- And with a willingness to work

An authority is a person distinguished by outstanding knowledge, skills, abilities and abilities, his position in society and his significance for humanity or for a person.
Who do you consider an authority? Seneca, because everything he says remains relevant in modern times? Putin for “raising Russia from its knees”? Grandma, because no one will give wiser advice? Do Russians need moral authorities, experts from the Public Opinion Foundation found out.
It turns out that half of our fellow citizens have had to be disappointed in an authoritative person. At least 49 respondents answered the question this way. Well, in any case, the glass remains half full - its authorities have not yet managed to disappoint the other half of Russia.
56% of total number Those surveyed said that in their immediate circle there are people who are authorities for them, but 40% of their fellow citizens, fortunately or unfortunately, do not have them. At the same time, an affirmative answer to this question was most often given by young people who really need a guide in life: 70% of respondents aged 18 to 30 have authority among close people. Elderly people, accordingly, no longer need any authorities: only 37% of respondents gave an affirmative answer.
“Do you often or rarely consult with these people and ask for their opinions on issues that are important to you?” This question was the next on the list of questions asked for those who do not have moral authorities in their immediate environment; 60% of respondents answered it. It turned out that 28% of 60% often consult with authorities, slightly less - 25% - do this rarely, and 5% of respondents never consult with anyone.
41% of respondents do not have authority among their colleagues or co-workers, 37% do, 18% of respondents do not work at all, and 3% of respondents found it difficult to answer this question.
An amazing pattern: not all people willingly recognize someone’s authority, but the self-esteem of Russians is off the charts. More than half of Russians believe that among their relatives, friends and colleagues there are those who consider them a moral authority for themselves, and only 17% answered that there are none.
Three-fifths of the Russian population have authorities among famous people Russia - cultural figures, scientists, politicians, athletes, etc. Moreover, among the young population (18-30 years old), only half consider a famous person to be an authority. If we look at the ages of 46-60 years, then 70% of respondents consider some famous Russian to be an authority, and 75% of people over 60 years old have the same opinion.
Every third Russian considers Vladimir Putin a moral authority, with p. Lavrov (6% of respondents), in third place is S. Shoigu (5%). Zhirinovsky is preferred by 5% of Russians, Medvedev and Mikhalkov - 3% each, Zyuganov - 2%. Patriarch Kirill, Stalin, Churkin, Emelianenko, Tretyak, Primakov, Ivanov, Kadyrov, Rogozin, Solovyov and Pozdner have one percent each.
About 40% of Russians believe that modern Russia There are fewer famous people who can be called authorities (unlike the 70-80s of the last century). Every third respondent, on the contrary, believes that now there are much more authorities among celebrities, 11% believe that there are the same number of them, and 20% found it difficult to answer.
The vast majority of people believe that people need moral authorities - 84% of 100% of respondents who answered this way. Half of these people believe that a person needs a role model, a guideline to which they strive. 10% of respondents think that everyone should have a person with whom they can consult and who is worth listening to. 8% believe that this is necessary for moral support, 7% think that people should have a leader who will lead others. Other answers: “This is necessary for making the right decisions,” “Without moral authority, people degrade,” “People must have moral values,” “There must be moral authorities,” “People must believe in something.”
Our fellow citizens for the most part believe that people who have moral authorities have a better life than people who do not know who to look to. However, if you break down the answers by age, then people from 40 to 60 years old think just the opposite - that people who do not have authority have a much easier life.
Writer Kazuo Ishiguro said: “Even if one is supposed to look up to one’s teachers, it is equally important to learn to question their authority.” The majority of Russians share the same opinion - 77% of respondents believe that in difficult situations It is better to rely only on yourself, without focusing on the opinion of moral authorities.

If a person positions himself as an educated person burdened with exceptional intelligence, then the presence of mistakes will simply ruin his authority. The only thing that is forgivable is typos, because it is a simple accident. Be that as it may, I cannot perceive any reasoning and intelligent thoughts if these same thoughts are presented with errors, and even stupid ones. If we are talking about ordinary correspondence with an ordinary person, then I notice mistakes, but they do not greatly spoil his authority.

