What are human values. Human values ​​- A PRIORI

Values ​​\u200b\u200b"eternal"

1. Based on goodness and reason, truth and beauty, peacefulness and philanthropy, diligence and solidarity, worldview ideals, moral and legal norms, reflecting the historical spiritual experience of all mankind and creating conditions for the realization of universal interests, for the full existence and development of each individual.

2. Well-being of loved ones, love, peace, freedom, respect.

3. Life, freedom, happiness, as well as the highest manifestations of human nature, revealed in his communication with his own kind and with the transcendent world.

4. "The golden rule of morality" - do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.

5. Truth, beauty, justice.

6. Peace, the life of mankind.

7. Peace and friendship between peoples, individual rights and freedoms, social justice, human dignity, environmental and material well-being of people.

8. Moral requirements associated with the ideals of humanism, justice and dignity of the individual.

9. Basic laws that exist in most countries (prohibition of murder, theft, etc.).

10. Religious commandments.

11. Life itself, the problem of its preservation and development in natural and cultural forms.

12. The system of axiological maxims, the content of which is not directly related to a specific historical period development of society or a specific ethnic tradition, but being filled in each socio-cultural tradition with its own specific meaning, it is reproduced in any type of culture as values.

13. Values ​​that are important for all people and have universal significance.

14. Moral values ​​that exist theoretically and are the absolute standard for people of all cultures and eras.

Explanations:
Human values ​​are the most common. They express the common interests of the human race, inherent in the life of people of different historical eras, socio-economic structures, and in this capacity they act as an imperative for the development of human civilization. The universality and immutability of universal human values ​​reflects some common features class, national, political, religious, ethnic and cultural identity.

Human values ​​represent a certain system of the most important material and spiritual values. The main elements of this system are: the natural and social world, moral principles, aesthetic and legal ideals, philosophical and religious ideas and other spiritual values. In the values ​​of universal human beings, the values ​​of social and individual life are united. They form value orientations(defining the socially acceptable) as the priorities of the socio-cultural development of ethnic groups or individuals, fixed by social practice or human life experience.
In connection with the object-subject nature of the value relationship, one can note the subject and subject values ​​of universal human beings.

The idea of ​​the priority of universal human values ​​is the core of new political thinking, which marks the transition in international politics from enmity, confrontation and forceful pressure to dialogue, compromise and cooperation.
Violation of universal human values ​​is considered as a crime against humanity.

The problem of universal human values ​​is dramatically renewed in the era of social catastrophism: the prevalence of destructive processes in politics, the disintegration of social institutions, the devaluation of moral values ​​and the search for options for a civilized socio-cultural choice. In New and Newest time Attempts have repeatedly been made to completely deny the values ​​of universal humanity or to pass off as such the values ​​of certain social groups, classes, peoples and civilizations.

Another opinion: Human values ​​are abstractions that dictate to people the norms of behavior that in a given historical era better than others meet the interests of a particular human community (family, class, ethnic group and, finally, humanity as a whole). When history gives the opportunity, each community seeks to impose its own values ​​on all other people, presenting them as "universal".

Third opinion: the phrase "Universal human values" is actively used in the manipulation of public opinion. It is argued that, despite the difference in national cultures, religions, living standards and development of the peoples of the Earth, there are some values ​​that are the same for everyone, which everyone should follow without exception. This is a myth (fiction) in order to create an illusion in the understanding of humanity as a kind of monolithic organism with a single development path for all peoples and ways to achieve their goals.
In the foreign policy of the United States and its satellites, talk about the protection of "Universal Human Values" (democracy, protection of human rights, freedom, etc.) develops into open military and economic aggression against those countries and peoples who want to develop in their traditional way, different from the opinion of the world community.
There are no absolute human values. For example, even if we take such a basic right, spelled out in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as the right to life, then here you can find enough examples of various world cultures in which life is not an absolute value (in ancient times, most cultures of the East and many cultures West, in the modern world - cultures based on Hinduism).
In other words, the term "Universal Human Values" is a euphemism that covers the West's desire to impose a new world order and ensure the globalization of the economy and multiculturalism, which will eventually erase all national differences and create a new race of universal human slaves serving for the benefit of the elect (it should be noted that the representatives of the so-called golden billion will not differ from such slaves in any way).

The fourth opinion: the attitude to the concept varies from a complete denial of the existence of "Universal Values" to the postulation of a specific list of them. One of the intermediate positions is, for example, the idea that under conditions modern world, where no community of people exists in isolation from others, for the peaceful coexistence of cultures, some common system of values ​​is simply necessary.

Human values instilled in a person in the course of his upbringing. They represent the accumulated spiritual, moral and ethical principles that maintain the level of goodness in society. Fundamental is human life with the acute problem of its preservation in the current cultural society and under existing natural conditions.

In another sense, universal human values ​​are an absolute standard that contains the foundations of moral values; they help humanity to maintain its kind.

However, critics argue that some are capable of misusing the concept. So, it can be used to manipulate public opinion. And this is despite the difference in national life, religion, etc. As a result, the same values ​​for everyone and everyone may contradict some culture.

