Ethical values ​​of social work. Philosophical and ethical values ​​of social work

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I. VALUES AND IDEALS OF PROFESSIONAL SOCIAL WORK

1.1. Basis of values social work

1.2. Philosophical values ​​and ideals

1.3. Value Levels

CHAPTER II. SPIRITUAL AND MORAL QUALITIES OF A SOCIAL WORKER

2.1. Moral qualities

2.2. Code of Ethics and its principles

2.3. Ethical dilemmas

CONCLUSION

LITERATURE

INTRODUCTION

The topic of my test is “Values ​​and ideals of professional social work”. In it, I will try to reveal such important concepts as the values ​​of social work; division of values ​​and ideals into levels; spiritual and moral qualities of a social worker; code of ethics social work; ethical dilemmas.

Social values ​​are more or less universally recognized behavioral standards, that is, beliefs shared by society or a social group about the goals that need to be achieved, and those basic ways and means that lead to these goals. Based on these values, social norms are developed. Among the most important social values ​​are, for example, such as freedom, equality, fraternity, peace, honor and dignity of the individual, social justice, civic duty, solidarity, material well-being, spiritual wealth and much more.

To better understand these issues, we should consider the philosophy of social work. The philosophy of social work is an ideology professional activity. It is based on the values ​​and ideals that took shape in the process of evolutionary development of social work as a public profession.

The system of values ​​was formed in the process of historical development of social work from its prehistoric forms to the present state.

The philosophical values ​​of social work are manifested at various levels and form a kind of system. The philosophy of social work values ​​is associated with the specifics of the activities of professionals in the social sphere.

CHAPTERI. VALUES AND IDEALS OF PROFESSIONAL SOCIAL WORK

1. 1. Basis of social work values

Significant changes took place in the practice of social work throughout its history, but social workers continued to adhere to a certain set of values, in which, although there were some constructive changes, but key elements preserved. For modern social work, as well as before, the desire for the well-being of the person, social justice and dignity of the individual is characteristic.

Social work is aimed at providing assistance, support, and protection to all people, especially “weak” social groups who are in need in the course of their life. Therefore, based on humanism and morality, social work focuses on the key elements of a set of values ​​that remain with minor changes throughout its history - the well-being of people, social justice, and the dignity of the individual. This means that the approach to the life of each individual as the highest value dimension is complemented by an understanding of the fact that this life itself must be worthy of a person. Each person is valuable for its uniqueness, which should be considered and respected.

1.2. Philosophical values ​​and ideals

The system of values ​​was formed from its prehistoric forms to the present state.

With a change in historical conditions, a transformation of value orientations took place. However, the public good, justice, responsibility, have always been important dominants in the philosophical understanding of civil and political human rights.

The philosophical values ​​of social work are manifested at various levels and form a kind of system where beliefs and attitudes, ideals and aspirations, norms and practical principles of interaction, ethical rules and professional values ​​are realized.

The philosophical values ​​contained in the multicultural space act as the values ​​of a professional subculture when the profession is considered at the level of the international community. Hence, the values ​​of the professional subculture are considered at the global level in the context of global civilizational goals and objectives.

Philosophical values ​​at the level of professional norms and requirements cover a different layer of value orientations. The macro level defines goals and objectives of a general nature. They are associated with corporate principles and norms and norms of interaction, relationships and a system of collective responsibility.

The microlevel of philosophical values ​​of social work reflects the value spectrum of professional interaction social worker and client.

1.3. Value Levels

Mega level

The mega-level of social work values ​​provides for the study of the profession at the level of the international community. Values ​​are considered in the context of global civilizational goals and objectives.

The right to life (active support for human life, countering the violation of his rights and activities in the field of ensuring the quality of life);

Freedom (Universal Declaration of Human Rights; secrecy of correspondence, place of residence);

Equality and non-discrimination (Basic of society, respect for the dignity of the individual);

Justice (Legal, social, judicial, economic guarantee of human rights and freedoms);

Solidarity (Understanding the suffering and aspirations of a person, participation in the struggle for his rights)

Social Responsibility (The practical side of solidarity, providing assistance and providing services to the poor and needy);

Ensuring peace and non-violence (The value of peace, harmony with oneself, with other people and the environment)

The relationship between nature and man (Search for harmony with nature).

macro level

The values ​​of this level justify the specific actions of a social worker within the limits of professional competence, determine his responsibility to clients, colleagues, employers, and to the profession.

The advantage of the individual over society.

Respect for confidentiality in client relationships.

Willingness to separate personal needs and feelings from professional relationships.

Striving for social change in line with perceived social needs.

Willingness to transfer knowledge and skills to others.

Respect for individual and group differences, worthy of their assessment.

Committed to developing self-help client.

Mesolevel

Social work is a normative discipline, it deals with the values ​​and social norms of people. In this regard, taking into account the norms and value orientations of clients is a necessary condition for the philosophical concepts of social work.

Microvalues ​​of social work. Value orientations in social work, acting at the interpersonal level, if they contribute to effective therapeutic contact (empathy, authenticity, attractiveness, expertise, acceptance, respect, reliability, etc.)

CHAPTERII. SPIRITUAL AND MORAL QUALITIES OF A SOCIAL WORKER

2.1. Moral qualities

As an activity to help people solve their problems, social work is one of the humane professions. Like medicine, which aims to rid people of diseases, or pedagogy, aimed at the formation of the human personality, it is a practical expression of the principle of humanism, according to which the highest value in society is a person. . Humanity is a moral quality that characterizes the attitude of social workers towards their clients.

Considered as a moral quality, humanity follows from the essence of social work, that is, it is one of its characteristics.

In relation to individual social workers, it acts as a moral requirement that they must show a humane attitude towards their clients. The humanity of social work is expressed in various forms, the most common of which is altruism.

Altruism- this is a moral quality that characterizes a person's willingness to sacrifice his own interests for the benefit of other people. Understood in this way, it is the exact opposite of selfishness.

Despite significant differences on the issue of the origin of altruism, all philosophers were united in understanding its essence: following O. Comte, they meant by it a characteristic of actions devoid of selfishness. Altruism as a character trait that manifests itself in human behavior, that is, the totality of actions performed by him that have moral significance, is necessary, first of all, for representatives of those professions that are somehow connected with helping people (and are called, because of this, helping).

Altruism is the most general form of manifestation of humanity, since its content is reduced only to the recognition of the priority of the interests of other people. “To live for others” - this general rule captures its essence very accurately. Expressing the relationship of a person to other people, altruism, however, is extremely abstract, since it does not take into account the specifics of various situations that develop in everyday life. Meanwhile, these situations are quite diverse: one thing, for example, is the attitude towards a person who has fallen into trouble, and another thing - to a defeated enemy. In the first case, the most natural form of manifestation of humanity would be sympathy, and in the second, generosity.

In other words, there are various forms of manifestation of humanity, which are characterized by greater specificity than altruism. One of these forms, which play an important role in social work and other helping professions, is sympathy (or compassion).

Ministry of Education and Science Russian Federation

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher vocational education

RUSSIAN STATE SOCIAL UNIVERSITY

Faculty of Social Work, Pedagogy and Juvenology

Department of Theory and Methodology of Social Work

CLEARED FOR DEFENSE

Head Department of Theory and

social work methodology

___________ / L.I. Starovoitova

"___" __________ 2014

Graduation qualifying work

"THE ETHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF SOCIAL WORK"

Completed:

4th year student

full-time education

Kolbin Kirill Sergeevich

Supervisor:

PhD, professor

Medvedeva Galina Pavlovna

Introduction

1 "Good" and "evil" as the ethical foundations of human existence

2 The history of the development of the theoretical and methodological understanding of the phenomena of "good" and "evil" in ethics and philosophy

Chapter II. Justification of "good" and "evil" as the ethical foundations of social work

2 "Good" and "evil" as the fundamental ethical foundations of social work

2 Analysis of the results of the study

Conclusion

Bibliography

Appendix

Introduction

“Socrates had a young friend named Euthydemus, and nicknamed the Handsome. He was impatient to become an adult and make loud speeches in the people's assembly. Socrates wanted to reason with him. He asked him:

"Tell me, Eufidem, do you know what justice is?"

“Of course I know, as well as anyone else.”

“But I am a person who is not used to politics, and for some reason it is difficult for me to understand this. Tell me: to lie, to deceive, to steal, to seize people and sell them into slavery - is this fair?

"Of course it's not fair!"

“Well, if the commander, having repelled the attack of the enemy, captures the prisoners and sells them into slavery, will this also be unfair?”

"No, it's probably fair"

“And if he plunders and plunders their land?”

"Fair too"

“And if he deceives them with military tricks?”

“That's also fair. Yes, perhaps I told you inaccurately: both lies, and deceit, and theft are fair in relation to enemies, but unfair in relation to friends.

The relevance of the research topic is due to the state of modern Russian reality and social work. The critical state of the ethical foundations of society is evidenced by the growth in the number of scientific articles in which the authors raise the problem of the moral degradation of society, the problem of rethinking old social norms and the formation of new ones.

Social workers are at the forefront of theoretical understanding and practical implementation of the existing ethical foundations of society in general, and social work in particular, and this implies the need for a multifactorial social research, and ideally, significant state and public attention to existing trends in determining, understanding and practical application of the phenomena of "good" and "evil" in the professional activities of social workers as the fundamental ethical foundations of this activity.

In modern Russian reality, a social worker, in the course of his professional activities, every day faces a situation where he must be guided in his actions by an understanding of good and evil. At the same time, he is often convinced that he fully understands what is good and what is evil.

"Good" and "evil" as phenomena of social life are ethical foundations, fundamental reasons, ideal guidelines and a practical tool in the professionally carried out activities of any social worker.

However, it is worth noting the lack of a single, comprehensive definition of good and evil in science, the lack of a common understanding of the essence of these phenomena. In the extreme and most general case, these phenomena are interpreted either through “emphasizing what they are not” (i.e. “Good is the opposite of evil, and evil is the absence of good”), or through emphasizing the general principles of “what they are”. could be” (“Good is good, something positive”).

At present, a system of norms is being formed in Russia that determines the life of a person in the new conditions, while the previously existing norms have either lost their significance or have been questioned and criticized in the practical activity of a person, despite the fact that they have not been officially rejected. Instability, uncertainty of the ethical space of being gives rise to many questions to which a person finds it difficult to find a legitimate answer.

“How to live in the modern world?”, “What principles should be guided by?”, “How to define good and evil?”, “How to separate one from the other and is it necessary to do this?”, “Is it necessary to do something to correct existing ideas about "good" and "evil" and how far can you, and most importantly, need to go in this activity? - all these ambiguous, difficult questions are especially relevant in modern Russian reality. A social worker, like any person, also asks these questions and looks for answers to them.

A high degree of general scientific elaboration of ethical problems, including the problems of good and evil, should be recognized. So at the theoretical level, such scientists as Aristippus, Epicurus, Aristotle, I. Bentham, F. Voltaire, J. Dewey, C. Pierce, J. Mill, A. Ayer, B. Russtel, J. Stevenson, and .Kant, L. Shestov, N. Berdyaev, M. Heidegger, M. Buber, J.-P. Sartre, G. Marcel, A. Camus, Z. Freud, E. Fromm, K. Horney and many others.

However, the question of good and evil in relation to social work, its essence and content, has not been raised before. In the aspect of understanding the problem of "good" and "evil" as the main ethical guidelines for professional social work, G.P. Medvedeva was engaged in scientific development.

All these scientists have made an invaluable contribution to the development of the theoretical and methodological foundations for studying this problem.

object this study are the ethical foundations of social work.

The subject of the study is the modern ideas of social workers about good and evil and their role as fundamental ethical foundations in their professional activities.

The purpose of this study: based on the study of theoretical approaches to the definition, understanding and interpretation of the phenomena of "good" and "evil", to identify modern ideas of social workers about "good" and "evil" and clarify their role as fundamental ethical foundations in professional activities.