MOM AND DAD!

There are some people whose character and willpower I deeply respect. But I do not idealize them or the qualities of their character. Their example helps me act in in the right direction. I can’t call them idols, that’s not the right word, even “role models” won’t do. I never imitated anyone (except for a very young age, when my mother and some other adults were examples) But I observed the people who surrounded me and drew the necessary conclusions for myself. I am me, I don’t want to be completely like a person, even if I respect many qualities in him. I form my personality bit by bit based on my own worldview, worldview, and observations.

you have to mark the territory, drive away their big guy. and show himself as the alpha male by mating with all the females.

Mom and Dad

It's not about appearance - attraction comes from within.
Strength of character, complete personality, charisma - these are the factors that make an impression on people, attracting them to them and earning respect.

If a person is convincing in his statements, then he is trusted, and few people understand how truthful and logical they are.
The main thing is to sound convincing and beautiful.

The fruit of righteousness in peace is sown to those who keep peace (James 3:18).

When David was about two years old, I realized that he belonged to the second group of children, the “75 percent.” Quite obviously, he was one of those who live by the slogan: “I will do everything myself.” And I realized what I needed to do to deal with it. If David ever got angry, it was never a secret to us, because, unlike Dale, he expressed his feelings very openly. Pat and I tried to watch him carefully and help him express the frustration that we knew he sometimes had. I repeat again: this does not mean that one boy was somehow better than the other; it only means that we coped with the situation differently, depending on the personality traits of each child.

People who make up this “75 percent” prefer to do what their own mind tells them. They want to make decisions on their own. They prefer to take the difficult path, independently directing their behavior. They can get angry if someone tells them what to do. Even if they want to learn something, they always strive to do it in their own way.

At first glance, it seems that such children are more difficult to raise than those who belong to the “25 percent.” But that's not true. Despite the fact that from an early age they are suspicious of authority (in the most general sense), their upbringing will require about the same amount of persistence, love and understanding as for children belonging to the first group.

They may seem "difficult to raise" because they have an innate desire to take responsibility for their decisions, which becomes stronger over the years. This is a talent that is given by God. And for the same reason, people from the “75 percent” are natural leaders.

Controlling them and helping them restrain themselves is much easier than teaching those in the first group to think for themselves. After all, telling a child what he needs to do is much easier than teaching him to think about why he needs to do exactly that.

However, when controlling the behavior of a child who is part of the “75 percent,” do not approach him too harshly, otherwise you risk causing him severe irritation. Children in the 25 percent get upset easily because they feel guilty easily. The child from "75" may not suffer particularly in each individual case, but he will accumulate a negative attitude, and, in the end, he will "repay you."

Too many Indians, but not enough chiefs

Most Christians, it seems to me, belong to those in the first group. It seems that not many of the “75 percent” attend church, and these are people who are natural leaders. There is nothing bad to say about those who belong to the first group, but the “75 percent” are precisely those without whom the church cannot exist.

There are too many rank-and-file “Indians” in modern churches and too few “leaders.” Because there are usually few in the church who are part of the second group, as soon as they appear there, they automatically become leaders. Because there are usually not enough such people, the balance is upset and the church as a whole suffers as a result. If a leader has no competitors and tends not to pay attention to the opinions of others, then he will increasingly listen only to himself and “push” only his own ideas.

This explains why so many churches take extremely authoritarian positions. Today's leaders often lean in this direction, presenting their thoughts as law to congregants who are largely part of the “25 percent.” The opinions of such leaders are rarely questioned.

For example, most Christians may wonder what the apostles Paul and John intended to say with their letters. They may also wonder what some of Christ's statements mean. But they don't dare ask these questions modern leaders to find out what they themselves think about this.

The danger of this situation lies in the fact that such leaders promote their views on the upbringing of children and adolescents in the same way. They argue that the first thing you need to pay attention to in education is discipline, and it must be achieved only by beating, especially with rods.

