issues of morality. Often the expression "ethics" is used to refer to specific moral principles, traditions, customs that exist among subjects of a limited group of society. The Kantian system views the word morality, using it to denote the concept of duty, principles of behavior and obligations. The word "ethics" uses Aristotle's system of reasoning to denote virtue, the inseparability of moral and practical considerations.

The concept of morality, as a system of principles, forms a set of rules that are based on many years of practice, and allows a person to determine the style of behavior in society. Ethics is a section of philosophy and theoretical justification of these principles. IN modern world the concept of ethics has retained its original designation as a science in the ranks of philosophy that studies human properties, real phenomena, rules and norms, which are moral norms in society.

Morality is one of the ways to regulate the behavior of people in society. It is a system of principles and norms that determine the nature of relations between people in accordance with the accepted in a given society concepts of good and evil, fair and unfair, worthy and unworthy. Functions of morality:

Cognitive - teaches people to see the actions of other individuals from the point of view of moral values.

Educational - participates in the formation of the human personality and its self-awareness. Morality contributes to the formation of views on the purpose and meaning of life, a person’s awareness of his dignity, duty to other people and society.

Value-oriented - morality allows us to highlight certain guidelines for each individual. This function gives a person ideas about his purpose and meaning in life. The individual will not think about it daily, but in difficult time The thought flashes through everyone’s head: “Why am I living?” And the value-orienting function allows you to find the answer to the question posed.

Regulatory - directs and adjusts a person’s practical activities from the point of view of taking into account the interests of other people and society.

The structure of morality includes:

Moral norms are social norms that regulate a person’s behavior in society, his attitude towards other people, towards society and towards himself.

Moral principles are one of the forms of expression of moral requirements, in the most general view revealing the content of morality existing in a particular society.

Moral ideals are concepts of moral consciousness in which the moral demands placed on people are expressed in the form of an image of a morally perfect personality, an idea of ​​a person who embodies the highest moral qualities.

2. Morality and law.

Moral norms are formed in society on the basis of ideas about good and evil, honor, conscience, and justice. They acquire mandatory significance as they are realized and recognized by the majority of members of society. Moral standards are not enshrined in special acts. They are contained in people's minds. Moral norms appear in the form of the most general rules of behavior (be kind, fair, honest). Legal norms are detailed rules of conduct compared to moral norms. They establish clearly defined legal rights and obligations of participants in public relations. The rules of law established by the state, after entering into force, immediately become mandatory for all persons within the scope of their action. In its turn, legal norms are expressed in official state acts (laws, decrees). Rules of law and moral standards in the overwhelming majority of cases are observed voluntarily on the basis of people's natural understanding of the justice of their prescriptions. The implementation of both norms is ensured by internal conviction, as well as by means of public opinion. Moral standards cover almost all areas of human relationships, including the legal sphere. Law affects only the most important spheres of public life, regulating only social relations controlled by the state. Law and morality serve one purpose - to harmonize the interests of the individual and society, to ensure and maintain public order. The implementation and enforcement of legal norms are largely determined by the extent to which they comply with moral standards. For legal norms to be effective, they at least must not contradict the moral values ​​of society. In some cases, law helps rid society of outdated moral norms.