The ethics of death

For the stability of any public education requires a clear indication of moral criteria related to the phenomenon of human death. This, along with other nodal points of ethical paradigm helps to keep the company in a dynamic equilibrium of morality, not allowing the exit to the aggressive instincts, uncontrolled mass murders and suicides. In the early ethical systems (brighter in the ancient mythology of Hinduism and Buddhism), death is seen as the result associated with the moral evaluation of a deceased person, his relations with other people, and "higher forces". (That is the ancient Greek goddess Moira, originally just "the mistress of death," gradually extended their patronage to all the important moments of human life.) Therefore, death is associated with a manifestation of one's something evil, or with just retribution for sin or an act of revenge (the fair or unfair) - This is the second question. However, the ancient philosophical tradition has come to consider death as good. Socrates, for example, speaking before the judge sentenced him to death, said: "... it seems in fact that all this [the verdict] was to my benefit, and this can not be that we understand it, believing that death is evil. " In ancient China, the philosopher Yang Zhu (he was 440-360. BC. E.) Focus on the fact that death is a symbol of social justice, for equal for all people: "In life there is a difference - the difference between smart and dumb, notably and low. In death, there is identity - that identity and the stink of decay, disappearance and destruction... and died a decade and the century-old, die and virtuous and wise; die and evil, and stupid. " As the history of civilization for the foreseeable approximately 7 - 8 times radically changed the paradigm of thinking, the moral aspects of attitude to death is constantly updated and reconstructed. Denoting this trend, today's researchers write that "the development of human consciousness in death because of its rejection of the spiritual is increasingly understood not as an end of personal existence, but as a moment of radical change, for which life gets in the sacrament of death, a new substance and is continuing in other forms : displacement in the country of the dead ", the separation of the immortal souls of mortal body, and initiation of its existence to the divine universe, or the transition to a personal afterlife existence. Belief in the afterlife to a certain faith frees people from fear of death, replacing his otherworldly fear of retribution, which is one of the motivating factors for the moral evaluation of actions, distinguishing good from evil. This, however, is given by the foundation and to reduce the value of otherworldly life, understood as the only pre-condition is not achieved in conditions of earthly existence and completeness of the truth. However, it was the notion of death, awareness of the finiteness and uniqueness of human personal life contributes to the clarification of moral meaning and value of human life. The sense of uniqueness of each of its moments, neunichtozhimosti, and in some cases and irreparably committed misconduct able to clarify the measure of a person for their business. Understand that death is an act of its purely physical nature of the physiological, which affects only the human body and does not affect human cases acquired in the separate existence of its results, requires measuring the behavior, words and deeds are not only limited to private and measure short-term interests, but the full and final measure of life and death. This specific nature of the idea of death and determines that any attempt to build ethical teachings besides this category every time split on the fact of a human fatality in the death of the irrational mind of any effort to run every time that person opens the inexorable moral not meaningful and not overcome spiritual death. In this case, the denial of the moral essence of death is a form of denial of the moral essence of life and can only serve as a basis for the complete irresponsibility of conduct emanating from the principle of "after us even if the flood." Strictly speaking, the ethics of death has been linked to idefiks religious concept, the dominant society (the State ekumene, people) at this time. If the State waives the protection of religion and even its stigma, many elements of the moral-religious understanding of death changed in the mundane everyday life - in the form of funeral rites, customs generally accepted, etc. The notion of good and evil in relation to death if this continues long enough ( except in cases of massive repression, genocide and mass displacement of peoples - when suddenly and in large scale collapse long way). Comparing traditional Christianity and philosophy (also rodya his religion), the Enlightenment, rodonachalnitsu Western rationalism, American historian Crane Brinton said unexpectedly large number of parallels between them. These parallels are clearly outlined in the work of Carl Becker "heavenly city of philosophers XVIII Century." Becker main thesis is that the Enlightenment faith is just as certain eschatology as Christianity. She pointed to a looming paradise as the ultimate goal of our earthly travails. However, the heavenly city of XVIII century there on the ground. Yet it - the future of the case, even though the near... Such a future does not fit in our lives. It is also true that people will enjoy them in the flesh. But remember that the resurrection and heavenly bliss in the flesh - an integral part of Christian teaching. In the specific details of this paradise does not include costs. Maybe prosveschenchesky heaven is a better material, less spiritual than the Christian heaven. But the characteristic of both religions extinction of evil and futility. The soul - and body! - Bliss, and that in another paradise. Many Christians (duhovnoproritsatelnym most of them), all this may seem a caricature of their paradise. Their paradise - it is indescribable ecstasy, and not merely the absence of evil. But whatever their mystical goal, a man of this world, this paradise seems repression, the cancellation of all, what