A similar theory appeared as a furious response to the passive attitude of parents of the 60s towards their children. It can be expressed in the words: “Do as you see fit.” Proponents of the opposite theory proclaimed harsh, strict discipline. To demonstrate the validity of this approach, they used verses from the Book of Proverbs that deal with authoritarian attitudes. But excesses were often allowed. None of them mentioned that the shepherd's rods spoken of in Scripture were almost always used only to guide the sheep, not to beat them (for example, in Ps. 22:4: “Thy rod and Thy staff are calm me down."

In my opinion, this erroneous teaching is one of the main reasons why so many of the “75 percent” are now turning away from the church. By the time they reach 17 or 18 years old, they are still angry with the authoritarian parents who raised them. They would rather go anywhere but to church.

On the other hand, the majority of the “25 percent” commit themselves to Christ and go to church regardless of how they have been treated because they need someone to guide them.

The church is losing members of the “75 percent” due to the widespread desire today to live by the motto: “I am my own boss.” Guided by this approach, they live without recognizing any authority, and this, in turn, happens because someone, when they were young, treated them badly and disrespectfully and made them disgusted with all kinds of authority.

Little riot

“I’m not going to church today,” thirteen-year-old David decisively declared one day. Sunday morning a few years ago.

“Well, well, let’s go, David,” I answered, “you know yourself that you are always glad that you ended up there.”

David relented and came with us. And there was no more talk about it for three or four weeks. But then again, despite the fact that he was by no means in a bad mood, he announced:

I'm not going to church today. I already told you that I don’t want to go there, and I won’t go.

I saw that it was completely useless to persuade David. Since he had finally decided this issue for himself, forcing him would mean cultivating in his soul a harmful, negative attitude towards the church and spirituality, which would then be extremely difficult to get rid of. I had to deal with this problem without alienating David and losing my ability to guide him on the right path until he grew up. I asked him: “Do you like going to Sunday school?”

Yes, I'm not against her.

Okay, I'll tell you what we'll do. You will go to Sunday school, and after it, your mother and I will take turns driving you home.

David agreed with this proposal. Pat's and my strategy was aimed at preventing the violent denial of spirituality that would inevitably arise if a person were forced to attend church or do anything related to the spiritual life. Knowing that David belongs to the “75 percent,” we decided not to put pressure on him at the moment, but to keep him away from the church for a while. Of course, we didn't encourage it in principle, but we had a plan.

After all, David was almost fourteen years old. He knew what we thought, what and how we believed. Maybe he knew us even better than we knew ourselves. This new arrangement lasted four or five weeks, and I saw that David began to take a more mature approach to the matter. He realized that Pat and I were really suffering because he didn't go to church.

He knew that we all wanted to attend church together, and finally he said:

Okay, for your sake I will go to church. That's what he did.

This approach works in our family to this day. I don't guarantee that it will work for all parents who have children in the 75 percent. To a huge extent, this depends on what kind of relationship you have with your child in general, and not just in the spiritual sphere. If you are confident that you really know your child and trust your own instincts, you will be able to handle your situation. The main thing is to try to maintain a friendly relationship with the child, throwing aside authoritarian approaches.

A similar approach should be taken to those children who are included in the first group. This is even more applicable to them. They are so prone to feeling guilty that a harsh, authoritarian attitude can cause real harm to them, one that prevents them from learning to think and make decisions for themselves.

These kids who are in denial

Let me tell you about the very difficult, self-confident middle-aged people in the second group who have only recently found Christ.

Jane and her mother are clearly among the "75 percent." As a girl, Jane constantly showed her unyielding nature, but her mother kept a tight rein on her, and this almost always resulted in Jane doing exactly what she was told. Fortunately, the girl's best friends went to church, so Jane herself liked to attend Sunday school. True, she sat in church with a defiant look, but she was always there with her mother.

As she turned into a teenager, she openly rebelled. But this time, too, her mother ensured that Jane not only went to church, but also earned encouragement for not missing passes.

But Jane was possessed by a spirit of rebellion. She was against studying, against church; generally denied any authority whatsoever. She had few friends because she became unsociable. When she left the city where she lived with her parents and went to college (which her mother had chosen), she stopped going to church altogether.