Research objectives:

.find out the cause-and-effect relationships between ethical grounds and the system of ideas about "good" and "evil";

.identify fundamental problems in defining, understanding and applying the definitions of "good" and "evil";

.analyze the history of the development of the theoretical and methodological understanding of the phenomena of "good" and "evil" in ethics and philosophy;

.to study the theories that represent a modern solution to the problem of understanding the phenomenon of "good" and "evil" in various spheres of society and the individual;

.identify and analyze the phenomena of "Good" and "evil" as the fundamental ethical foundations of social work;

.conduct a social study of the ideas of social workers about good and evil;

.analyze the results of the study and develop recommendations for the formation of ethical components of the worldview of social workers.

The theoretical and methodological basis of the study was the ideas and concepts of domestic and foreign scientists - specialists in the field of philosophy and ethics (Aristotle, Plato, Seneca, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, E. Fromm, N. Hartmann and many others), as well as the main modern concepts social work (M.V. Firsov, A.A. Kozlov, V.I. Zhukov, V.A. Nikitin, V.M. Basov, V.I. Tetersky and many others).

Methods used to write this thesis: analysis of scientific literature, analysis and synthesis, classification, analogy, induction, ascent from the abstract to the concrete, comparison, measurement, description, questioning, interviewing, etc.

The theoretical and practical significance of the study is determined by the possibility of using its results in practical, scientific and educational activities. The main results of the study can become an integral part of those studied in universities educational courses devoted to the problems of professional ethics.

Empirical base of research. The practical part of the study was carried out on the basis of the Faculty of Social Work, Pedagogy and Juvenology of the Russian State Social University.

The logic of the study determined the structure of the thesis, consisting of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and an appendix.

Chapter I. Historical and theoretical aspects of studying the problem of understanding and interpreting the phenomena of "good" and "evil"

1"Good" and "evil" as ethical foundations of human existence

One of the most important signs human activity is its joint, collective nature, involving the unification of the efforts of many individuals to achieve socially significant goals.

At first glance, the pragmatic and ethical orientations of a person are inseparable, but at the same time, the special nature of ethical determination makes it possible to determine the goals formulated by a person and the means used by him from the point of view of the well-being or disadvantage of society and the person himself. As a result of this, ideas about good and evil as social and, at the same time, ethical phenomena necessarily arise.

As you know, ethics is the science of morality, its existence, development and role in society. Ethics studies morality as a system, as well as its elements - norms, principles, values, etc. The inevitable question is: what binds the individual elements, turning them into a relatively stable system? This issue requires a separate study.

Ethical foundations are the foundation of any ethical doctrine and, in general, ethics as a science. Ethical foundations are both a system of ideas about morality, duty, good, evil, morality, and a skillfully constructed system of illusions that support a meaningful existence, and a super-motivating ideal, and special values ​​that are studied by the science of "Axiology".

Axiology (from the Greek axia - value and logos - doctrine, concept, word) - a philosophical doctrine about the nature of values, their justification and origin, about the essence, functions, types and hierarchy of various values ​​(objects, events, works, as well as traditions, norms and ideals that have historical, social, cultural significance for a person). The constituting of this field of knowledge into a special doctrine or philosophical discipline is connected with the understanding of the semantic meaning of values, as a condition for the knowledge of true and false in the field of the theory of knowledge of good and evil in ethics, beautiful and ugly in aesthetics, as a condition for confirming the value of truth, goodness and beauty.

The most fundamental questions of ethical axiology, as well as ethics in general, are questions of good and evil. What is good and evil? What is their origin? Are they properties of things themselves or are they attributed to them by human consciousness? Where are the boundaries between different phenomena? In what framework do various phenomena of ethics and axiology exist, are comprehended and implemented?

The answers to these questions are critical. they determine the whole life of a person, fill it with a special meaning, give a “report system”, a system of worldview, set the meaning of any human activity. For example, it is known that values ​​are the leading motivators of human activity. A person sets goals and attracts the necessary funds to activities, based on values. Based on values, a person formulates principles, norms and rules, determines the content of duty and responsibility, justifies the requirements for personality traits. In this sense, we can consider that values ​​are the foundations of human activity.

But values ​​cannot be the basis, the foundation of ethics, because are not self-determined. Moreover, the definition of any object as a value is carried out by comparing it with a certain final object, in this case playing the role of the absolute. Such a phenomenon can be considered good.

It is in line with the dialectical unity of identity and difference that the contradiction between good and evil is resolved.

Thus, we can say that the problem of understanding, understanding, applying the dialectical unity of the phenomena of "good" and "evil" is a fundamental issue of ethics and axiology. Understanding the essence of these phenomena makes it possible to more fully reveal the existing meaning-forming, motivational, value-oriented attitudes of people. This is especially important and useful when studying the motivating, meaning-forming factors of the professional activity of social workers.

“Good - Old Slavonic - good, good. The adjective “kind”, meaning “kind-hearted”, “compassionate”, “good”, was first used in Russian in the 11th century. The word with the same Indo-European stem is found in the Armenian language (darbin), but it has a different meaning - “blacksmith”. Derivatives: kindness, good-natured, approve, kind.

“Evil is the value of human existence: who does not know what evil is, he does not know what good is. The knowledge of good and evil makes man equal to God.

“Evil is 1) the opposite of good; the definition of the concept of good also depends on the understanding of evil. In Manichaeism, evil appears as a metaphysical concept in Plotinus, in Christ. Philosophy, Augustine, Leibniz, J. Boehme, Schelling, Hegel - all of them were looking for an answer to the question: how did evil come into the world, is it possible and should it be eliminated, does evil play this or that role and what? 2) that which is perceived as hindering life, destroying it or providing some value, that which causes disharmony.

“Good and evil are categories of ethics and concepts of moral consciousness, in an extremely general form showing the distinction between moral and immoral, proper and reprehensible in the motivation of activities and actions, moral qualities and human relations, social phenomena.”

These definitions are only a few of the many existing ones, but using their example, one can trace a general pattern in understanding the solution to the problem of finding definitions, namely:

)Definition of "evil" as the opposite of "good". In science, it is recognized that these concepts are dualistic and opposite. But when defining a concept, it is incorrect to proceed from, only, its opposite to another concept.

Trying to understand what "evil" and "good" are, to identify their relationship, we may encounter a number of difficulties, here are some of them:

) Confusing the concepts of good and evil will, with the concepts of good and evil circumstances.

The category of "good" is usually associated with such semantic groups as benefit, joy, pleasure. With the category of "evil" - lack, suffering, trouble. But in this case, within the framework of morality, it turns out to be a complete absurdity, because, for example, any crime committed is evil only for the victim. And for the criminal, the crime he commits is good.

Good and evil circumstances, in order not to get confused, in principle should not be considered in a highly moral context, especially if we take into account that there is no objectively moral benefit or harm, but there is in the direction of the will of people striving for a certain result.

) Mixing the concepts of good and evil with ethical norms, that is, with social norms of behavior (etiquette, decency, traditions, etc.).

For example, if you decide to go out and perform a folk dance in the central square of the capital of a foreign state, then the evil will not be in your performance of the dance, but in your disregard for the feelings of others. At the same time, if a folk dance is performed in your native country, it most likely will not offend the people around you in any way, and in some cases even vice versa.

Attempts to correlate the behavioral traditions of peoples and various social groups with the concept of goodness can lead to a controversial conclusion about the relativity of the moral. Of course, the norms of behavior adopted in a particular society are not related to good, but they are often mixed in ostentatious and regulated norms.

) Views of good and evil as a certain set of specific actions.

The manifestations of good and evil are very diverse and heterogeneous. No list of evil or good manifestations human will is not able to cover all the diversity and subtlety of the manifestations of good and evil. Therefore, the moral can be defined either as a general direction of the will, or as taking into account all the circumstances, a particular definition for a single, specific situation, but not as an exhaustive list of prescribed actions.

“Do not kill, do not steal, do not commit adultery” - these are, of course, the correct commandments, but even observing them, you can still be a real scoundrel. Otherwise, for example, for a murder committed under certain conditions, a person can be justified both in conscience and by law.

Moral norms make only the highest possible demands on a person, and do not have any semi-norms. It is believed that a person who has not sacrificed everything that he is capable of to someone who is really feeling very bad, strictly speaking, cannot be considered a highly moral person.

The impossibility of exact observance of the rules of good puts a person who wants to fulfill them in an indefinite, vulnerable position, which, of course, can cause both the rejection of the moral obligations of the person himself, and the denial of any possibility of their normative implementation. Moral feeling not only does not lead to the fulfillment of moral norms, but moreover, it presents a person with the impossibility of any fulfillment of them, including because a more or less conscientious person begins to find in himself more and more subtle and imperceptible immorally colored manifestations.

But one should not dramatize the essence of conscience too much, if only because the voice of conscience will remain equally delicate, both for a criminal who does outright meanness and for a highly moral person, just a moral feeling reacts to completely different levels of immorality.

) The ambiguity of the purpose of goodness.

If it is not clear what is the purpose of goodness, what is its social function, then we cannot admit that judgments about both good and evil are fully justified. It is not surprising that moral definitions have long been associated with ethics and law in a single connection, because these three behavioral standards have one goal - maintaining stability and order in society. However, if the rules of law are aimed at ensuring the order of material and practical relations in society, and the norms of ethics provide the order of predictable, regular behavioral uniformity, then the observance of the norms of morality should bring the social system into a state of harmony, which is based on universal, mutual feelings of mercy, sympathy, complacency. , closeness... Thus, we can say that the purpose of "moral" is to bring society to one denominator - to some kind of ideal harmony of relations, in contrast to the so-called "social balance", which is based on fear of public condemnation, state sanctions and physical coercion.

) Inevitable subjectivism and limited possibilities of cognition in attempts to understand the "absolutes" - "good" and "evil".

It is known that human consciousness is limited in the possibilities of cognition, and also, a priori, any cognition carries elements of subjectivism. Based on this, any attempt to give an "objective" definition of the "absolute" i.e. an undeniable phenomenon recognized by all people, understood by everyone in the same way, regardless of circumstances, is doomed to failure. The popular statement “how many people, so many opinions” fits in this case as well as possible. In a situation with the knowledge of such definitions as "good" and "evil", a person is faced with his own value judgments based on personal experience or the limited cognizable experience of other people, which the evaluator understands from his point of view.

1.2 The history of the development of the theoretical and methodological understanding of the phenomena of "good" and "evil" in ethics and philosophy

Since ancient times, people have thought about what is "good" and what is "evil". In its study of these concepts, society has created and used many theories. They proclaimed different approaches to the origin, understanding, interpretation and application of these concepts. Sometimes different theories contradicted each other, both in the object of research and in research methods.

One of the first theories dealing with the understanding of "good" and "evil" is "hedonism" - a naturalistic theory based on a person's natural desire for pleasure and enjoyment.

In ancient times, the theory of hedonism was developed by Aristippus (the founder of the Cyrene school). In his theory, Aristippus adhered to extreme views. In his hedonism, "pleasure" was the only value. Pleasure, according to Aristippus, is only possible own, positive, transient and physical. "Happiness" was considered only a set of transient physical pleasures. Based on this understanding of goodness, Aristippus deduced the basic principles of life: to get as much pleasure as possible. It's about quantity, not quality. According to Aristippus, there is no big difference between the quality of pleasures. It is worth noting that Aristippus was the only representative of this extreme hedonistic theory. Despite the fact that after his death Aristippus left behind the Cyrene school he created, his followers in their works tended more and more towards moderate views.

Also in antiquity there was another hedonistic school - Epicurean. Epicurus developed a theory of hedonism that differed from that of Aristippus in more moderate views. Epicurus believed that in addition to physical pleasures, spiritual pleasures were also important. He also believed that the pleasures of other people are as important as their own, because there is a certain relationship between the pleasures of people.