is worth living. The average is a Christian paradise - just for some unknown bliss, an end to the struggle, the satisfaction of desires. In both faiths final result being determined by force, more powerful than the power of any individual. People can understand the intentions of the forces that can adapt to them. More than that, they must do so if they want to get to paradise. Change, however, these designs can not. In other words, the two religions - and the Christian and prosveschencheskaya - based on prejudice. In practice, they soften this election for the individual ethics of the struggle for good against evil, ethics, which gives a person at least the illusion of personal freedom. The Christian concept of grace has its parallels in the person of a philosophical mind, the notion of redemption - in the face of philosophical education, even in areas such as organization and ritual parallels begs themselves. This is particularly noticeable in the early period of the French Revolution of 1789, when the Jacobin clubs, the new medium of faith, began to imitate the very caricature Christian rites. In those days, were established republican horaly, processions, celebrations of love, catechisms, even the Republican cross the sign. " The French Revolution, of course, morally devalued the concept of death, although to a "domestic" Christian thinking is allowed quite familiarly related to the transition to the other world. I. Heyzinga in the book "Fall of medieval" identifies three dominant themes relating to the understanding of death in the European late Middle Ages. "First of all, where all those who filled the world of these magnificent? Next motive precipitate in awe the whole picture of corruption that were once human beauty. And finally, the motif dances of death, involved in a dance for people of all ages and occupations" . When, in the XIV century in European art (literature, painting, drawing and sculpture, theater performances), a theme dances of death, she became a personalized expression of horror, shudder, sticky, freezing fear. "All-powerful religious idea then brings all of this in the moral sphere - II summarizes Heyzinga - brings to a memento mori, willingly subordinating force using fear-based perceptions, painted a horror in front of ghosts. Around the dances of death grouped some related representations associated with death and is also intended to serve as deterrence and edification. Dances of death precedes the appearance of the legend of the three survivors and three dead. Already in the XIII century, it was noted in the French literature: three aristocratic young men suddenly met three heinous dead, decrees them to their former greatness of the earth - and on the fast end, inevitably waiting boys who are still alive. Exceptionally expressive characters frescoes in the Campo Santo in Pisa - the earliest incarnation of this theme in a serious art. In the XV century miniatures and wood make this story public domain, it becomes a widespread in mural painting. " Of course, this does not happen by accident, death is closely linked in the minds of the average person from another ethnic group - the notion of fairness and equality. And it is an image of three dead along with three alive, according to Heyzingi forms a connecting link between the hideous picture of corruption and expressed Dances of Death idea of equality in death. From this position, death takes on a noble color, destroying earthly manifestations of injustice. As govarivali maniheytsy: "When Adam groin, and Eva pryala - who was then the gentleman?" In general, however, believes Heyzinga, "late medieval religious thought knows only two extremes: the complaint that all the transient, the inevitable loss of strength, honor, worldly pleasures, the disappearance of beauty - and rejoicing over the salvation of soul and attaining eternal bliss. All that lies in between the two, not be expressed. kameneyut Live feelings developed in detail in the ugly images of skeletons and other images of Dances of Death. " The question about the attitude to death has always had an ethical dimension. But long before the late Middle Ages there was a situation where opposition to interpretations of death in western civilization has reached an incredible tension. I am referring to the struggle of traditional Christianity and maniheystva in the first millennium. Polarity with respect to the world reflected in these verah thus: manihei felt cloth, tvarny peace, human flesh, evil and emptiness - good, unlike the Christians, claiming that God's creations can not be carriers of Eternal Darkness, is not denying the importance of sensual pleasures life for the human soul. "The easiest way out for maniheev it would be suicide - writes LN Gumilev - but they have put into their doctrine on the teachings of the relocation of a shower. This means that the death pushes suicide in the new birth, with all its attendant troubles. Therefore, in order to save Dos suggested alternative: attrition flesh or austerity, a level of frenetic, collective depravity, and then loose matter must release the soul from its claws. Only that goal was recognized maniheyami decent, as far as earthly affairs, the morality, of course, is abolished. If the matter - evil, any destruction of it - the benefit, whether it be murder, lies, betrayal... all does not matter. In relation to the subjects of the material world were everything is allowed. This concept of frightened and angry medieval French. Their sound instinct to rebel against logic. System to bend to the phase of the recovery phase to akmaticheskoy faced antisistemoy and left on the earth the ashes of executed... What manihei by the end of the fourteenth century had disappeared from the face of the Earth, it is not surprising, for they, indeed, in this sought. Hate material world, they must beat to hate life itself, therefore, to assert they were not even death, for death - just the time of the change of states, and antizhizn and antimir. Reflecting on the origins maniheystva, Gumilyov comes from afar - he said that "the most common filosofemy the beginning of our era claimed the bipolar world, differ only in