But for every argument there is a counterargument. Opponents of this side argue that without such values, society would already be morally decomposed, and individual subjects could not coexist peacefully.

Important - they first of all form and only then the culture of the country and society as a whole. And, nevertheless, there are no specifics in this kind of values ​​- this is not a certain set of rules that must be unquestioningly followed. Also, they are not associated with a certain period of time in the development of a particular culture, a specific ethical tradition. This is what distinguishes a civilized person from a barbarian.

Human values ​​include several components. The spiritual component is religion, philosophy, art, ethics, aesthetics, various cultural monuments, masterpieces of music and cinema, literary works, etc. That is, the entire spiritual experience of peoples is a universal value. This conceals deep philosophical reflections on the meaning of being, morality, cultural heritage and mores of the people.

The spiritual component is divided into moral, aesthetic, scientific, religious, political and legal foundations. modern society- this is honor, dignity, kindness, truth, harmlessness and others; aesthetic - the search for the beautiful and the sublime; scientific - truth; religious - faith. The political component reveals in a person the desire for peace, democracy, justice, and the legal component determines the importance of law and order in society.

The cultural component includes communication, freedom, creative activity. Natural is organic and inorganic nature.

Human values ​​are a form of application of moral standards, which is associated with the ideals of humanism, human dignity and justice. They direct a person to ensure that his life rests on three important components: awareness, responsibility and honesty. Therefore, we are the people that are able to come to this. The prosperity of society, the atmosphere in it depends on us. Mutual understanding and mutual respect should reign in the world. Observance of universal human values ​​can realize such a longed-for world peace!

Sometimes the literature raises the question of innate values. Let's say right away: only natural, natural data can be innate. needs of people. Values ​​are outside human consciousness, therefore, they cannot be innate. For a different reason, but the same must be said about the value orientations of people: like any ideas, understanding, etc., they are all acquired. The process of origin, establishment, definition, formation, formation, modification, change of individual value orientations takes place throughout life, takes place on the basis of the unity and interaction of the specifics of the existing natural, social conditions of people's lives and their individual characteristics on the basis of their practical, cognitive, evaluative and normative activities . Of course, this process is predominantly influenced by the social environment, including education, upbringing, media propaganda, art, communication with other people, etc. But this influence is refracted in a peculiar way for each person through his own characteristics: the state of physical and psychological health, temperament, character traits, inclinations, abilities, inclinations, habits, conformist predispositions, sympathies, antipathies, interests, needs, intentions, desires and much more. Therefore, people have (as V.A. Kuvakin calls them) both anti-values, and pseudo-values, and completely original, purely individual value orientations, and the awareness of the perceived general group and universal values ​​acquires in some way a specific expression, unique nuances.

From this it is clear that with values ​​any person can count almost anything, and it is completely useless to argue about many individual values ​​(values ​​\u200b\u200bsuch as "tastes are not disputed"). But as for the universal ones, one can and should both argue and justify, especially since there is a lot of far-fetched, unfounded, unfounded in this issue.

Many authors consider certain moral (perhaps, more precisely: moral-religious?) principles, norms, as universal human values, understanding by them, among other things, the commandments of Moses. But it is known that these and similar commandments have never been and are not a universally recognized and absolute standard for all people and states.

Others argue that faith (apparently religious), democracy, law and order, justice, humanism, freedom, love, family, the meaning of life, duty, responsibility, honor, dignity, conscience, nobility, mercy, compassion were and are universal human values. etc. Here is euphoria, obvious utopianism, Manilovian dreams, because the authors are trying to pass off private values ​​as universal human values ​​without any evidence. And they are neither universally recognized nor common among people. Moreover, there were and are many misanthropes, chauvinists, misanthropes, biryuks, unscrupulous, dishonorable people, militarists (aggressors), dictators, convinced bachelors, parasites, etc.

What, for example, do specific authors attribute to universal human values? It must be said that usually the terms "universal values" and "absolute values", and sometimes the term "highest values" are used by them as synonyms. But judge for yourself on the example of the ideas of a number of authors.

So, having singled out three stages in the development of philosophy (7th, 6th centuries BC - 16th century AD; 17th century - 60s of the 19th century; 2nd half of the 19th century - XXI century), G.P. Vyzhletsov states that their highest values ​​were, respectively, GOOD, HAPPINESS (including freedom “from”), FREEDOM (“for” or spiritual) [see: 12, p.63-65]. In our opinion, this is an obvious reduction (simplification). In addition, the same author calls faith, love and beauty as the highest values ​​[see: ibid., p.24], as well as goodness, justice, peace, usefulness [see: ibid., p.25].

The most numerous set of values, divided into groups, is announced by A.O. Boronoev and A.O. Smirnov: “Recognition of personalities in us by fellow citizens, fellow tribesmen is associated with the identification of bearers of values ​​in us. Five of their groups are distinguished: socially-targeted (Holiness, Spirituality, Knowledge, Mastery, Deed, Glory, Power, Wealth); social-instrumental (Law, Freedom, Justice, Solidarity, Mercy); personal-instrumental (Life, Health, Strength, Dexterity, Beauty, Mind); subjectively target (Substance, Energy, Space); universal (Thinking Spirit, Society, Man)" [Cit. according to: 20, p.16].