Faith for her turned into viewing Jesus Christ as simply a “good guy.” She completely denied the virgin birth of the Virgin Mary, claiming that it was nothing more than a myth. She was determined to take positions opposite to those held by her mother.

Jane successfully graduated from college and received a nursing degree, after which she immediately began working in a large hospital, where she met a doctor, whom she later married. They had two children, but this marriage, unfortunately, ended in divorce. But while Jane was working and raising children, she rarely visited her parents. Sometimes arriving at her parents' house, she constantly argued with her mother.

Some time after the divorce, she met Fred - calm, confident person standing firmly on his feet. He tried to love and support Jane's sons, who were then teenagers. Jane's denialist nature bothered him.

Fred tried to ensure that Jane established more or less friendly relations with her parents, in particular with her mother, as a result of which she herself tried to establish communication with her.

During one of her visits to her hometown, when Jane was trying to heal some wounds from her past, she shared her discovery with an old friend.

“You know, before we came to my mother, my eldest son came home one day very upset. He approached two law firms about summer work, and both turned him down.

Trying to console him, to convince him that even in the most difficult moments you still need to hope, I suddenly realized that my words were worthless without God. Suddenly I realized that I could not convince him to hold these views and feel confident unless I myself had faith in something that would give me hope. And that something was God. After so many years of fighting with my mother, I had to admit that she was right about some things. At least in relation to God."

It’s sad that Jane’s mother did not understand not only her daughter’s personality traits, but even her own, which is why all these years their relationship was so difficult. This happens quite often if people try not to give in to each other in anything, causing pain to both themselves and the other person.

Let's return to the story of Denise and Bill, told in chapter three. Denise, as you remember, was classified as "25 percent," and her brother Bill was classified as "75 percent." We have clearly seen that if parents do not understand the personality traits of their children, it can cause serious harm to the family.

Mother and father behaved with Denise in the same way as with Bill, that is, quite harshly, but he was more indifferent to this.

Bill's parents forced him to attend college, and it is not surprising that he studied there for one year and dropped out. His mother tried to control him in the same way as Denise, but thanks to his natural position, which can be formulated: “I can do everything myself,” he turned out to be a rather difficult teenager. Disagreements constantly arose between them.

When Bill and Denise argued and their parents pressured them, Bill would get angry and Denise would feel guilty. As soon as the opportunity arose, Bill left the family without accepting any of his parents' moral values. And why should he take them? His parents were so busy "deciding his fate" that they rarely let him know they loved him.

However, when Denise's problems surfaced and the whole family came for consultation, many issues were resolved. This family is truly very lucky. It successfully survived its crisis, and all its members subsequently lived happy, active lives.

The stories of Denise, Bill and Jane illustrate to us how important it is to understand each child, to understand individual characteristics his personality. Without realizing what we are as parents, and knowing our children poorly, we can unintentionally make irreparable mistakes.

Knowing your child's personality is key to understanding how to cope with a given situation. Regardless of which children should be restrained and forgiven more, and which should be encouraged, the better we understand their personality traits, the easier it is for us to cope with them.

There are very few children who combine the features of both the first and second groups. But they still exist. Such children usually do not go to the extremes characteristic of the first or second group. Our daughter Kari is a typical example of this “transitional” type. We are lucky that she is our eldest. If our boys had come first, we would have really had problems.

If David had been the firstborn, I know that not only would he have been opposed to Christianity, but he probably would have been unable to even talk about it without becoming angry. Dale might have been a Christian, but not a happy one, not one who made this decision of his own free will.

Now that you know who the people who make up these two groups are, you can help your children become truly spiritually mature individuals. There is no doubt that only those children whose parents make an effort to understand what their child accepts and what they do not, and try to show their unconditional love for them, can become spiritual.

Angry generation

A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up wrath (Prov. 15:1).

What's for dinner, mom? Fourteen-year-old Tommy asks, throwing his books and gym bag onto the kitchen table.

I haven't cooked anything yet, Tom, but I have all the ingredients I need. When dad comes home, you can cook dinner,” mom replies. - I need to work tonight.

Damn it! I hate cooking. Maybe you could cook dinner before you go?