Distinctive feature Epicurean hedonism is the need to select pleasures, making distinctions in the origin of pleasures, because the means of obtaining pleasures can cause great grief. Epicurus singled out as the most the best way"the path of virtue". "There is no pleasant life that is not reasonable, morally exalted and just, and there is also no reasonable, morally exalted and just life that is not pleasant." Epicurus believed, unlike Aristippus, that a person's life should be moderate, fair, pleasant and reckon with the lives of other people.

"Evil", according to Epicurus, was a manifestation of physical suffering and mental anguish.

Thus, we can assume that already in antiquity there were two opposite theories of hedonism: the Epicurean theory and the theory of Aristippus. They, in accordance with their content, explained in different ways the purpose and purpose of human life and his attitude to good and evil. Supporters of the hedonistic theory of Aristippus believed that each person knows only his own pleasure and he can evaluate only his own pleasure. Supporters of Epicurus, on the contrary, said that if one's own pleasure is considered good, then the pleasures experienced by other people should also be considered good.

The true flowering of hedonism falls on the 18th century. It was at the end of the 18th century that Jeremy Bentham created his theory of hedonism, which combined many of the ideas of his century. It should be noted that Bentham's theory had its own specifics: he completely abandoned the extreme ideas of the Cyrenaics and developed the ideas of Epicureanism. He created a specific list of pleasures, which reflected pleasures that could be enjoyed and those that should be avoided. Bentham's hedonism was distinguished by a broader understanding of pleasure, a focus on society, with less emotionality in judgments.

Selfish hedonism in Bentham's judgments was the starting point, he believed that only one's own pleasure and one's own happiness is good. However, the end result of the judgments was non-egoistic hedonism - one's own happiness lies in the happiness of others. Bentham, trying to combine these two different concepts, argued that one's own happiness and the happiness of others are connected, such a connection in which the happiness of other people is the cause of one's own happiness.

According to the theory of hedonism, "pleasure" is a "good", while "suffering" is an evil to be avoided. According to I. Bentam, there is no real evidence to confirm this thesis. But more than that, according to Bentham, proofs are not required, because people learn correctness, fidelity through intuitive understanding. In proving their theory, hedonists rely on intuitive understanding, intuitive foreboding, but this is not entirely true:

Intuition does indeed tell a person that pleasure is something pleasant and good, but not only pleasure should be considered a good, although this is the main thesis of hedonism (with the exception of more cautious areas of hedonism, declaring that pleasure is only one of the varieties of good ).

The next theory that touches upon the problem of understanding the phenomena of "good" and "evil" is "stoicism". Stoicism is “a philosophical school founded in Athens just before 300 BC. Zeno of Kitia. Stoicism, together with Epicureanism, was a philosophical response to the onset of a new, Hellenistic era and remained the most influential teaching in Greek philosophy until the 3rd century. AD, when it was pushed aside by Neoplatonism, which took a lot from Stoicism.

In Stoic ethics, “good” meant life in harmony with nature, with cosmic law, in accordance with the power of reason. Evil was understood as something that is “not natural”, contrary to nature. In accordance with this, the Stoics saw nothing reprehensible in incest, homosexuality, necrophagy.

Another theory that studies the problem of understanding and defining the concepts of good and evil is "Eudemonism". The main postulate of eudemonism is the thesis “happiness is the highest good”. “The great business of life and the only thing to take care of is to live happily,” Voltaire believed, and this is the formula of eudemonism. Eudemonism is very similar to hedonism in the sense that eudemonism is also associated with the concept of "happiness", as well as hedonism with the concept of "pleasure". It is worth noting that the hedonistic perception of eudemonism was characteristic of the Enlightenment. It was believed that in accordance with the theory of eudemonism, "happiness" is only a qualitative definition of the word "pleasure".

The ancient philosophers and scholastics understood eudemonism differently. So, for example, Aristotle, said that “bliss is considered the highest good, both by uneducated and educated people”, understood happiness (eudaimonia) as the possession of a set of benefits that are available and necessary for a person. The same was understood by the scholastics, who asserted that "happiness is the highest good." Thus, happiness is considered the sum of all good things that do not leave desires and exclude any evil.

Eudemonism would be only hedonism if in a life full of happiness we valued only satisfaction. However, we value life for something more, including both the manifestations of pleasures and the root cause and consequences of these very pleasures. We value life because we have something to be satisfied with. “Happiness” in this sense is a certain balance of life, and “satisfaction” is only part of it and proof that this is a positive balance.

Happiness, understood as a positive balance of life, does not represent individual goods, but their totality. Moreover, the benefits that testify to happiness are different for all people. Thus, we cannot speak of a certain constant value of happiness, because it is often indefinite, and if it is certain, then it is changeable and relative.

However, there are other views on this problem: it is believed that there are goods that are valued higher than happiness, goods because of which one can refuse happiness. For example, such benefits are creativity, enthusiasm and spiritual insight. In comparison with them, any pleasures are insignificant.

In the ancient Greek period of the development of ethics, two main concepts of understanding the good were formed:

"Naturalistic" (Heraclitus, Democritus, Epicurus) which have already been mentioned, and "Idealistic" (Plato and Socrates). The basis of morality, according to Plato, was the very desire for goodness. Good as perfection, unattainable by earthly means, was the main ideal in Plato's ethics.

By the end of the period of antiquity, the idea of ​​evil as an independent force opposing good was replaced by an understanding of evil as an insufficient, incomplete good. Antiquity comprehended the fact that evil cannot be some specific ability of a person, a person that is not related to positive, creative abilities. Evil is a kind of decayed good that does not find integrity and measure in itself.

In this study, it is also necessary to consider the ethical theory of Immanuel Kant. In one of his main works, Critique of Practical Reason, I. Kant wrote that the true law of ethics should not be some kind of “hypothetical imperative” that calls us to achieve a specific goal through any action, but a “categorical imperative”, unconditionally calling us to just some action. So, for example, you do not need to donate money to charity, just to be considered merciful. You just need to do it. The "categorical imperative" is affirmed by practical reason, which is guided by our will. According to Kant, the will guided by practical reason is a good will that motivates to action.

Kant's basic moral law is: "Act in such a way that the maxim of your will can at the same time have the force of the principle of universal legislation."

Immanuel Kant believed that the action performed should be such that the subjective principle that guides it has universal application. “Good”, according to Kant, is something universal, true, unconditional, similar to the universal laws of nature. And that which does not have universal truth, he considered evil.

Also, the central concept in Kant's theory is the concept of duty: Morality, according to Kant, is the morality of duty, and the internal law of morality that prompts us to action is the voice of duty. "Duty. You are an exalted, great word, there is nothing pleasant in you that would flatter people, you demand obedience ... you only establish a law that by itself penetrates the soul and even against the will can gain respect for itself.

Thus Kant's "morality" is the morality of duty. And the inner voice that convinces us of certain actions is the voice of duty.

I. Kant wrote: “In order for good will not to be regulated by anything, it is necessary to postulate freedom; while imperfect people strive to realize goodness to the full, it is necessary to postulate the immortality of the soul; while a person is busy searching for the perfect good or the highest good, virtue should be associated with happiness; and finally, as long as virtue is associated with happiness, it is necessary to postulate the existence of God.

The next theory considering the concepts of “good” and “evil” is the theory of “emotivism” developed from neopositivism. The theory of emotivism was studied by such scientists as B. Russell, A. Ayer, and the more moderate emotivist C. Stevenson. In the theory of emotivism, the central concept is the concept of "verifiability", which says that any scientific theory must be ready for empirical verification. Such a judgment as: "This is good, and this is evil" cannot be verified and contains only an emotional judgment about perception. Thus, this judgment does not have any scientific validity. According to Ayer, the concepts of "good" or "evil" are only emotional reactions, they cannot be proved or disproved by facts, they do not contain scientific knowledge. Any moral statements or judgments can neither be true nor false, because they are only human expressions of emotions.

Thus, from the point of view of the theory of emotivism, there are neither absolute nor relative meanings of the concepts of "good" and "evil", they are only an emotional response of a person to various phenomena.

In the aspect of this theory, a very important question arises about the viability of ethics as a science, since emotional judgments cannot be considered scientific, evidence-based or false. However, in this work, we will not touch on the controversial issue of ethics, considered as a science.

And of course, one cannot ignore religious views on the understanding of such categories as "evil" and "good". There are many various versions understanding of the nature of good and evil, and here are some of them:

The first version is the notion of the moral-ontological duality that lies at the foundation of the universe. This version was developed and defended by Zoroastrianism, or Mazdaism, the ancient teaching of the Persians. According to the teachings of the prophet Zarathushtra, two equally powerful spirits stand at the origins of the universe - the good god Ahuramazda and the evil god Ankhra Mainyu. Ahuramazda created everything good, pure, reasonable, his opponent - everything evil, impure and harmful. But the most important thing is that there is an irreconcilable struggle between the gods, in which good and evil do not just fight, but mix, get mixed up with each other and it becomes very difficult to separate one from the other. Our world is a mixture and interpenetration of good and evil.

The idea of ​​the moral dualism of the world, proclaimed by Zarathushtra, was later taken up by the Christian heresy of Manichaeism. In accordance with the ideas of Christianity, good cannot be equal to evil, good cannot be higher and more significant.

The second major position in the religious understanding of the origin of evil is the position that puts good at the foundation of the world. For Christianity, evil is fundamentally secondary, because the world is created by the one and only God, manifested in three persons. God is Good and Being, he creates the world out of fullness and out of love, therefore evil cannot be inherent in his offspring. However, where did it come from? If God is absolute goodness, an infallible good, then why is there so much suffering around? Maybe the Lord is still angry? No, this is impossible. Then where does the hatred and cruelty come from? So in Christian philosophy for centuries the problem of theodicy has been discussed - the justification of God in the question of the presence of evil in the world.

Theology offers another explanation for evil. Evil is born of pride and misuse of freedom. The first, still "subhuman" evil arose as a result of envy and pride.

The reason that played the role of the "trigger" of evil was the freedom that the Lord gave to the spirits he created. And he endowed man with the same freedom. God did not want to create "tin soldiers" who would be automatically obedient to his will. He created man in the fullest sense in his own image and likeness, endowing him with freedom and the ability to love. Man was given the opportunity to choose whether to follow God's will or indulge in other paths, respond to other calls. Adam failed the exam. He violated the divine prohibition, was tempted by the temptation of the serpent, wished to "know good and evil" as "the Almighty." Freedom and pride gave birth to evil for the second time, casting Adam into the mortal earthly world, where his descendants fully tasted pain, old age, death, hatred and cruelty.

The third version, representing its vision of the problems of "good" and "evil" is "Buddhism". The teaching of the Buddha contains a paradoxical, at first glance, the idea that good and evil are not of great importance, and only the achievement of "nirvana" is important, however, the achievement of nirvana is possible only through the implementation of good, good deeds. This situation is explained by the fact that Buddhism puts itself above the confrontation between good and evil, but not above good itself. In a general sense, in Buddhism, "good" is understood as non-violence, life in achieving nirvana, the state of "nirvana" itself becomes the main absolute, while "evil" is presented as the suffering of people.

The fourth fundamental version explaining the presence of evil in the world is the most ancient. It goes back to the Vedic teachings. According to her, there is no evil in the world at all. But how is it, a reasonable question arises, the sages say that there is no evil when there is blood, hunger, injustice all around? How can you ignore such obvious things? “All this is seen by us,” Eastern thinkers answer, “because we occupy a partial, particularistic position in the world. We look at everything from our small, limited point of view, and therefore our gaze rests on those imaginary "imperfections" of being, which are actually harmoniously inscribed in the whole universe. Our partial position makes us see only blackness, experience the negative as if it were an element of harmony. To see reality in its true light, we must rise above the human personal point of view, elevate and expand our perception to the divine position, embracing everything that exists, then we will be convinced that there is no evil, that in fact everything is beautiful and blissful, wonderful and perfect. .