Many of those not classified as universal values, other authors, as we will now see, include in their number.

According to E.M. Udovichenko, "The basic (fundamental) usually include the so-called universal values: these are life and death, goodness, truth, beauty, love, the meaning of life, honor, nobility, dignity, freedom, the intrinsic value of each person" . In addition, as essential, which “can be defined as values ​​from values”, the author calls “the meaning of life, the attitude towards a person as a goal (self-worth), moral freedom” [see: ibid., p.3].

Assignment of death to the number of values ​​(and even more so - universal) is, at least, highly controversial. It cannot be a universal human value, because the vast majority of people have a negative attitude and attitude towards it, they are afraid of it, they do not want death for themselves.

"More modest" looks B.L. Nazarov in the enumeration of values: “Human rights, like law in general, ... ascend to the category of universal human values. ... The concepts of absolute good and evil, beauty, etc. are characteristic of universal human values.” .

According to D.A. Leontiev, "...universal, "eternal" values ​​(truth, beauty, justice)...".

G.P. Vyzhletsov distinguishes the highest values ​​in accordance with the levels in the integral structure of value in general (with the levels of "ideal", "norm" and "significance"): faith, love, beauty; goodness, justice, peace and usefulness. In addition, he writes: “The main spiritual value that determines a person’s life in society and in the state is conscience” [see: ibid., p.30].

V.V. Ilyin believes that “humanitarianism is the highest value of being, fixing nobility in aspirations, essential and meaningful in life”, that “... the highest value of the social order is human development, calculated by indicators - life expectancy, literacy ..., purchasing power parity” and that "Ideals are the highest values ​​...".

Considering that the highest values ​​are not constant, A.K. Rychkov and B.L. Yashin, in relation to different eras for Russia, argues: “The Russia of Nicholas II: feudal-capitalist relations, the highest values ​​of society - Faith, Tsar and Fatherland. Soviet Russia: socialist relations, the highest values ​​(at least declared ones) - democracy, social equality, communism. Modern Russia: capitalist relations, the highest values ​​- freedom, democracy, material wealth".

In his two-hundred-page book, Yu.A. Schrader did not consider it necessary (or, perhaps, simply turned out to be incapable?) to give at least some definition, at least some definition of the concept of “value”, but nevertheless writes about a number of universal human values, including that “ St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of two values ​​that should guide human behavior. The first value is the salvation of the soul and the achievement of the opportunity to contemplate God as the highest good. And the second value is the benefit of other people. In addition, he declares honesty, decency, justice as universal human values, originating from the Old Testament commandments, the salvation of the soul is an absolute value, freedom is one of the highest values, the ability to find a reasonable compromise with people is a fundamental ethical value. The author does not explain or prove all these ideas, since he adheres to an orthodox theological point of view, believing that “man is created in the image and likeness of God”, his moral behavior, free choice are subordinate to God, that the highest value is God. .

The philosophy of the Russian religious renaissance, notes G.P. Vyzhletsov, - “... revealed their spiritual content in universal human values ​​as the inner basis of human total unity. Seeing the values human being Russian philosophers (from V.S. Solovyov to N.O. Lossky) showed the deep interconnection and organic unity of the great triad of the 20th century: Spirit - Freedom - Personality not in the cognizing mind, albeit in the world, but in the divine spirituality.

So what did we see? The unique dissonance of the original opinions. Why is this happening?

Apparently, due to the significant discord prevailing in the literature, and sometimes insufficient clarity in the definition of the concept of “value” and in delimiting it from the concept of “value orientation”, such discord is obtained in the allocation of universal (absolute, highest) values. In addition, philosophical views, political beliefs, religious beliefs or lack thereof, the personal preferences of the authors.

But the main reason for such a disagreement is that the authors attribute certain phenomena to universal (absolute, highest) values ​​according to the principle “it seems to me so kaatsa (it seems)”, i.e. purely declarative, unsubstantiated, groundless, without logically deriving them from the corresponding grounds.

But these thoughts of A.K. Rychkov and B.L. Yashin about the highest values, in our opinion, are both interesting and true: “in the value system of any person there are values ​​that he recognizes as higher values. For one person, the highest values ​​are God, faith and related religious values. For another, the highest value is the “golden calf”, material wealth, for the sake of which he is ready to deceive, meanness and even murder. For the third, the highest value is Freedom, Justice and Democracy. For the fourth, this is scientific truth, which for him is not only dearer than friendship, but can be dearer and own life» . Yes, it is, because, firstly, in this case it is definitely not about universal human values, but about individual, and, secondly, words a“for ... a person, the highest values ​​\u200b\u200bare” can be understood somehow that we are talking about genuine values, and the fact that this person erroneously something takes for the highest values ​​(understanding, most likely, by "highest" - "the most important").