Calm down. And don't grumble. What's so terrible about this? You got angry the minute you walked into the house - Mom gave Tommy some hamburgers. - How was the football match?

Great! - Tom snapped, slamming the frying pan on the stove with all his might. “Like you care how the match went,” he grumbled, throwing the burgers onto the frying pan.

Watch your tongue, young man! There's no need to start a fight just because you need to heat up a couple of hamburgers. I don't want to hear anything like that anymore!

Father appeared at the door.

Here I am! Wow, look who's cooking dinner!

Yes, mom has to go to work. - I see you seem to be doing well, son. I'll make a salad. What's new?

“Nothing,” Tommy replies gloomily.

He was upset that he had to cook dinner himself and, apparently, because of an unsuccessful football match, his mother is responsible for him; then kisses her husband on the cheek. - I went.

“It’s not like that at all,” Tommy says irritably when his mother is not in the room.

Wait a minute, let’s figure it out,” says the father. - What's the matter with you, Tom? Why do you always argue with your mother?

I played very poorly, dad. Everything was bad.

Wait a minute, Tom. I don't want to hear your complaints. You are a good player and you know it yourself. You just need to show what you are capable of and stop whining.

It's all true, dad. But today I was not at my best... - I don’t want to hear any more about this! Either stop complaining or quit football altogether. What do you prefer?

“Play football,” Tom said calmly.

Now tell me, what seasoning would you like for your salad?

I don't care.

Then get out of the kitchen, Tom. Your sour face is not what I want to see tonight. Curious to know what happened to you?

But dad, I tried to tell you. Today at the match...

Not a word more about football. Go to your room, I will call you when dinner is ready.

Have you ever slammed your fist on a table with thunder and screams? When were you at work? difficult days, didn’t you try, when you came home, to discuss this and only this? If you were irritated and upset after watching the news in the evening, didn’t you immediately begin to express your opinion to your loved ones?

Chances are good that you will answer “yes” to all of these questions. We all get irritated sometimes and feel the need to take out our irritation on someone by talking or even shouting.

Now imagine how you would feel if you were in a very bad mood and you were told not to shout. Or if your spouse refused to listen to your complaints about difficulties at work or completely ignored your comments about latest news? Wouldn't you be upset and even angrier?

This is exactly what Tommy felt when he tried to tell his parents about the unsuccessful football match. He felt even more angry and upset. All he needed was to vent his anger, but his parents were too busy with themselves to listen to him. This happens to everyone, but very often we do not understand it. We are so busy with our own problems that we have no time to truly listen to our children. IN in this case Fortunately, Tommy and his parents resolved the conflict the very next morning.

The father put his hand on the boy's shoulder and said:

Son, sorry about last night. I should have listened to you instead of sending you out of the kitchen, but I was so tired when I got home from work that I wasn’t in the best mood myself. Let's talk about your football match. Everyone has the right to be in a bad mood. I know I should have listened to you.

“And I was so busy getting ready for work that I didn’t find time to listen to you properly, Tom,” my mother added. - Don't be angry with us, son. Next time, if you are upset, we will try to behave like adults and will certainly listen to you,” she smiled and squeezed his hand.

Reasons for anger

Before continuing the conversation about how to cope with anger, let's look at what could be causing it. Anyone will become irritated if their emotional needs are not met as they expect. Take, for example, a small child. If he is not fed exactly when he wants to eat, he gets irritated and starts crying. If he lies in the same position for a long time, he becomes uncomfortable and also begins to scream and cry in irritation.

When a child grows up a little, he develops an emotional attachment to one of the family members, usually his mother. Of course, it won’t necessarily be the mother, but whoever it is, if this person does not meet the child’s needs, he will become irritated.

A good example was when my wife Pat was away at a weekend conference. Our son David was 18 months old at the time, and his mother had never left him for so long before.

Finding myself in the role of a nanny, I did not foresee any problems. But two days later, when Pat returned home, David did not want to let her near him. He was angry that she left him and - in general, a completely normal reaction - for about six hours he did not even allow her to touch him.