A similar point of view is found among Christian authors. Its deep flaw is the call to people to go beyond the human in order to experience the goodness of the world. It turns out that as long as we exist in the body, as long as our horizon is the human horizon, we are doomed to evil and suffering, and only yogic meditation or the enlightenment of a saint can overcome the narrow limits of our earthly position. The good appears as being beyond the human.

The harmony of the world as a whole is little consolation for those who are in the "black streak", experiencing all its negative effects. And yet, according to modern ideas, called “holistic” (that is, basic at the discretion of integrity), a view of the world as a unity, if it does not save us from evil, is able to reduce the amount of suffering caused by our very way of relating to the world.

The harmony of the world is not given to us directly, but we can affirm the good in our lives, relying on the idea of ​​such harmony, creating it with our thoughts and actions.

Thus, having analyzed only a few of the existing theories for solving the problem of finding definitions for such concepts as “good” and “evil”, we can come to the following conclusions:

Since ancient times, there has been a problem of mixing the concepts of good and evil with concepts that are similar in their semantic group. For example, for the category of "good" similar concepts were: joy (the theory of emotivism), pleasure (the theory of hedonism) and others that will be discussed later.

Chapter II. Justification of "good" and evil as the ethical foundations of social work

1 Modern theoretical approaches to understanding the phenomena of good and evil in various spheres of society and personality

good evil ethical social

The modern stage of development of the understanding of the categories of "good" and "evil" by ethics and philosophy is represented by a variety of theories.

One of the theories considering the problem of understanding good and evil is "utilitarianism" (from the Latin utilitas - benefit, benefit). The concept of "utilitarianism" belongs to John Stuart Mill. That was the name of his main moral and philosophical work - "Utilitarianism" (1863), in which he systematized and substantiated the main provisions developed by his teacher, Jeremy (Jeremiah) Bentham.

In the theory of utilitarianism, one of the central terms is the concept of "benefit" and "benefit". According to utilitarianism moral value behavior is determined by its relation to utility. In the classical formulation of utilitarianism, morality is that which "brings the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people." Views on the definition of the concepts of "happiness" and "benefit" are the main disagreements in the theory itself. It is worth noting that utilitarianism is a theory directed against selfishness, i.e. against judgments that say that the essence of goodness is the satisfaction of a person's own interests. Pleasures, according to the theory of utilitarianism, are divided into permissible and not permissible, in accordance with the common good, with a focus on common happiness. In the theory of utilitarianism, the concept of “benefit” is identified with the benefit of the public, and not the individual, and this is the direction of the theory in the development social ethics.

One of the theories involved in the search for a new interpretation of the concepts of "good" and "evil", the search for a new look at the structure of society is the theory of "pragmatism". The ideas of pragmatism were first developed by Charles Pierce. These ideas were subsequently popularized by William James.

According to W. James, the truth is "what works." An idea becomes true, according to W. James, if it "works", but if it does not "work", the idea is erroneous. He believed that: “The truth of an idea is not an inert property inherent in it ... An idea becomes true, acquires truth as a result of events. Its fidelity is actually an event, a process: a process of self-examination, confirmation. Its correctness is the process of confirming this correctness. Such a criterion of truth is also a criterion of value and goodness. Thus, according to James, a moral statement does not need practical proof. A moral statement is considered true only when it brings some satisfaction or peace. Based on this, we can say that, in accordance with the theory of pragmatism, “good” is not something static and absolute, but, on the contrary, a constantly changing phenomenon, changing in better side in accordance with the growing experience of mankind as a whole.

Later, the theory of pragmatism was studied and developed in his writings by John Dewey. Dewey was an instrumentalist, believing that the mind is a tool for gaining knowledge or an effective tool for solving problems. Dewey believed, unlike James, that only the phenomena of everyday, everyday life are subject to consideration, excluding all metaphysical concepts from his theory.

Dewey's theory is based on the understanding of man as an organic, living being. A living being, a person, according to Dewey, is in constant relationship with the surrounding world. Moreover, if a living being falls into a certain state of instability, it seeks to get rid of it and come to peace. The mind is just the tool that can do this. Only behavior guided by reason can become a tool for building a prosperous society. Based on this, he believed that a healthy, prosperous society would necessarily be built only when all people used their intellect and acted on the basis of reason.

Thus, Dewey believed that good is realized gradually through the expansion and increase of knowledge that meets all the requirements of life and satisfies various desires. For Dewey's theory of pragmatism, there was no definite good that a person could immediately recognize. The definition of "good" was the same tool as "reason" was an effective means of solving problems. He wrote: “The moral principle in such a case is not a requirement to act or avoid acting in a certain way; it is a tool for analyzing a specific situation as a whole, and not a rule as such.

One of the current theories of understanding the categories of "good" and "evil" is Existentialism. “Existentialism (French existentialisme from Latin existentia - existence), also the philosophy of existence, is a trend in the philosophy of the 20th century, focusing on the uniqueness of human being, proclaiming it irrational. Existentialism developed in parallel with related areas of personalism and philosophical anthropology, from which it differs primarily in the idea of ​​overcoming (rather than revealing) a person's own essence and a greater emphasis on the depth of emotional nature.

One of the first to introduce the term "existential philosophy" was Karl Jaspers in 1931 in his work "The Spiritual Situation of Time"

Existentialism was also studied by such scientists as L. Shestov, N.A. Berdyaev, M. Heidegger, M. Buber, J.-P. Sartre, G. Marcel, A. Camus.

Morality, following the views of representatives of existentialism, is the sphere of manifestation by a person of his "authenticity" and at the same time a means of revealing the structures of "being". It is worth noting that the specificity of existentialism is manifested in the attempt of a completely new understanding of being and the meaning of human life. The main issue for this theory is the ability of the individual to show his individuality in complex and ambiguous conditions of increasing bureaucratization, standardization and monopolization of the public sphere of human life. A person is considered "the master of his own destiny" only if his actions are not standardized, but impulsive. Supporters of existentialism, thinking about their theory, wanted to bring the personality out of the ordered system of "cogs" in order to become the personality as the only "creator of one's life".

An important point to understand the opinion of existentialists in relation to the categories of "good" and "evil" is the judgment that for a person walking along a truly "free" path of human existence, it is necessary "without changing external conditions, to change only the internal setting of consciousness in such a way that his being stood before him as his own creation. Based on this judgment, we can say that for existentialists there is no specifically defined concept of morality in the traditional form. "Morality", according to existentialists, is only a special form of mindset, a means of mastering in the mind of a person his place in the world.

Thus, we can conclude that, according to existentialists, the understanding of such categories as "evil" or "good" depends entirely on the personal intention of the individual. Understanding the categories of "good" and "evil" for existentialists is the personal choice of each person, his means of understanding and choosing his own role in society.

The next theory necessary for understanding the problem of the current situation of searching for the actual definitions of "good" and "evil" is "Relativistic Ethics".

The founders of relativism, as such, are the Sophists. It is worth recalling the saying of Protagoras: "man is the measure of all things ...". From this statement, we can conclude that for the sophists the basis of knowledge is only fluid sensibility, and not any objective, stable phenomena.

Relativistic ethics states that moral concepts and norms are rather relative and changeable. Thus, morality, morality, the concepts of "good" and "evil" are different for different people, peoples, social groups and communities, depend on the conditions of the place and time, beliefs and interests.

However, behind this ambiguity and variability of ideas about morality, representatives of relativism do not see any patterns. Relativism, ultimately, comes to subjectivism in the interpretation of the concepts and judgments of morality and morality. Ethical relativism has often been used to undermine the ideas of virtue and moral norms among various social groups.

The extreme forms of the ethics of relativism lead to the complete denial of any objective foundations of morality. It is appropriate to recall the previously mentioned theory of emotivism. Supporters of this theory believed that judgments about morality have no objective content, but contain only the personal attitudes of those who express them. From this it follows that judgments about morality are wrong to consider neither true nor false. One should not generally raise the question of their validity, scientificity or legitimacy of such judgments: any individual person has the right to adhere to those principles that are preferable to him, and any point of view in this case is equally justified. This form of ethical relativism is the theoretical justification for moral nihilism. Being a reaction to dogmatism, the relativistic point of view at the same time makes it impossible to develop a clear moral position.

The main drawback of the relativistic theory is considered to be the impossibility, within the framework of relativism, to single out a certain general content of morality, which is preserved at different stages of the development of society among social groups and communities that are different from each other. Also, the known shortcomings of the theory of relativism include a possible gradual rejection of moral norms in general.

Thus, we can say that the theory of ethical relativism admits the existence of diverse, equally valuable moral judgments in the aspect that the difference between good and evil is not inherent in nature, but exists only in the opinions of people.

An interesting modern ethical theory that offers a new interpretation of the concepts of "evil" and "good" is the theory of "reverence for life" by Albert Schweitzer.

A. Schweitzer proposed a completely new ethical theory of understanding "good" and "evil". In his ethics, the central place was occupied by "reverence for life", which acts as a kind of criterion of "good" and "evil". Thus, everything that preserves, develops and elevates life is good. That which harms and eradicates life is evil. Schweitzer paid special attention to moral development and improvement. He believed that only right motivation, actions carried out by "pure" means can lead to high morality based on the theory of "reverence for life"

According to his ethics, the main value is life in all its manifestations, and if a person contributes to the prosperity of life, then he acts naturally - lives good, however, if he destroys any life - he increases evil in the world.

Schweitzer writes about compassion, about sympathy for all living beings, regardless of their place and purpose in nature, as about the norm of existence in the world. The ethic of "reverence for life" requires love in the highest sense. In other words, love is service to any living creature, regardless of their relationship to human nature. This theory expands the Christian ethic of love and compassion to enormous proportions.

Albert Schweitzer believed that for a truly kind person, any life is sacred, regardless of what level of the hierarchy of living beings this life is. Truly a kind person never takes life just like that, in passing, or because of thoughtlessness. Only out of necessity. In accordance with the theory of “reverence for life”, the highest bliss is the help of life.

Schweitzer's ethics is the ethics of action that must be carried out here and now, performing specific actions of reverence for life, realizing in them one's moral convictions and attitude.

However, it is worth noting that the thesis about the admissibility of deprivation of life due to necessity is somewhat at odds with the essence of this ethics. Although the taking of life out of necessity is considered evil in many ethical theories, in reality we use this “evil” or “forced good” every day. If one nevertheless accepts this thesis of Schweitzer, then it is necessary to make major concessions and reservations in Schweitzer's theory.

Another modern theory affecting the understanding of "good" and "evil" is the "Ethics of non-violence".

In his life, a person constantly encounters violence. The decision of the public, interpersonal through force, has become almost traditional. Such words as: “the one who is stronger is right”, “the winners are not judged” are already commonplace. Strength always has in our thoughts a certain positive color: strong - worthy of respect. Thus, in a certain sense, power is good, it is good. “Violence” is a completely different matter. But violence is also just the use of force. It's all about the process of applying that force. It is very difficult to draw a definite line between the "non-violent" use of force and violence.

Violence as a means of acquiring and maintaining any rights, economic or political supremacy is a generally recognized fact. Depending on how the act of violence is evaluated, the tasks of ethical concepts are reduced either to the apology of this act, or to its critical evaluation.

Considering the apology of violence, one can be convinced that there is no shortage of materials: the philosophy of the 19th century. provides us with the works of such scientists as F. Nietzsche, E. Dühring, K. Marx. Of course, Marxism did not formally accept theories that assign the main role to violence in history, but it was Marxism, as such, that carried out the transformation of violence from theory into practice, making the latter a means of destroying a person. The "dictatorship of the proletariat" is violence elevated to a principle.

"Ethics of non-violence" is a theory that substantiates such principles and methods of conflict resolution that exclude the very fact of violence (physical or moral) against a person. The "ethics of non-violence" is a certain way of life in which a person builds his relationships with people, avoiding violence.