A number of supporters philosophical teachings, declaring some values ​​​​absolute and supreme, "deduce" this from the innate (a priori) nature of ideas or from the Universe, the World Spirit, God. It is completely unknown and incomprehensible where in what world, how TRUTH, GOOD, GOOD, etc. exist as such, how, when a priori ideas crawled into our consciousness or who introduced them into it. All this, like God, can be and is only a matter of faith, assumption, assumption, conjecture, therefore it is impossible to prove, substantiate all this. With regard to other values, which really and naturally exist, but are called by some authors absolute and supreme, apparently, the political, moral and other convictions and preferences of the authors, who tend to idealize them too much and exaggerate the place and role of certain values, are evidently affected.

But this is not the point, but whether the terms "absolute" and "supreme" are suitable for characterizing values ​​and their types?

We have shown above that it is incorrect to use the term “higher” (and hence both “middle” and “lower”) to refer to certain values. In our opinion, if we already divide values ​​according to their place and role, then it is better to divide them into more and less socially or individually important, significant in well-defined aspects or situations, circumstances.

What about absolute?

TRUTH, GOOD, GOOD... Where are they? "Generally"? In general, they do not exist by themselves and cannot exist. They are always in relation to something, someone, they are always someone's, they are with people, society, humanity, they are in them, in their connections, relationships.

GOD... He is God insofar as there is a World, as it is believed, created and ruled by Him. There can be no God without relation to the World and with the World, and all arguments about God, His omnipotence, omniscience and other super-qualities, regardless of the World, completely lose their meaning.

So, as we have justified above, there are no absolute values, just as there are no absolute truths. But in universal human values ​​there is an absolute moment (moment!), which is what is in them - constant, stable, preserved in time and space and being in unity with their relative moment, i.e. with what is modified in them, concretized.

At present, the ideals and norms of socialist and communist morality are being scorned in every possible way by many domestic authors, authors of other CIS countries, and praised moral standards of the Orthodox religion with the propagandistic demagogic declaration of tolerance. But, allow me, let's take the Moral Code of the Builder of Communism. No matter how utopian, adventurous the statement “the current generation of Soviet people will live under communism”, but out of the thirteen points (principles) of this code, ten do not at all contradict religion and the norms, ideals, principles of a democratic society itself:

Voluntary labor for the benefit of society: who does not work, he does not eat;

Everyone's concern for the preservation and multiplication of the public domain;

High consciousness of public duty, intolerance to violations of public interests;

Collectivism and comradely mutual assistance: each for all, all for one;

Humane relations and mutual respect between people: man to man is a friend, comrade and brother;

Honesty and truthfulness, moral purity, simplicity and modesty in public and private life;

Mutual respect in the family, concern for the upbringing of children;

Irreconcilability to injustice, parasitism, dishonesty, careerism, money-grubbing;

Friendship and brotherhood of all peoples of the USSR, intolerance towards national and racial hostility;

Fraternal solidarity with the working people of all countries, with all peoples [see: 31, p.411].

But the Holy Scripture is one thing, and the socio-political system established at the end of the 20th century in the vast majority of the former countries of the Socialist Commonwealth with the ideology of the ruling forces, which profess, impose on society, and implement completely different moral and political principles, is another thing, planting through the media, educational establishments, literature, forms of entertainment, etc., in their countries the principles of private property individualism, selfishness, elitism, permissiveness, nationalism, the pursuit of wealth, money-grubbing, fierce competition, etc. And many religious figures are being drawn into the new system, starting to serve its principles. So it turns out: part of the population (mostly mature and elderly) continue to live by adherents of the old values, the other (mostly young people) accepted the system of principles of the “wild bourgeois society” imposed “from above”, and the third part (the rest), disoriented , in different versions compiles values ​​from both systems.

At a meeting of the State Council on December 26, 2006, the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin specifically noted: “The ideological vacuum formed after the collapse of the socialist ideology is being filled and it will certainly be filled. But it will be filled either with extremism, chauvinism, nationalism and national intolerance that destroy us, or with the active support of general humanistic, universal values.”

Well, firstly, about the "crash" - this is a clear wishful thinking, because this ideology dominates in a number of countries, is a state one (for example, in countries such as China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba). Secondly, despite all the attempts of Western propaganda, the official media of the Russian Federation, domestic clergy, former hidden enemies of Soviet power, all those “offended” by it, the mass of the adult population in today's Russia to one degree or another prefers precisely the socialist ideology, having voted at the contest "Name Russia" for the candidacies of I.V. Stalin and V.I. Lenin, who out of 50 candidates received 3rd and 10th places, respectively. Thirdly, why such a tough alternative: either extremism, nationalism, or universal human values? Isn't there a "third"? For example, the “values” of the current masters of Russia, the “new Russians”, the newly minted masters: “all means are suitable for me”, “even a flood after us”, “patriotism is a fiction”, “homeland is where I feel good”, etc. .? And what about propaganda on screens, on stages, in the media of the “values” of violence, sadism, debauchery, etc.? What about anti-tolerance in the relationship between ministers of different faiths to each other? Etc.

a) Dogmas, commandments of the corresponding Holy Scripture(for example, the 10 commandments of Moses in Christianity);

b) one or another set of moral norms (including prohibitions, including the so-called "Golden Rule");

c) a number of freedoms and rights of the individual.