Pat was only gone for 48 hours and look at the kid these days. His mother or whoever is caring for him regularly leaves him for quite long periods of time. And this is one of the reasons why modern children are so irritated - they are not given attention by the people most dear to them at the very moment when something happens that causes grief or anger. Their natural need to see a loved one nearby is very often not satisfied.

There are some emotional needs of a child that only parents can satisfy. He pays much more attention to how his parents behave with him than to what they say to him.

Children need their parents to look into their eyes with affection and love, touch them gently, focus their attention on them, and treat them with tenderness and care. I talked about all this in my book “How to Truly Love Your Child,” but here I also want to pay attention to it. Too often, parents use eye contact, a powerful communication tool, in a negative way. Knowing that children are especially attentive at the moment when we look directly into their eyes, we often turn to this only when we want to scold the child. Small child obeys out of fear, but when he grows up, this fear will only cause him irritation and a feeling of resentment. By deliberately avoiding the child's gaze, we harm him. Indeed, the child perceives this more painfully than even physical punishment. Therefore, let's look the child in the eyes, smile and say pleasant words, and punish him for bad behavior in some other way.

Unfortunately, parents often avoid physical contact with their child and only touch him when he needs help, such as getting dressed and undressed or when he needs to be put in the car. And this is sad, because physical contact is one of the most simple ways demonstrate to the child your unconditional love, which is so necessary for him. We all need positive physical contact with other human beings. Tell me honestly, aren’t you pleased when a friend shakes your hand and thereby “informs” that he is glad to see you?

Concentrating attention on a child requires a certain amount of tension and often prevents you from thinking about something of your own, but the child simply vitally needs your participation. Attentive attention gives him the opportunity to realize that he is one of a kind, special. All parents should set aside at least some time to communicate with their child. Just remember how pleasant it is for you to spend time with your spouse, talk to each other every day, and you will understand how strong the child’s need for your attention is.

Education involves more than just punishment. We develop a child's mind and develop his character, thereby giving him the opportunity to become a full-fledged member of society, responsible for his actions. You can educate by example, verbal instructions, training, jokes; in a word, almost all methods of communication, including punishment. Although punishment is a negative and primitive method of education, sometimes it can be used. However, the best way to teach a child something is to direct his thoughts and actions in the right direction, instead of punishing him for mistakes. Raising a child is incomparably easier when he feels that he is truly, sincerely loved.

By showing our love for a child in different ways, we thereby satisfy his emotional needs. But for a huge number of today's children, these needs are not met, as a result of which they all experience anger.

Lack of emotional “feeding” leads to depression, and depression, in turn, causes additional irritation. Many doctors who treat drug and alcohol addiction say that drugs and alcohol lead to depression. This is, of course, true, but most children who started using them were already depressed because their emotional needs were not met. However, most adults neglect this fact.

Few of us realize that a depressed teenager is, for the most part, an irritable teenager. And the more irritated he gets, the more deeply he sinks into depression. Essentially, this is a vicious circle, and any teenager can fall into it, regardless of age and life experience. This can happen to both the rich and the poor, both the active and the sluggish, the teenager who has many friends and the one who has none at all.

What to do? Just by loving the child unconditionally, we can prevent him from becoming irritated. This is the only way we can teach him how to deal with his anger himself. The child should be allowed to express his irritation; at least it's better than if he directs it inside himself. If a child suppresses and hides his irritation, this can be very dangerous for him.

55% of Russians believe that among their relatives, friends, and colleagues there are those who consider them their moral authority; Among young people, 66% are sure of this. Who has an easier life: those who have moral authorities, or those who do not? Opinions are divided: 35% of Russians believe that it is easier for those who have someone to look up to, 32% - that life is easier for people without such reference points. 49% of respondents were disappointed in an authoritative person, while exactly the same proportion were not.

download data

TeleFOM is a representative survey of the population aged 18 years and older. 1000 respondents participated in the survey. Telephone interview using a random sample of mobile and landline phone numbers. 320 cities, 160 villages. The statistical error does not exceed 3.8%.

Are there people in your immediate circle who are moral authorities for you, or are there no such people?

DATA IN % OF GROUPS

Do you often or rarely consult with these people, ask for their opinion on issues that are important to you?