It is generally believed that the ideal of non-violence is formulated in the New Testament. All the commandments of non-resistance to evil by violence hardly entered the ordinary consciousness of a person and at first seemed impossible, because these commandments contradicted the generally accepted (at that time) moral norms, and even natural instincts themselves. “Whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.” In everyday consciousness, resistance to this postulate usually immediately began. In the New Testament, such behavior was offered as a manifestation of some kind of "moral perfection." Refusal to multiply evil was considered a highly moral manifestation of goodness.

Leo Tolstoy made a significant contribution to the development and study of the theory of nonviolence. In his writings, he wrote that the recognition by people of the inability of non-resistance to evil is only a hidden justification for their usual vices such as: revenge, self-interest, envy, cowardice, etc. “The majority of the people of the Christian world feel ... the misery of their situation and use to save themselves the means that, in their worldview, they consider valid. This means is the violence of some people over others. Some people, who consider the existing state order beneficial for themselves, try to maintain this order by the violence of state activity, others, by the same violence of revolutionary activity, try to destroy the existing system and install another, better one in its place. Leo Tolstoy believed that the main misconception of the authors of various teachings that led to a disastrous state is that they consider it right to unite people by violence in such a way that they all, without resisting, submit to one, defined by someone, the structure of life. “All violence consists in the fact that some people, under the threat of suffering or death, force other people to do what the raped do not want.”

Thus, we can say that any violence is not a means of resolving conflicts or contradictions, because it does not create anything, but only destroys. The one who repays evil with evil only multiplies evil, but does not get rid of it. Leo Tolstoy leads us to a simple conclusion: violence destructive and inhumane.

Another famous person whose influence on the theory of nonviolence cannot be underestimated is Martin Luther King. Of particular interest is his work "Love your enemies" - in this work there is a substantiation of the general principles of universal love for humanity, as well as recommendations for the implementation of these principles. M. King was not only a moralist, but also a psychologist: he fully understands how difficult it is to accept and realize the principles of non-violence, how incompatible these principles are with ordinary human consciousness.

In the works of M. King, we may encounter a certain paradox: the one who has been subjected to violence, and not the one who committed it, should forgive, and it is necessary to forgive voluntarily. The template "offended - sorry" should work almost automatically in any situation. To clarify this thesis, King says: “When we forgive, we forget in the sense that evil is no longer a psychological barrier to establishing a new relationship ... Forgiveness means reconciliation, reunion again ... We must understand that evil, what is done by our neighbor - the enemy, the cause of our suffering, never reflects the whole essence of this person. Elements of goodness can be found in the character of the worst enemies"

Another, no less famous than Martin Luther King, supporter of the ethics of non-violence is Mahatma Gandhi, who dreams of gaining independence through non-violence. The main non-violent methods of his struggle were: civil disobedience and non-cooperation. M. Gandhi expressed his views in the work “My faith in non-violence”.

“I discovered,” writes Gandhi, “that life exists in the midst of destruction, and therefore there must be a higher law than the law of destruction. Only under such a law will society be built correctly and intelligently, and life will be worth living... Wherever a quarrel arises, wherever an opponent confronts you, conquer him with love... this law of love operates in a way that never the law of destruction was in effect.

Gandhi believed that it was necessary to work hard so that the phenomenon of non-violence became an integral part of the human mentality and, only by embarking on the path of strict discipline, it was possible to achieve the desired result. “As long as there is no sincere support from the mind, only external observance will be only a mask, harmful both to the person himself and to others. The perfection of the state is achieved only when the mind, body and speech are in harmony ... Non-violence is the weapon of the strong. Fear and love are contradictory concepts. Love recklessly gives without thinking about what it will receive in return. Love fights the whole world as if it were itself, and ultimately dominates all other feelings... The law of love works like the law of gravity, whether we accept it or not. Just as a scientist works miracles by applying the law of nature in various ways, so a person who applies the law of love with the accuracy of a scientist can work even greater miracles.

Paradoxically, it was in the 20th century, in a century during which there was so much violence and so little humanism, that ideas arose that came into direct conflict with the widespread practice of solving all sorts of problems with the help of force. A special, specific resistance arose - disobedience, ignoring, non-retribution of evil for evil.

"Even the worst of us have some good in them, and the best of us have some evil in them," King said. The essence of the theory of non-violence is the non-violent practice of overcoming conflicts and various contradictions. According to this theory, “good” is the renunciation of violence, the resolution of conflicts by refusing to respond with evil for evil. "Evil" is violence in any form, physical or moral.

Another theory affecting the understanding of ways to solve the problem of finding definitions for the concepts of "good" and "evil", considered in this study, is the theory of "Neo-Freudianism"

Neo-Freudianism is a modern trend in Western philosophy, sociology, ethics and psychology. The theoretical foundation of this theory is the work of the famous Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud. It is worth noting the invaluable contribution to science by Z. Freud. He separated the actions and deeds of people from material conditions and their causes. He proposed a psychoanalytic understanding of all human actions as a manifestation of unconscious, sexual desires. He formalized in his theory a compromise result of the struggle between instinctiveness and the super-strict influence of public morality.

In accordance with the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud, representatives of neo-Freudianism - Fromm, Sullivan, Horney deduce the thesis that the environment plays a decisive role in the formation of morality. Supporters of neo-Freudianism deliberately focus attention in their studies of moral problems on interpersonal relationships. Also in their studies, neo-Freudians contrast the personality of a person and his environment.

The concept of "morality" in the theory of neo-Freudianism is a combination of various social institutions. The concepts of "morality", "good", "evil" are only a means that provides a relatively identical, stereotyped response of individuals, a means of maintaining the stability of the social system. Any moral norms and concepts, according to Horney and Sullivan, are a successful adaptation to the surrounding social environment, and any deviation from "social identity" is considered a pathology.

2.2 "Good" and "evil" as the fundamental ethical foundations of social work

Any institution as a system has a general goal and mission, as the highest guideline for the activities carried out within this system. In our opinion, there is a more significant guideline - it is a moral, ethical guideline that determines all activities within the system. This landmark, despite the fact that it is at the very top of the hierarchical model of the system, at the same time exists at every level of the system. From this point of view, the main guideline in social work is its ethical foundations.

The ethical approach to the analysis and evaluation of social work is one of the most significant. An approach is a fundamental basis of activity based on a certain concept of a process or phenomenon; a specific position in relation to any pedagogical problem, which involves the use of appropriate means and methods of practical activity by a practicing teacher.

Depending on the chosen approach, the social worker uses a certain set of interrelated concepts, ideas and methods pedagogical activity. Most often, its practical activity is based on several approaches, which should not be mutually exclusive. So, in the activities of a social worker, systemic, activity-oriented, personality-oriented, synergistic, competence-based, praxeological and some other approaches can be successfully applied. But they, one way or another, are combined with an ethical approach. Because of this, the identification and justification of the ethical foundations of social work seems to be objectively necessary.

Ethical foundations are a system of fundamental, (basic) and derivative elements. As the fundamental elements of the ethical foundations of social work are the leading ideas, concepts, categories of ethics of professional social work, as derivatives, secondary - the main values, principles, norms, rules, requirements for personality traits. And, undoubtedly, the fundamental basis of the entire ethical doctrine is the concept of good and evil, outlining the subject field of ethics as a science.

Social work, as a profession, is more than others within the boundaries of morality and morality. And in this regard, it is especially important to understand the fundamental foundations of social work. Such a basis is the idea of ​​"good" and "evil" as a value-oriented, meaning-forming factor of professional activity. Based on ideas about the highest values ​​of society and the individual, social work, as a social subsystem, carries out its activities. That is why it is important that every social worker, as part of this system, clearly understands what the fundamental ethical foundations of social work are, because in his work a professional social worker needs to adhere to clear moral guidelines, such an understanding of the good in which he would avoid manifestations in his actions. evil.

The dialectical relationship between good and evil is the central issue of ethics. Only by answering questions about the essence of good and evil, one can make judgments about such concepts as morality, morality, duty, justice. Raising the question of due, duty, first of all, is guided by an understanding of what is good and what is evil. In order to understand what should be done in a given situation, it is necessary to look at this situation from the point of view of ethics. Due is that which corresponds to understanding and contributes to the implementation of public or personal good, good. Justice is something that corresponds to a specific picture of “truth”, which in turn is based on fundamental ethical grounds, and without at least an intuitive understanding of what good and evil consists in, it is impossible to determine what this truth consists of. The same is the case with morality: the understanding of conscience, as well as free will, is built on a certain social or social-personal matrix of understanding the fundamental ethical foundations. In this context, "good" and "evil" are defining subjects, phenomena that define, direct and delimit being and consciousness. Social work, as a professional activity, in which the issues of morality, morality, good, evil, justice and injustice are updated every day, carries out its activities in accordance with the fundamental ethical foundations, in which the dialectical relations of good and evil are the worldview-setting subjects.

At the same time, since ancient times, there has been a problem of mixing the concepts of good and evil with concepts that are similar in terms of semantic group. For example, for the category of "good" similar concepts were: joy (the theory of emotivism), pleasure (the theory of hedonism), benefit (utilitarianism). The conclusion suggests itself that good and evil are non-absolute, ambiguous, rather general concepts that reflect phenomena whose essence is questioned by some theories (emotivism)

On the other hand, there are theories elevating to the absolute, with some reservations, the concepts of "good" and "evil" (religious theories, the theory of I. Kant). Noticeable general pattern revealing the dualistic nature of the concepts of "good" and "evil", their multidirectionality, and at the same time, inseparability, connection with each other.

Any modern ethical theory affecting the problem of understanding the phenomena of "good" and "evil" can be viewed through the prism of social work.

So, for example, one of the theories that we can consider in relation to social work is "Neo-Freudianism". In accordance with the theory of neo-Freudianism, the concepts of "morality", "good", "evil" are only a means that provides a relatively identical, stereotyped response of individuals, a means of maintaining the stability of the social system. Based on this theory, we can state that social work is only a means of ensuring the stability of society, a means of relieving social tension. And such fundamental criteria for the activity of a social worker as "good" or "evil" are only regulators of standardized behavior. And in this context, the theory of neo-Freudianism is very similar to Dewey's theory of pragmatism: social work is only a means. In the aspect of this theory, we cannot say that social work is good or evil, it is only a means to achieve certain goals of the state.

However, if we consider social work through the prism of the theory of "reverence for life", then social work becomes the highest manifestation of goodness, because it cares about the preservation and prosperity of a person's life, whatever it may be, since social work accepts its clients as they are regardless of their gender, nationality or religion.

It is also worth noting that when considering social work through the prism of the theory of "reverence for life", it is not at all necessary to abandon the theory of neo-Freudianism. Paradoxically, the theory of "reverence for life" does not dismiss the theory of neo-Freudianism, but allows its existence when considering the phenomenon of social work.

Considering social work through the prism of ethical and philosophical views, it is also necessary to note the religious, metaphysical theory of good and evil. From the point of view of religious views, "social work" is a manifestation of the highest good - mercy, sympathy, friendliness, benevolence. From this point of view, social work itself is a distributor of goodness and virtues throughout the world.

Analyzing the nature of social work in terms of ethical and philosophical theories, one can use the theories of eudemonism and pragmatism. The central concepts of these theories are happiness (eudemonism) and success (pragmatism). In accordance with the purpose of social work, the goal of a professional social worker is to achieve happiness or success for his client as a result of social work itself.

According to existentialists, the understanding of such categories as "evil" or "good" depends entirely on the personal intention of the individual. Understanding the categories of "good" and "evil" for existentialists is the personal choice of each person, his means of understanding and choosing his own role in society.

The theory of ethical relativism admits the existence of diverse, equally valuable moral judgments in the aspect that the difference between good and evil is not inherent in nature, but exists only in the opinions of people. Relativistic ethics states that moral concepts and norms are relative and changeable.

The essence of the theory of non-violence is the non-violent practice of overcoming conflicts and various contradictions. According to this theory, “good” is the renunciation of violence, the resolution of conflicts by refusing to respond with evil for evil. "Evil" is violence in any form, physical or moral.