The first is unconvincing, since the commandments do not coincide in different faiths, and besides, they are not significant for unbelievers and atheists. And if we take the factual side? How many thieves, robbers, rapists, seducers, lovers of other people's wives, users of prostitutes, envious people, children who hate their parents - "concurrently" being believers in the world!

The second is also not suitable for the role of universal human values. Well, how many in the past were and still are politicians, entrepreneurs, figures of big-time sports, art, etc., who sincerely adhered to and now adhere to the “Golden Rule of Morality” and follow it?! What about other humane moral norms?! No wonder it is believed that "politics is a dirty business." But is entrepreneurship, big sport, modern art, journalism, legal proceedings - clean, in everything and always respectable?

The third is nothing more than an ideal. Rights and freedoms were and are used as real at best only by those who had and still have wealth and power.

As if justifying the legitimacy of the peremptory declaration by various authors of certain phenomena, phenomena, objects as universal human values, G.P. Vyzhletsov writes: "... it is impossible to prove values ​​logically and scientifically" . In our opinion, if axiology can claim to be scientific, then everything in it must be proven, justified.

So we will try to substantiate our point of view on general scientific values.

So, a significant disagreement on the issue of universal human values ​​is obtained, first of all, due to the insufficient definition of the meaning of the terms “universal” and “value”, and hence the content of the concept of “universal human value”.

According to logic as a science, before discussing, arguing, proving, refuting, criticizing something, etc., it is necessary to find out the meaning of terms, phrases, expressions, the content of concepts that will be used in these thought processes. Let's try to find out and agree what to call "universal" and what "universal value" means. Next, we will find out what are the main types universal human values, why exactly they are such, what are the relationships and connections between them.

Since axiological activity directly depends on cognitive activity, then values ​​cannot be something that is incomprehensible to our thinking, that is unreal, impossible, impracticable, unattainable, unrealizable, imaginary, fantastic, utopian, chimerical, etc. ***

Regarding the meaning of the term "universal" one must bear in mind, at least three interrelated aspects:

1) universal (in the sense: universal) as that which concerns every normal person(from primitive man to the modern, from the child to the elderly);

2) universal as something that is an absolute, eternal, enduring need and importance for humanity as a whole(i.e. as not summative, but holistic, systemic education);

3) universal as something that must certainly be in the center of attention each state and his multifaceted politics.

Taking into account these aspects, we define the concept of "universal values" as follows. Human values ​​- it's real *** for people, universal, permanent, consistent with legal laws and moral principles and norms, material and spiritual means, methods, conditions that can satisfy and satisfy human material and spiritual needs, and therefore, are certainly necessary, desirable, having eternal essential significance for every individual, for humanity as a whole, for any state that expresses essential the interests of the society of their country and its citizens.

Since such values ​​for all individuals, humanity, all states (societies), despite their interconnections, interactions still have significant features, we believe that it is necessary to distinguish three types universal values: 1) universal values; 2) the values ​​of humanity; 3) national values.

Initial among them is the system of common human values.

Values ​​in human life: definition, features and their classification

08.04.2015

Snezhana Ivanova

The most important role in the life of an individual and society as a whole is played by values ​​and value orientations...

The most important role not only in the life of each individual person, but also in the whole society as a whole is played by values ​​and value orientations, which primarily perform an integrative function. It is on the basis of values ​​(while focusing on their approval in society) that each person makes his own choice in life. Values, occupying a central position in the structure of personality, have a significant impact on the orientation of a person and the content of his social activity, behavior and actions, his social position and on general attitude him to the world, to himself and to other people. Therefore, the loss of the meaning of life by a person is always the result of the destruction and rethinking of the old system of values, and in order to regain this meaning again, he needs to create a new system based on universal human experience and using the forms of behavior and activities accepted in society.

Values ​​are a kind of internal integrator of a person, concentrating around themselves all his needs, interests, ideals, attitudes and beliefs. Thus, the system of values ​​in a person's life takes the form of the inner core of his entire personality, and the same system in society is the core of its culture. Value systems, functioning both at the level of the individual and at the level of society, create a kind of unity. This is due to the fact that the personal value system is always formed based on the values ​​that are dominant in a particular society, and they, in turn, influence the choice of the individual goal of each individual and determine the ways to achieve it.

Values ​​in a person's life are the basis for choosing the goals, methods and conditions of activity, and also help him answer the question, why does he perform this or that activity? In addition, values ​​are the system-forming core of the idea (or program), human activity and his inner spiritual life, because spiritual principles, intentions and humanity no longer relate to activity, but to values ​​and value orientations.