one thing: what is considered good, but that - evil. Naturally a division in the system life, according to which the material substance - good, and Void, a deep, - the evil, and who believe that material catches the soul of their toils, enshroud it hurts, but the soul, or quantum of consciousness, seeking to break the will of the real particles become virtual " . Gumilyov considers both approaches unsubstantiated, but they give rise to two models of human behavior in the world and, accordingly, the two positions in relation to the ethical meaning of death. "The first position: the material world of horror and has no right to exist, because all life awaiting death, which is the destruction. The second position: the world is beautiful, and death, constantly supporting life, just out of the complex, often unportable situations. Death - benefit because it saves from vsemirovogo evil, injustice, resentment, suffering that terrible death. Both the position is consistent and you can select any of the request. In the first position - the desire to replace the discrete system (biocenose) to hard, which, according to the logic of development, make a living being in the stick, tap in the thermal decomposition reaction to molecules, molecules raspadutsya to atoms, from atoms selected foreground appears real particles, which annigiliruya, turn online. The limit of such a development - a vacuum. Conversely, when complication systems where life and death go hand in hand, a diversity that is immediately transmitted to the psychological realm, creating art, poetry, and science. But, of course, for the sorrow and joy will have to pay a legitimate physical deaths. Logic is not here, because the correctness of the thesis is given in experience, and intuitive synthesis. The choice of path is free. That kontroverza. And most curiously, that she had seen of our days before the start of a new era, from existentialism to the gnostic, Buddhist-mahayanistov, manheev - apologists first position. " If the theory of LN Gumilev is true, consider that today in the world beat of life. Yet scientists do not quite correctly assesses attitude towards life and death of Christians. The purpose of Christianity is not a set of positive values, which interprets Gumilyov - "pure joy of the flesh, marriage, joy and love to ROdine..." Christ preached love for very different rOdine - celestial and was a stranger to any of patriotism. In this sense, he was an exemplary cosmopolitan... The second inaccuracy Gumilyov that he sees between Christianity maniheystvom and only the differences. But there are definite similarities. In Christianity, a strong element maniheystva, because death is treated in the same time as evil as good. Evil - as a reminder of the original sin, the inadequacy of the flesh, unclean source. Well - as it enables afterlife, incorruptible existence with the hope to gain eternal bliss. This dualism in relation to the death characterized and Buddhism. As long as death - just stop at the next (resettlement of souls), it is - a definite evil, leading to mnogostradaniyam. If the complete range of transformations, the death is desired, Daru care nirvana. In general, modern humanity treats death as an evil rather than vice versa. In developed countries, a significant increase in comfort earthly life by making an active life until the last breath the vast majority of people. The invention treatment methods previously fatal diseases, the active struggle for the renewal of life in old age, the money invested in gerontological research - all this suggests that in the struggle between the earthly and otherworldly existence, people have toward Earth. This attitude was a simple formula: Death is an absolute and necessary evil. And Odin moment, as it should be recalled. There is a certain contradiction between the "natural" (natural) and "artificial" (religious) ethical treatment of death, next to which potoptalsya, but would not reach its essence PA Kropotkin in his "Ethics." Inequality (hierarchy) as a law of nature implies the brutal death of interspecific (and sometimes intra iv) the fight. Is it possible to carry out the analogy between the other living creatures and man? All tvarny world created by God - why did the animals can live with impunity on other laws than the people? Because they have no soul? But the man is not separated from nature, he initially "entered" into it and put the need in some way to relate her life with her existence in it. Fox, zagryzshaya mouse, did not think that comes immoral. Similarly, it does not consider his death or the death of congener as evil or that the ethical category. To the eternal nature of the natural line of death. Why, a person must be an exception? Thinking about this issue, an American researcher Layell Watson writes: "... death is helping to maintain the necessary balance in the whole population, not allowing it to grow and become too unmanageable. Do not be death, the world would have won organisms multiplying faster than the others. One little invisible bacteria can make a few hours of great offspring, an equal weight of person, and every gram of soil contains a hundred million of these potential Patriarchs. In less than two days, the entire surface of the Earth would be covered with smelly bacteria dunes all the colors of the rainbow. freely reproduced, simple give us the same picture for forty days, the room will need to fly four-year, rat - eight years, the clover plants can cover the entire Earth Odinnadtsat for years, but before we replace elephants, will be held at least a century. " This model, of course, applies to humans. Not whether we have such a limit, as the death of a few centuries, the entire surface of the planet resembled a Sochi beach in summer. So, from the standpoint of science is a good death phenomenon. But we, ordinary people, this is no easier. We Me'rime'e all by one's own yardstick, our home-philistine psychology does not allow us to accept their own death necessary and appropriate. And even if we understand it, it always moves inside chervyachok question: "Why did I go?"
AP Lavrinov

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8