Modern ethical theories understand and interpret the concepts of "good" and "evil" in completely different ways. However, in many theories there are such general parallels as the increasing role of personalization in understanding the categories of "good" and "evil", understanding of the relativity and extreme generality of the categories of "good" and "evil", the need to further study the problem of defining the concepts of "good" and " evil." At the same time, each ethical theory has its own specifics, its own approach to understanding, interpreting and using definitions. concepts of "good" and "evil".

Thus, good and evil are the ethical foundations of social work. Analyzing the nature of social work in the aspect of ethical and philosophical theories, we can say that while some theories recognize the fact that social work is only a means of reducing social tension, a means of reducing discontent in society, many theories recognize the fact that for a single individual and for society as a whole, the phenomenon of "social work" has a positive characteristic, is considered good, or at least beneficial, because it theoretically contributes to an increase in happy and successful people, or at least contributes to solving the problems of social work clients and directs them towards happiness and well-being.

Chapter III. Practical multifactorial social research "Modern ideas of social workers about "good" and "evil" and their role as fundamental ethical foundations in their professional activities"

1 Theoretical and methodological foundations for studying the ideas of specialists about good and evil in social work

In order to clarify the modern ideas of social workers about fundamental ethical grounds, on the basis of the studied theoretical material, a practical multifactorial social study "Modern ideas of social workers about "good" and "evil" and their role as fundamental ethical grounds in their professional activities" was developed and conducted. .

The object of this practical research is the ethical foundations of social work.

The subject of practical research is the modern ideas of social workers about good and evil and their role as fundamental ethical foundations in professional activities.

The purpose of this practical study: to identify the modern ideas of social workers about "good" and "evil" and to clarify their role as fundamental ethical foundations in their professional activities.

Tasks of the practical part of the study:

1.find out the relevance of the study;

2.reveal an understanding of the ethical foundations of social work;

3.to identify the attitude of social workers in terms of ethics to social work, state social policy;

4.to identify the ideas of social workers about their role in social policy, the functioning of social work in terms of ethics;

5.find out the value-oriented factors of the worldview of social workers.

Research hypothesis: in the worldview of students, teachers, practical social workers, the categories of "good" and "evil" occupy a significant place, but these phenomena do not have a clear interpretation.

Based on the hypothesis, the following assumptions can be made:

.In the minds of practical social workers, an “ordinary-empirical” understanding of the ethical foundations of social work has been formed;

.From the point of view of social workers, the public good over the private good prevails;

As the format of the study, "questionnaire" and "interview" were chosen. This choice is justified by the specifics of the study itself. The sample size is 102 people. The students of the Russian State Social University studying in the specialty "social work" were selected as the respondents, interviewees; teachers of the Department of Theory and Methodology of Social Work of the Faculty of Social Work, Pedagogy and Juvenology of the Russian State Social University; employees structural unit Russian State Social University "Volunteer Center "Paralympic", as well as specialists working in the field of social work, including those undergoing distance learning in the 1st year in the specialty "social work" at the Russian State Social University.

As part of the implementation of this study, a questionnaire was developed (see Appendix 1), which was used to carry out the survey and interview the respondents.

The structure of the questionnaire is:

.Clarifying ideas about the ethical foundations of social work (Questions No. 1,2,3,5,6,14,16)

.Identification of the relevance of the study (Question No. 4)

.Educational component (Questions #1,5,6)

.Identification of the attitude of social workers, from the point of view of ethics, to social work, state social policy (Questions No. 7,8,9,10 13)

.Revealing the ideas of social workers about their role in social policy, the functioning of social work in terms of ethics (Questions No. 10, 11)

.Clarification of the value-oriented factors of the worldview of social workers (Questions No. 6,12,14,15,16)

.As well as a statistical block of information about the respondent: Gender, age, education, place of work.

Due to the specific nature of the study, open-ended questions were used in the process of creating the questionnaire, which made it difficult to process test results. This circumstance served as the basis for choosing the following methods for processing the results of the study: analysis and synthesis, classification, analogy, comparison, measurement, description, generalization, etc.

The theoretical and practical significance of this study is determined by the possibility of using its results in practical, scientific and educational activities. The main results of the study can be included in the courses studied at universities devoted to the problems of professional ethics.

3.2Analysis of the results of the study

As a result of the study, the following results were obtained:

The total number of respondents was 102 (see Appendix 2). What is the minimum functionally representative sample. Of them:

Teaching staff of the Department of Theory and Methodology of Social Work of the Faculty of Social Work, Pedagogy and Juvenology of the Russian State Social University - 10 people

Employees of the structural unit of the Russian State Social University "Volunteer Center" Paralympic "- 2 people

Students of the Russian State Social University, specialty "social work" - 30 people

Specialists working in the field of social work, including those undergoing distance learning in the 1st year in the specialty "social work" at the Russian State Social University - 50 people

Control group of respondents consisting of 10 people

Distribution by education (see Annex 3):

41% of respondents have completed higher education

59% of respondents have incomplete higher education

Those. the vast majority of respondents have a high educational level.

Distribution by gender (see Appendix 4):

10% men

37% women

53% did not indicate gender

As a result, we can say about the predominance of female respondents, which corresponds to the general trends of a large quantitative ratio of women in the humanitarian fields of knowledge and activity. However, just over half of the respondents refused to indicate their gender.

Average age of respondents was 28.9 years (see Appendix 5)

The average age of the teaching staff of the Department of Theory and Methodology of Social Work of the Faculty of Social Work, Pedagogy and Juvenology of the Russian State Social University is 40.5 years

The average age of employees of the structural unit of the Russian State Social University "Volunteer Center" Paralympic "- 27 years

The average age of students of the Russian State Social University majoring in social work is 22.8 years

The average age of specialists working in the field of social work, including those undergoing distance learning in the 1st year in the specialty "social work" at the Russian State Social University - 32.6 years

The average age of respondents in the control group is 21.6 years

Respondents' ideas about the ethical foundations of social work were clarified:

Good (see pr. No. 6):

% of respondents believe that “Good” is what is good

% of respondents believe that "Good" is good

% of respondents believe that “Good” is something that is useful

% of respondents believe that "Good" is help

% of respondents believe that "Benefits" are objects of value

% of respondents found it difficult to answer the question of the questionnaire

Thus, slightly less than half (46%) of respondents believe that "good" is good, 26% of respondents define "good" as good, and 16% and 6% of respondents identify "good" with usefulness and help, respectively. It can be stated that the concept of "good" is interpreted vaguely due to the complexity of its precise and objective definition, i.e. the existence of a significant problem of confusion of the concepts of “good”, “good”, “usefulness”, “good”, as well as significant subjectivism in the limited knowledge of the respondents, which was mentioned above in paragraph 1.1 of the first chapter, is confirmed.

It is also worth noting the predominance of the scientific approach (comprehensive, scientific nature of the description of the phenomenon, which includes several points of view in compliance with the principle of historicism, the principle of determinism, the principle of correspondence, the principle of complementarity) in relation to the understanding and interpretation of the basic ethical definitions of social work among the teaching staff. Department of Theory and Methodology of Social Work, Faculty of Social Work, Pedagogy and Juvenile Studies, Russian State Social University.

"Debt" is ... (see Appendix 7)

% of respondents believe that "debt" is a duty

% of respondents believe that "duty" is responsibility

% of respondents believe that "duty" is a moral value

% of respondents believe that “debt” is money debt

% of respondents believe that "duty" is good

In this regard, it can be recognized that the concept of duty among the respondents is identified with a certain obligation (52% - slightly more than half) and responsibility (27% - slightly more than a quarter). And although, in the first case, one can assume a certain non-positive ethical connotation, a little more than a quarter of the respondents impose an ethical connotation of responsibility on the concept of duty, which, as one might assume, indicates high moral and moral qualities. This assumption also confirms the opinion of 10% of respondents that "duty" is some kind of moral value, as well as the opinion of 4% of respondents that "duty" is good. However, the results of the responses of a minority of respondents are puzzling. Namely, those who believe that "debt" is a monetary debt (7%). This opinion indicates either that the respondents interpreted this concept from an ordinary point of view, which was not supposed in the instructions for the questionnaire, or they are not sufficiently competent in this moral concept.

Injustice is… (see Ex. 8)

24% think "injustice" is a violation of social norms

20% think "injustice" is a bad thing to do

10% believe that “injustice” is a discrepancy between our expectations and reality

8% believe that "injustice" is a subjective assessment

7% think "injustice" is evil

6% believe that "injustice" is social inequality

2% believe that "injustice" is everyday

23% of respondents found it difficult to answer

In this regard, we can draw the following conclusions: The interpretation of the concept of "injustice" is quite broad and ambiguous; There are two points of view on the definition of this definition. The first is based on the values ​​of society, the second on the values ​​of the individual. Thus, from the standpoint of subjectivism, 47% (20%, 10%, 8%, 7%, 2%) understand “injustice”, and from the point of view of social values ​​30% (24%, 6%), another 23% found it difficult to answer. All this once again emphasizes the difficulty of differentiating the ethical foundations of social work.

Good is ... (see Appendix 9)

33% believe that "good" is the realization of good

20% believe that "good" is help, compassion

15% believe that "good" is something positive

9% think "good" is the opposite of evil

6% think "good" is love

4% believe that "kindness" is justice

12% found it difficult to answer

In this regard, the following conclusions can be drawn: The concept of “good” is understood by the respondents ambiguously. There is a certain special understanding by social workers of the concept of "good" through help, compassion (20%), love (6%), justice (4%), which in general statistics is about one third of the respondents and is a significant phenomenon. A special understanding of the concept of “goodness” by social workers is highlighted on the basis of the correspondence between the results of the survey in the control group (see Appendix 10) and the summary statistics of the survey results. Also, the assumption of significant confusion in understanding the phenomenon of “good” is confirmed: 33% of respondents identify good with good, 20% with help, 15% with something positive, 9% understand “good” as the opposite of evil. And only 1% of the respondents take the position of an outside observer in their judgments and believe that “good” is an evaluation category.

The relevance of the study was identified through the question “Do you often have to solve issues related to professional ethics in your professional activities?” in the questionnaire (see Appendix 1)

According to the results of the study, it was revealed:

80% answered yes to this question

20% answered negatively to this question

Based on this, it can be concluded that, in the activities of social workers, issues related to professional ethics, and, consequently, the issues of determining the fundamental ethical foundations of professional social work, are essential, which determines the relevance of this study.

The next set of questions in the questionnaire (see Annex 1) was aimed at identifying the attitudes of social workers, from the point of view of ethics, to social work and state social policy. Detailed statistics answers are presented in Appendix 11.

The first question in the block of identifying the relationship of social workers, from the point of view of ethics, to social work and state social policy was the question "Social work in general - is it good or evil?"

74% answered that social work is good

15% answered that social work is evil

11% of respondents believe that social work should not be viewed in terms of good and evil

As expected, the majority of respondents (74%) noted that social work is good. 11% believe that social work should not be considered from the point of view of good and evil, which, in our opinion, is not entirely correct. proceeding from the fact that "good" and "evil" are the moral determinants of any activity, and social work, in particular, it would not be correct to remove social work from fundamental moral guidelines. There is also a point of view, which makes up 15% of the respondents' answers, that social work is evil. In this aspect, it is interesting to compare the results of these answers with the results of the next question. Namely:

“Social work in the Russian Federation is ...” (see Appendix 12)

55% of respondents answered that social work in the Russian Federation is good

38% of respondents answered that social work in Russia is evil

7% of respondents answered that social work in the Russian Federation should not be considered in terms of good and evil

In this case, the correlation between the results of the answers to the previous question and this one is interesting. The number of respondents who believe that social work in the Russian Federation is 55%, and who believe that social work in general is good is 74%. Thus, we can observe a decrease of 19%, from the total number of respondents, in the opinion that social work is good. At the same time, we can state an increase in the point of view that social work is evil, more than 2 times. From 15% to 38%. In this case, we can assume a certain specific attitude of social workers to social work in the Russian Federation. The essence of this relationship was clarified in the analysis of the following questions. The ratio of respondents who believe that social work should not be considered from the point of view of good and evil also raises questions: the ratio has decreased from 11% to 7%.