The role of values ​​in human life: theoretical approaches to the problem

Modern human values- the most urgent problem of both theoretical and applied psychology, since they influence the formation and are the integrative basis of the activity of not only a single individual, but also a social group (large or small), a team, an ethnic group, a nation and all of humanity. It is difficult to overestimate the role of values ​​in a person's life, because they illuminate his life, filling it with harmony and simplicity, which determines a person's desire for free will, for the will of creative possibilities.

The problem of human values ​​in life is studied by the science of axiology ( in lane from Greek axia / axio - value, logos / logos - a reasonable word, teaching, study), more precisely a separate industry scientific knowledge philosophy, sociology, psychology and pedagogy. In psychology, values ​​are usually understood as something significant for the person himself, something that gives an answer to his actual, personal meanings. Values ​​are also seen as a concept that denotes objects, phenomena, their properties and abstract ideas that reflect social ideals and therefore are the standard of due.

It should be noted that the special importance and significance of values ​​in a person's life arises only in comparison with the opposite (this is how people strive for good, because evil exists on earth). Values ​​cover the whole life of both a person and the whole of humanity, while they affect absolutely all areas (cognitive, behavioral and emotional-sensory).

The problem of values ​​was of interest to many famous philosophers, sociologists, psychologists and educators, but the beginning of the study of this issue was laid back in ancient times. So, for example, Socrates was one of the first who tried to understand what goodness, virtue and beauty are, and these concepts were separated from things or actions. He believed that the knowledge achieved through the understanding of these concepts is the basis of a person's moral behavior. Here it is also worth referring to the ideas of Protagoras, who believed that each person is already a value as a measure of what exists and what does not exist.

Analyzing the category of “value”, one cannot pass by Aristotle, because it is to him that the term “thymia” (or valued) originated. He believed that values ​​in human life are both the source of things and phenomena and the cause of their diversity. Aristotle identified the following benefits:

• valued (or divine, to which the philosopher attributed the soul and mind);
• praised (impudent praise);
• opportunities (here the philosopher attributed strength, wealth, beauty, power, etc.).

Philosophers of modern times made a significant contribution to the development of questions about the nature of values. Among the most significant figures of that era, it is worth highlighting I. Kant, who called the will the central category that could help in solving the problems of the human value sphere. And the most detailed explanation of the process of formation of values ​​belongs to G. Hegel, who described the changes in values, their connections and structure in the three stages of the existence of activity (they are described in more detail below in the table).

Features of changing values ​​in the process of activity (according to G. Hegel)

Steps of activity	Features of the formation of values
first	the emergence of a subjective value (its definition occurs even before the start of actions), a decision is made, that is, the value-goal must be concretized and correlated with external changing conditions
second	The value is in the focus of the activity itself, there is an active, but at the same time contradictory interaction between the value and possible ways to achieve it, here the value becomes a way to form new values
third	values ​​are woven directly into activity, where they manifest themselves as an objectified process

The problem of human values ​​in life has been deeply studied by foreign psychologists, among which it is worth noting the works of V. Frankl. He said that the meaning of human life as its basic education finds its manifestation in the system of values. Under the values ​​themselves, he understood the meanings (he called them "universal meanings"), which are characteristic of a greater number of representatives not only of a particular society, but of humanity as a whole throughout the entire path of its development (historical). Viktor Frankl focused on the subjective significance of values, which is accompanied, first of all, by the person taking responsibility for its implementation.

In the second half of the last century, values ​​were often considered by scientists through the prism of the concepts of "value orientations" and "personal values". The greatest attention was paid to the study of the value orientations of the individual, which were understood both as an ideological, political, moral and ethical basis for a person's assessment of the surrounding reality, and as a way of differentiating objects according to their significance for the individual. The main thing that almost all scientists paid attention to was that value orientations are formed only due to the assimilation of social experience by a person, and they find their manifestation in goals, ideals, and other manifestations of personality. In turn, the system of values ​​in human life is the basis of the content side of the orientation of the individual and reflects its internal attitude in the surrounding reality.

Thus, value orientations in psychology were considered as a complex socio-psychological phenomenon that characterized the orientation of the personality and the content side of its activity, which determined the general approach of a person to himself, other people and the world as a whole, and also gave meaning and direction to his personality. behavior and activities.

Forms of existence of values, their signs and features

Throughout its history of development, humanity has developed universal or universal values ​​that have not changed their meaning or diminished their significance for many generations. These are such values ​​as truth, beauty, goodness, freedom, justice and many others. These and many other values ​​in a person's life are associated with the motivational-need sphere and are an important regulatory factor in his life.

Values ​​in psychological understanding can be represented in two meanings:

• in the form of objectively existing ideas, objects, phenomena, actions, properties of products (both material and spiritual);
• as their significance for a person (value system).

Among the forms of existence of values, there are: social, subject and personal (they are presented in more detail in the table).

Forms of existence of values ​​according to O.V. Sukhomlinsky

Of particular importance in the study of values ​​and value orientations were the studies of M. Rokeach. He understood values ​​as positive or negative ideas (and abstract ones), which are in no way connected with any particular object or situation, but are only an expression of human beliefs about types of behavior and prevailing goals. According to the researcher, all values ​​have the following features:

• the total number of values ​​(significant and motivated) is small;
• all values ​​in people are similar (only the steps of their significance are different);
• all values ​​are organized into systems;
• the sources of values ​​are culture, society and social institutions;
• values ​​have an impact on a large number of phenomena that are studied by a variety of sciences.