DATA IN % OF GROUPS

The question was not asked to those who have no moral authorities in their immediate environment, answered 60% of respondents

Are there people among your colleagues and co-workers whose opinion is important to you, who is your moral authority, or are there no such people?

DATA IN % OF GROUPS

Do you think that among your loved ones, friends, colleagues there are those who consider you a moral authority for themselves, or are there no such people?

DATA IN % OF GROUPS

Among the famous people of Russia - cultural figures, scientists, politicians, athletes, etc. - is there anyone who is a moral authority for you, or are there no such people?

DATA IN % OF GROUPS

Which famous person in the country is your moral authority? Please name no more than five names.

DATA IN % OF RESPONDENTS

Open question. Asked to those who have moral authorities among famous people, answered 60% of respondents

Do you think there are more, fewer, or the same number of famous people in Russia today who are recognized moral authorities as there were in the 70s and 80s of the last century?

DATA IN % OF RESPONDENTS

Do you agree or disagree with the view that people fundamentally need moral authorities?

DATA IN % OF RESPONDENTS

Why do you think humans need moral authorities?

DATA IN % OF RESPONDENTS

Open question. Asked to those who believe that people need moral authorities, answered 84% of respondents

In your opinion, who has an easier life - people who have moral authorities, or people who do not have such authorities?

DATA IN % OF GROUPS

Do you think, when making choices in difficult situations, is it better to rely only on yourself or is it better to rely on the opinions of moral authorities?

DATA IN % OF RESPONDENTS

Have you ever been disappointed in a person who was your moral authority, or has this never happened?

DATA IN % OF RESPONDENTS

Data source: TeleFOM - a telephone survey of Russian citizens 18 years of age and older using a random sample of mobile and landline phone numbers. July 6, 2014. 320 cities, 160 villages. 1000 respondents. The statistical error does not exceed 3.8%.

The author of the statement raises the problem of reasons for following moral standards. Mikael Lazarevich Nalbandyan believes that a person can be called moral when he acts in accordance with moral standards, not out of fear of public opinion or the likelihood of violent coercion, but according to personal conviction of correctness existing standards. The secret of the stability of society lies in the consciousness and solidarity with which a person observes moral norms.

Moral norms are used in society as a means of regulating relationships in it, representing a set of unwritten rules accepted by the majority of people.

The mechanism for maintaining stability and order in society through moral norms has two directions: from the outside and from within the individual himself. In the first case, the people around the individual and social institutions they influence him using social sanctions; in the second, a person regulates his activities based on the dictates of conscience and personal beliefs. These two areas are interconnected and interdependent. If a person is influenced from the outside without internal agreement with moral standards, then the mechanism for maintaining order becomes unstable. If internal beliefs exist without external influence, then a person’s behavior can be regarded as deviant, since other members of society behave differently.

Thus, the author’s idea about the conditions of human morality is confirmed by events from the history of Russia. IN Russian Empire people, dissatisfied with the tsar’s policies and their socio-economic situation, staged uprisings, created underground revolutionary circles, that is, they violated the law, which eventually grew into February revolution and the overthrow of the autocracy. On the contrary, in the Soviet Union, during a certain period of its existence, people observed the moral rules of Soviet society, because they were convinced of the correctness of the party line, believed in the ideals of communism, which everyone strived for, which made the USSR a strong power that defeated fascism in the Second World War and raised economy to a qualitatively new level.

From personal social experience, one can cite the example of a person’s behavior in a supermarket. He realizes that, most likely, the security officer is not watching him from the surveillance cameras. He, in fact, has the opportunity to steal goods without being punished for the offense. However, a person who understands that her conscience will torment her if she violates her convictions acts consciously and does not commit theft. A person shows solidarity in relation to established norms, since he does not want to be robbed himself; he understands the correctness of their existence.

Thus, a moral person is primarily guided in behavior by inner consciousness and solidarity. If an individual is dissatisfied with something in society, he will find a way to circumvent the objectionable norm, whereas it is the conviction in the correctness of moral norms that really ensures the stable functioning of the social system.

Updated: 2018-02-14

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.