The next question in the block of identifying the relationship of social workers, from the point of view of ethics, to social work and state social policy was the question of understanding the essence of paid services in social work. (See Appendix 13)

55% of respondents believe that paid services in social work is evil

24% of respondents believe that paid services in social work are good

18% of respondents believe that paid services in social work are a necessary measure

3% of respondents believe that benefits should be paid for

A significant phenomenon is noticeable: slightly more than half of the respondents consider paid services to be evil. And only 24% believe that paid services in social work are good. 18% of respondents take a neutral position, which consists in recognizing the fact that paid services in social work are a necessary measure. And only 3% of respondents take a somewhat radical position, which consists in the opinion that benefits must be paid for.

The next pair of questions was related to the definition of respondents' opinions about the essence of good and evil in professional social work (see Appendix 14). This pair of questions also revealed respondents' opinions about why social work is good or evil.

“Goodness in the performance of professional social work is manifested in...”

56% in helping

38% in the performance of professional duty

6% in the very existence of social work

"Evil in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in ..."

29% in the incompetence of a social work specialist

23% in dependent attitude of clients towards social work

13% in the activities of the state

35% of respondents found it difficult to answer.

As a result of the analysis of answers to these questions, one can notice significant trends:

)There is a quite obvious point of view that "good" in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in helping those in need (56% of respondents' answers)

)Exists, already voiced in many scientific papers according to the theory of social work, the point of view about the negative role of the dependent attitude of social work clients to the assistance received (23% of respondents' answers).

)A previously unseen trend of opinions that “good” in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in the performance of professional duty (38% of respondents' answers), and evil in the incompetence of social work specialists (29% of respondents' answers) was revealed. It is important to highlight this trend as a previously unexplored phenomenon of scientific knowledge.

)13% of respondents believe that the evil in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in the activities of the state, which correlates with the opinion of those who believe that paid services are evil (the state as the subject of evil), and a significant increase in those who believe that social work in the Russian Federation is evil ( The Russian state as the subject of evil).

)35% of respondents found it difficult to answer the question of what evil is manifested in the implementation of professional social work, which correlates with a high moral and moral idea of ​​social work in the minds of respondents-social workers

Despite the opinion assumed by the respondents about the knowledge of the significance of the phenomena of good and evil in social policy and in social work, in particular, we can state a significant diversity of opinions about the relationship between good and evil in social policy, as well as a lack of understanding of the essence of this issue (see Appendix 15 )

30% think the ratio is 50% and 50%

10% believe the ratio is 90% good and 10% evil

6% believe that the ratio is 60% good and 40%

5% believe that social policy should not be viewed in terms of good and evil

49% of respondents found it difficult to answer

In order to identify the ideas of social workers about their role in social policy, the functioning of social work from the point of view of ethics, when developing the questionnaire, the question “What is the responsibility of a social worker to society?” The opinions of the respondents were divided again (see Appendix 16):

46% of respondents believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in the professional performance of their duties

21% of respondents believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in the diligence of a social worker

7% of respondents believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in the settlement of issues of good and evil

7% of respondents believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in fairness

19% of respondents found it difficult to answer the question about the responsibility of a social worker to society

In the analysis of this issue, we can again state the professional values ​​of social work, which are interpreted as the most significant - professionalism (46%), diligence (21%). In correlation with the answer to the question about the manifestation of good and evil in social work, which revealed a previously unseen trend of opinions that “good” in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in the performance of professional duty (38% of respondents’ answers), and evil in the incompetence of social work specialists (29% of the respondents' answers), we can conclude that there is a certain "professional understanding" of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work, in which good is understood as professionalism, diligence, and evil - incompetence. The relevance of the study is also confirmed by the opinions of 7% of respondents who believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in justice, and 7% of respondents who believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in settling issues of good and evil. It is a matter of concern that 19% of respondents could not answer the question about the social worker's responsibility to society.

The purpose of the next set of questions was to clarify the value-oriented factors of the worldview of social workers, which corresponds to the goals, objectives, hypothesis, assumptions of this study (see Appendix 17). The particular importance of this block of questions became clear as a result of the analysis of the previous part of the questionnaire, which revealed a previously unseen "professional understanding" of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work. The first pair of questions raised the problem of the dialectical unity of the role of good and evil in human life(see appendix 18):

"What is the role of goodness in human life?"

13% of respondents believe that the role of good lies in the identification of people

10% of respondents believe that the role of good lies in the perception

8% of respondents believe that kindness acts as a regulator of social relations

3% of respondents believe that the role of good lies in happiness and well-being

1% of respondents believe that the role of good lies in the salvation of the soul

1% of respondents believe that the role of good lies in filtering people

64% found it difficult to answer this question

"What is the role of evil in human life?"

17% of respondents believe that the role of evil lies in the identification of people

10% of respondents believe that the role of evil lies in the perception

4% of respondents believe that evil acts as a regulator of social relations

1% of respondents believe that the role of evil lies in filtering people

68% found it difficult to answer this question

Of particular concern in the analysis of this pair of questions is the significant number of respondents who could not answer these questions (64% and 68%). The opinions of those respondents who gave the answer were divided. The role of goodness in human life, according to the respondents, lies in the identification of people -13% (Apparently, this implies the role of goodness as a moral guideline in assessing people's activities), in perception - 10% (the role is similar to the role of identification), in happiness and well-being - 3% and in saving the soul - 1%, only 8% of respondents take a neutral position, which is to understand the role of good as a regulator of social relations, and 1% of respondents believe that the role of good lies in filtering people (Apparently, the role of good is similar to the role of identification and perception). Also noticeable is the understanding of the role of good and evil in human life among the respondents through dialectical unity, which corresponds to similar results of answers to these two questions:

The role of good / evil (respectively):

)In identification 13% /17%

)Perception 10% /10%

)In filtration 1% /1%

)As a regulator of public relations 8% /4%

The analysis of the next pair of questions is axeological in nature and aims to identify the ideas of social workers about the fundamental values ​​in modern society and in professional social work (see Appendix 19).

“What values ​​underlie the functioning of modern society?”

25% Material

17% Good, humanism, human freedoms

13% None

5% Human personality

3% Social justice

1% Equality

1% tolerance

30% could not answer this question

"What are the highest values ​​in professional social work?"

24% Humanism

9% Mercy

9% Professional qualities

8% Kindness

5% Social justice

5% tolerance

5% Liability

5% Respect

3% Compliance with the professional and ethical code of a social worker

2% Understanding

2% Honesty

23% Difficult to answer

Based on the results of the respondents' answers, the following conclusions can be drawn:

)According to the majority of respondents, the functioning of modern society is based on humanistic values ​​(Good, humanism, human freedoms - 17%, 5% - human personality, 3% - Love, 3% - social justice, 2% - Good, 1% - Equality, 1% - Tolerance), which in general statistics is 32% of the respondents. In second place, according to the respondents, the functioning of modern society is based on material values ​​(25%), another 13% believe that no values ​​are at the basis of the functioning of modern society. And 30% of respondents found it difficult to answer;

)In the understanding of the respondents, humanistic values ​​are the highest in professional social work, and only 23% found it difficult to answer this question;

)9% believe that the highest value in social work is professional quality a social worker, which corresponds to the previously identified trend of “professional understanding” of fundamental ethical grounds;

)On average, only one quarter of the respondents found it difficult to answer the question about values ​​in society and in social work, in particular, which can serve as confirmation of the high degree of relevance of this study, and at the same time, be an incentive to further deepen the study of fundamental ethical foundations respondents.

The next question was "What is the least important thing in social work?" (see annex 20)

11% of respondents believe that the least significant in social work is the social status of a social worker

2% of respondents believe that the process of making a profit is the least significant in social work

2% of respondents believe that the least significant in social work are activities that do not benefit

4% of respondents believe that the least significant in social work is pension

20% of respondents believe that there is no least important thing in social work

61% found it difficult to answer

It raises questions 20% of the respondents' opinion that there is nothing less significant in social work, because even purely theoretically there is no ideal system, which means that there is something that is less significant, more significant. Only 19% were able to give an answer, among the answers the social status is 11%, and it is really low in society, making a profit 2% (and indeed, in accordance with humanistic values, social work should not aim at making a profit), activities that are not beneficial - 2% (and this opinion is also understandable - resources should be spent efficiently), but the opinion of 4% of respondents who believe that pensions are the least important in social work is puzzling. 61% of the respondents found it difficult to answer, which, once again, confirms the need for a more in-depth study on the basis of higher professional education of value-oriented factors in the activities of social workers and the fundamental ethical foundations of social work.

The final question in this block of the questionnaire and the final question in this study was the question “How should social work be transformed in order to best meet the criteria of good and good?” (See Appendix 21). This question aimed to clarify, on the basis of the value-oriented factors of the worldview and understanding the fundamental ethical foundations of social workers, the ideas of the respondents-social workers about the direction of the progressive development of social work from the point of view of good and evil. The results look ambiguous:

7% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of continuous professional development of personnel at all levels

5% of respondents believe that there is no ideal solution for social work to be most consistent with the criteria for good and evil

4% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of the basic principles of social service - targeting, accessibility, fairness

3% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of bringing social work to every person

3% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of targeted targeted assistance to those in need

2% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of increasing the prestige of the profession

2% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of development together with society and responding to emerging challenges

2% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of excluding paid services from social work

2% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of increasing the efficiency of the feedback channel between the "state" and social workers

1% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of increasing tolerance for each other

1% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of adjusting the process of optimizing social work

1% of respondents believe that social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and evil, should be transformed in the direction of initiating the reformation "from above"

67% found it difficult to answer

Thus, if the majority of respondents agree on the fundamental values ​​of social work, then opinions about the transformation of social work in the aspect of the greatest compliance with the criteria of goodness and welfare drastically diverge. There are 12 generalized points of view of the respondents, some of them contradict each other, some are of no value in terms of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work, some relate to improving the efficiency of social services. But, nevertheless, these results are of undoubted practical and research value, as a result of identifying areas for the transformation of social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and good; as revealing the social expectations of social workers; also as a result of identifying the value-oriented factors of social workers' activities. As a result of the analysis of this issue, it was revealed that 67% of respondents found it difficult to answer this question, which can confirm the earlier voiced opinion about the need for an in-depth study of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work as necessary moral guidelines for professionally carried out activities, on the basis of higher professional education.

At the end of this chapter, the following conclusions can be drawn:

Modern ideas of social workers about "good" and "evil" were identified and their role as fundamental ethical foundations in professional activities was clarified:

)the relevance of the study is proved:

It can be concluded that, in the activities of social workers, issues related to professional ethics, and, consequently, the issues of determining the fundamental ethical foundations of professional social work, are essential, which determines the relevance of this study.

2)the understanding of the ethical foundations of social work was clarified:

Benefit: Slightly less than half (46%) of respondents believe that “good” is good, 26% of respondents define “good” as good, and 16% and 6% of respondents identify “good” with usefulness and help, respectively. As a result, we can state that the concept of "good" is interpreted vaguely, due to the complexity of its precise and objective definition, i.e. the existence of a significant problem of confusion of the concepts of “good”, “good”, “usefulness”, “good”, as well as significant subjectivism in the limited knowledge of the respondents, which was mentioned above in paragraph 1.1 of the first chapter, is confirmed.