In addition, M. Rokeach established a direct dependence of a person's value orientations on many factors, such as his income level, gender, age, race, nationality, level of education and upbringing, religious orientation, political beliefs, etc.

Some signs of values ​​were also proposed by S. Schwartz and W. Bilisky, namely:

• values ​​are understood as either a concept or a belief;
• they refer to the desired end states of the individual or to his behavior;
• they have a supra-situational character;
• are guided by the choice, as well as the assessment of human behavior and actions;
• they are ordered by importance.

Classification of values

Today in psychology there is a huge number of very different classifications of values ​​and value orientations. Such diversity appeared due to the fact that values ​​are classified according to various criteria. So they can be combined into certain groups and classes, depending on what types of needs these values ​​satisfy, what role they play in a person's life and in what area they are applied. The table below shows the most generalized classification of values.

Classification of values

Criteria	Values ​​can be
assimilation object	material and moral
subject and object content	socio-political, economic and moral
subject of assimilation	social, class and values ​​of social groups
purpose of assimilation	selfish and altruistic
generalization level	concrete and abstract
mode of manifestation	persistent and situational
the role of human activity	terminal and instrumental
content of human activity	cognitive and object-transforming (creative, aesthetic, scientific, religious, etc.)
belonging	individual (or personal), group, collective, public, national, universal
group-society relationship	positive and negative

From point of view psychological features of human values, the classification proposed by K. Khabibulin is interesting. Their values ​​were divided as follows:

• depending on the subject of activity, values ​​can be individual or act as values ​​of a group, class, society;
• according to the object of activity, the scientist singled out material values ​​in human life (or vital) and sociogenic (or spiritual);
• depending on the type human activity values ​​can be cognitive, labor, educational and socio-political;
• the last group consists of values ​​according to the way of performing activities.

There is also a classification based on the allocation of vital (human ideas about good, evil, happiness and sorrow) and universal values. This classification was proposed at the end of the last century by T.V. Butkovskaya. Universal values, according to the scientist, are:

• vital (life, family, health);
• social recognition (values ​​such as social status and ability to work);
• interpersonal recognition (exhibition and honesty);
• democratic (freedom of expression or freedom of speech);
• particular (belonging to a family);
• transcendental (manifestation of faith in God).

It is also worth dwelling separately on the classification of values ​​according to M. Rokeach, the author of the most famous method in the world, the main purpose of which is to determine the hierarchy of a person's value orientations. M. Rokeach divided all human values ​​into two broad categories:

• terminal (or value-goals) - the person's conviction that the ultimate goal is worth all the effort to achieve it;
• instrumental (or value-methods) - a person's conviction that a certain way of behavior and actions is the most successful for achieving the goal.

There are still a huge number of different classifications of values, a summary of which is given in the table below.

Value classifications

Scientist	Values
V.P. Tugarinov	spiritual	education, art and science
	socio-political	justice, will, equality and brotherhood
	material	various types of material goods, technology
V.F. Sergeants	material	tools and methods of implementation
	spiritual	political, moral, ethical, religious, legal and philosophical
A. Maslow	being (B-values)	higher, characteristic of a person who is self-actualizing (values ​​of beauty, goodness, truth, simplicity, uniqueness, justice, etc.)
	scarce (D-values)	lower, aimed at satisfying a need that has been frustrated (values ​​such as sleep, security, dependence, peace of mind, etc.)

Analyzing the presented classification, the question arises, what are the main values ​​in human life? In fact, there are a lot of such values, but the most important are common (or universal) values, which, according to V. Frankl, are based on three main human existentials - spirituality, freedom and responsibility. The psychologist identified the following groups of values ​​(“eternal values”):

• creativity that allows people to understand what they can give to a given society;
• experiences, thanks to which a person realizes what he receives from society and society;
• relationships that enable people to realize their place (position) in relation to those factors that somehow limit their lives.

It should also be noted that the most important place is occupied by moral values ​​in human life, because they play a leading role in people's decisions related to morality and morality. moral standards, and this, in turn, indicates the level of development of their personality and humanistic orientation.

The system of values ​​in human life

The problem of human values ​​in life occupies a leading position in psychological research, because they are the core of the personality and determine its direction. In solving this problem, a significant role belongs to the study of the value system, and here the studies of S. Bubnova, who, based on the works of M. Rokeach, created her own model of the system of value orientations (it is hierarchical and consists of three levels), had a serious impact. The system of values ​​in human life, in her opinion, consists of:

• values-ideals, which are the most general and abstract (this includes spiritual and social values);
• values-properties that are fixed in the process of human life;
• values-modes of activity and behavior.

Any system of values ​​will always combine two categories of values: values-goals (or terminal) and values-methods (or instrumental). Terminal includes the ideals and goals of a person, group and society, and instrumental - ways to achieve goals that are accepted and approved in a given society. Values-goals are more stable than values-methods, therefore they act as a system-forming factor in various social and cultural systems.

To the specific system of values ​​that exists in society, each person shows his own attitude. In psychology, there are five types of human relations in the value system (according to J. Gudechek):

• active, which is expressed in a high degree of internalization of this system;
• comfortable, that is, externally accepted, but at the same time a person does not identify himself with this system of values;
• indifferent, which consists in the manifestation of indifference and complete lack of interest in this system;
• disagreement or rejection, manifested in a critical attitude and condemnation of the value system, with the intention of changing it;
• opposition, which manifests itself both in internal and external contradiction with this system.

It should be noted that the system of values ​​in a person's life is the most important component in the structure of personality, while it occupies a borderline position - on the one hand, it is a system of personal meanings of a person, on the other, its motivational-need sphere. Values ​​and value orientations of a person act as the leading quality of a person, emphasizing its uniqueness and individuality.

Values ​​are the most powerful regulator of human life. They guide a person on the path of his development and determine his behavior and activities. In addition, the focus of a person on certain values ​​and value orientations will certainly have an impact on the process of formation of society as a whole.

Basic human values

Labor training naturally orients the process of personality formation towards the upbringing of high moral qualities.

In Russian pedagogy, ethnopedagogy of the peoples of Russia - work, justice, beauty, goodness - being the components of morality, they form a single harmonious whole.

The highest human values: justice, labor, beauty, and the strongest and most of all, of course, kindness, kindness as the best, most convincing manifestation of love.

It is obvious that all this together constitutes a reliable basis for morality, and, accordingly, for moral education.

To this list of universal human values, I think it is necessary to add the truth.

So let's make a list of universal human moral values:

Work, beauty, kindness, justice, love, truth, life, purpose of life, meaning of life, truth, chastity, purity, upbringing, homeland, family, children, honesty, traditions, conscience, freedom, man.

Human values ​​in the modern world

value universal norm

In the modern world, there are two diametrically opposed points of view on the question of the existence of universal human values. The first of them: there are no absolute universal values. Values ​​and a system of ethics are developed by an ethnos in relation to their own society, based on the experience and nature of the interaction of people within this community. Since the conditions for the existence of different communities are different, it is incorrect to extend the ethical system of one community to the whole world. Each culture has its own scale of values ​​- the result of the conditions of its life and history, and therefore there are no certain universal values ​​that are common to all cultures. An example of ethical behavior among cannibals was the eating of the corpses of a defeated enemy after a battle, which effect mystical meaning. Supporters of the above point of view believe that it is impossible to blame a cannibal for such behavior. Advocates of another point of view appeal more to real situations of interaction and coexistence of different cultures. Since in the conditions of the modern world no community of people (except, perhaps, a specially created reservation) exists in isolation from others, but, on the contrary, actively interacts with them, for the peaceful coexistence of cultures, it is necessary to develop some common system values, even if it a priori did not exist. For the peaceful coexistence of the culture of cannibals with the culture of vegetarians, they need to develop some system of common values, otherwise coexistence will be impossible. There is also a third point of view that follows from the first. Its adherents claim that this phrase is actively used in the manipulation of public opinion. Opponents of US foreign policy argue that in the foreign policy of America and its satellites, talk about the protection of "universal values" (freedom, democracy, protection of human rights, etc.) often develops into open military and economic aggression against those countries and peoples that want to develop in their traditional way, different from the opinion of the world community. In other words, according to this point of view, the term "common human values" is a euphemism covering the desire of the West to impose a new world order and ensure the globalization of the economy and multiculturalism. There are certain grounds for such a view. European standards are approved all over the planet. These are not only technical innovations, but also clothing, pop music, the English language, building technologies, art trends, etc. Including narrow practicality, drugs, the growth of consumer sentiment, the dominance of the principle - "do not interfere with money making money" and etc. In fact, what today is customarily called "universal values" are, first of all, the values ​​that have become established by the Euro-American civilization. Having endured crises of varying intensity and consequences, these ideologies have become excellent soil on which a unified consumer society has grown in the West, and in Russia it is being actively formed. In such a society, of course, there is a place for such concepts as kindness, love, justice, but other "virtues" are among the main values ​​in it, which are important primarily for achieving material well-being and comfort. Spiritual values ​​become secondary Another terrible feature of modern civilization is terror. Terrorist evil cannot be justified. But you can try to understand its causes. Each of the tragedies is another episode of an intercivilizational war, in which on one side of the invisible front line is the Western, that is, the American-European civilization, and on the other, that world, or rather, its most radical and extremist part, to which the values ​​of this civilization are alien.

Intercivilizational confrontations are not at all a distinctive feature of the present time. They have always existed. But the main difference between the modern "war of the worlds", which is unfolding in the era of globalism, is that this confrontation develops into a global one, that is, a much larger and more dangerous one. And the battlefield is the Earth. Will this completely cancel the universality of human values?.. Can we at least hope for a better outcome?.. It is impossible to make predictions.