Debt: The concept of duty, among the respondents, is identified with a certain obligation (52% - slightly more than half) and responsibility (27% - slightly more than a quarter). And although in the first case one can assume a certain non-positive ethical connotation, just over a quarter of the respondents assign an ethical connotation of responsibility to the concept of duty, which, as one might assume, speaks of high moral and moral qualities. This assumption also confirms the opinion of 10% of respondents that "duty" is some kind of moral value, as well as the opinion of 4% of respondents that "duty" is good. However, the results of the responses of a minority of respondents are puzzling. Namely, those who believe that "debt" is a monetary debt (7%). This opinion indicates either that the respondents interpreted this concept from the everyday point of view, which was not supposed in the instructions for the questionnaire, or they had little understanding of this moral concept.

Injustice: The interpretation of the concept of "injustice" is quite broad and ambiguous. There are two points of view on the definition of this definition. The first is based on the values ​​of society, the second on the values ​​of the individual. Thus, from the standpoint of subjectivism, 47% (20%, 10%, 8%, 7%, 2%) understand "injustice", and from the point of view of social values ​​30% (24%.6%), another 23% found it difficult to answer. All this once again emphasizes the difficulty of differentiating the ethical foundations of social work.

Good: The concept of “good” is understood by the respondents ambiguously. There is a certain special understanding by social workers of the concept of “good” through help, compassion (20%), love (6%), justice (4%), which in general statistics is about one third of the respondents and is a significant phenomenon. A special understanding of the concept of “goodness” by social workers is highlighted on the basis of the correspondence between the results of the survey in the control group (see Appendix 10) and the summary statistics of the survey results. Also, the assumption of a significant confusion in understanding the phenomenon of "good" is confirmed - so 33% of respondents identify good with good, 20% with help, 15% with something positive, 9% understand "good" as the opposite of evil. And only 1% of the respondents take the position of an outside observer in their judgments and believe that “good” is an evaluation category.

3)the attitude of social workers from the point of view of ethics to social work, state social policy was revealed:

As expected, the majority of respondents (74%) noted that social work is good. 11% believe that social work should not be considered from the point of view of good and evil, which, in our opinion, is not entirely correct. proceeding from the fact that "good" and "evil" are the moral determinants of any activity, and social work, in particular, it would not be correct to remove social work from fundamental moral guidelines. There is also a point of view, which makes up 15% of the respondents' answers, that social work is evil. In this aspect, it is interesting to compare the results of these answers with the results of the next question. Namely: The number of respondents who believe that social work in the Russian Federation is 55%, and who believe that social work in general is good is 74%. Thus, we can observe a decrease of 19%, from the total number of respondents, in the opinion that social work is good. At the same time, we can state an increase in the point of view that social work is evil, more than 2 times. From 15% to 38%. In this case, we can assume a certain specific attitude of social workers to social work in the Russian Federation. The essence of this relationship was clarified in the analysis of the following questions. There is a significant phenomenon in the analysis of respondents' answers about paid services in social work: Paid services are considered evil by slightly more than half of the respondents. And only 24% believe that paid services in social work are good. 18% of respondents take a neutral position, which consists in recognizing the fact that paid services in social work are a necessary measure. And only 3% of respondents take a somewhat radical position, which consists in the opinion that benefits must be paid for. The next pair of questions was related to the definition of respondents' opinions about the essence of good and evil in professional social work. As a result of the analysis of answers to these questions, one can notice significant trends:

There is a quite obvious point of view that “goodness” in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in helping those in need (56% of respondents' answers).

There is a point of view, already voiced in many scientific works on the theory of social work, about the negative role of the dependent attitude of social work clients to the assistance received (23% of respondents' answers).

A previously unseen trend of opinions that “good” in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in the performance of professional duty (38% of respondents' answers), and evil in the incompetence of social work specialists (29% of respondents' answers) was revealed. It is important to highlight this trend as a previously unexplored phenomenon of scientific knowledge.

13% of respondents believe that the evil in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in the activities of the state, which correlates with the opinion of those who believe that paid services are evil (the state as the subject of evil), and a significant increase in those who believe that social work in the Russian Federation is evil ( The Russian state as the subject of evil).

35% of respondents found it difficult to answer the question of what evil is manifested in the implementation of professional social work, which correlates with a high moral and moral idea of ​​social work in the minds of respondents-social workers

Despite the opinion assumed by the respondents about the knowledge of the significance of the phenomena of good and evil in social policy and in social work, in particular, we can state a significant diversity of opinions about the relationship between good and evil in social policy, as well as a lack of understanding of the essence of this issue.

It should be noted that only 10% of respondents believe that the ratio of good and evil in the social policy of the state is 90% and 10%, respectively, i.e. only 10% recognize the predominance of goodness in the social policy of our state. 30% believe that the ratio is 50% and 50%, and 6% believe that the ratio is 60% good and 40% - these results roughly correlate with the results of respondents' answers to the question of what is social work in the Russian Federation good or evil . In this question, when developing the questionnaire, the semantic proximity of the concepts of "social policy" and "social work" was assumed, based on judgments that "social work" is a practical tool of "social policy". Raises questions 5% of respondents who believe that social policy should not be considered in terms of good and evil. In one of the previous questions, the results amounted to 7% of respondents who considered social work in the Russian Federation should not be considered from the point of view of good and evil. And also - 11% of respondents' answers saying that social work should not be considered from the point of view of good and evil. Those. we can observe a downward trend in the views that social work should not be considered in terms of good and evil. What can we say about the educational aspect of filling out this questionnaire, confirming the relevance of this study, understanding the role of fundamental ethical foundations in professional social work among respondents-social workers.

4)the representations of social workers about their role in social policy, the functioning of social work from the point of view of ethics were revealed:

In order to identify the ideas of social workers about their role in social policy, the functioning of social work from the point of view of ethics, when developing the questionnaire, the question “What is the responsibility of a social worker to society?” In the analysis of this issue, we can again state the professional values ​​of social work, which are interpreted as the most significant - professionalism (46%), diligence (21%). In correlation with the answer to the question about the manifestation of good and evil in social work, which revealed a previously unanticipated trend of opinions that “good” in the implementation of professional social work is manifested in the performance of professional duty (38% of respondents’ answers), and evil in the incompetence of social work specialists (29% of the respondents' answers), we can conclude that there is a certain "professional understanding" of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work, in which good is understood as professionalism, diligence, and evil - incompetence. The relevance of the study is also confirmed by the opinions of 7% of respondents who believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in justice, and 7% of respondents who believe that the responsibility of a social worker to society lies in settling issues of good and evil. It is a matter of concern that 19% of respondents could not answer the question about the social worker's responsibility to society.

5)the value-oriented factors of the worldview of social workers have been clarified:

The first pair of questions raised the problem of the dialectical unity of the role of good and evil in human life. Of particular concern in the analysis of this pair of questions is the significant number of respondents who could not answer these questions (64% and 68%). The opinions of those respondents who gave the answer were divided. The role of good in human life, according to the respondents, lies in the identification of people - 13% (Apparently, this implies the role of good as a moral guideline in assessing people's activities), in perception - 10% (the role is similar to the role of identification), in happiness and well-being (3%) and in saving the soul (1%), only 8% of respondents take a neutral position, which is to understand the role of good as a regulator of social relations, and 1% of respondents believe that the role of good lies in filtering people (Apparently, the role of good is similar roles of identification and perception). The understanding of the role of good and evil in human life is noticeable among the respondents through dialectical unity. The next point in elucidating the value-oriented factors of the worldview of social workers was the point on fundamental values ​​in modern society and in professional social work: Based on the results of the respondents' answers, the following conclusions can be drawn:

According to the majority of respondents, the functioning of modern society is based on humanistic values ​​(Goodness, humanism, human freedom 17%, 5% human personality, 3% Love, 3% social justice, 2% Good, 1% Equality, 1% Tolerance) - which in general statistics is 32% of the respondents. In second place, according to the respondents, material values ​​are at the heart of the functioning of modern society - 25%, another 13% believe that no values ​​are at the heart of the functioning of modern society. And 30% of respondents found it difficult to answer.

In the understanding of the respondents, humanistic values ​​are the highest in professional social work, and only 23% found it difficult to answer this question.

9% believe that the highest value in social work is the professional qualities of a social worker, which corresponds to the previously identified trend of “professional understanding” of fundamental ethical grounds

On average, only one quarter of the respondents found it difficult to answer the question about values ​​in society and in social work, in particular, which can serve as confirmation of the high degree of relevance of this study, and at the same time, be an incentive to further deepen the study of fundamental ethical foundations respondents.

The final question in this block of the questionnaire and the final question in this study was the question “How should social work be transformed in order to best meet the criteria of good and good?” (See Appendix 21). This question aimed to clarify, on the basis of the value-oriented factors of the worldview and understanding the fundamental ethical foundations of social workers, the ideas of the respondents-social workers about the direction of the progressive development of social work from the point of view of good and evil. The results look ambiguous: if the majority of respondents agree on the fundamental values ​​of social work, then opinions about the transformation of social work in terms of the greatest compliance with the criteria of goodness and welfare drastically diverge. There are 12 generalized points of view of the respondents, some of them contradict each other, some are of no value in terms of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work, some relate to improving the efficiency of social services. But, nevertheless, these results are of undoubted practical and research value, as a result of identifying areas for the transformation of social work, in order to best meet the criteria of good and good; as revealing the social expectations of social workers; also as a result of identifying the value-oriented factors of social workers' activities. As a result of the analysis of this issue, it was revealed that 67% of respondents found it difficult to answer this question, which can confirm the earlier voiced opinion about the need for an in-depth study of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work as necessary moral guidelines for professionally carried out activities, on the basis of higher professional education.

The following hypotheses have also been confirmed:

)In the minds of practical social workers, an “ordinary-empirical” understanding of the ethical foundations of social work has been formed, concluded in the idea that “good” is a professional, executive implementation of one’s activities as a specialist, and “evil” is the incompetence of a social worker;

)The relevance of problems related to the ethical foundations of social work in professional activities is growing;

)Humanistic values ​​occupy the highest places in the hierarchy of values ​​of practical social workers;

)The understanding of social work prevails as a manifestation of humanistic values, social policy of the state, goodness;

)The value-oriented, worldview, ideological, motivational function of humanistic ideas about the ethical foundations of social work in the minds of social workers has been implemented.

Conclusion

Social work is an activity in which the ethical component plays a significant role. From how the value system of a specialist is built, what ethical principles he is guided by how deeply he understands the essence and meaning of his duty and responsibility to a large extent depends on the well-being of the client, the stability of society. The effectiveness and social significance of social work to a large extent depend on what meaning the social worker puts into the concepts of "good" and "evil", what he considers good and evil in social work and, accordingly, how he implements these ideas in his professional practice.

In a theoretical study of the development of an understanding of the solution to the problem of finding the definitions of "good" and "evil", the following patterns were identified:

)Definition of "evil" as the opposite of "good". In science, it is recognized that these concepts are dualistic and opposite. But when defining a concept, it is incorrect to proceed from, only, its opposite to another concept.

)The concepts of "good" and "evil" are interpreted vaguely, due to the complexity of the precise and objective definition of these concepts.

The problem of defining the concepts of good and evil worried the minds of many scientists throughout the development of society. These concepts are central in many ethical systems, because it is through the prism of understanding these categories that almost all human actions are evaluated throughout his life.

Trying to understand what “evil” and “good” are, to identify their relationship, one may encounter a number of difficulties:

) Confusion of the concepts of good and evil will, with the concepts of good and evil circumstances

) Mixing the concepts of good and evil with ethical standards, that is, with social norms of behavior (etiquette, decency, traditions, etc.)

) Views of good and evil as a certain set of specific actions

) Impossibility of precise observance of the rules of goodness

) Unclear purpose of goodness

) Inevitable subjectivism and limited possibilities of cognition in attempts to understand "absolutes" - "good" and "evil"

Analysis of the theories of "good" and "evil" showed:

. “Good” and “evil” are categories of ethics and concepts of moral consciousness, in an extremely general form showing the distinction between moral and immoral, proper and reprehensible in the motivation of activities and actions, moral qualities and human relations, social phenomena. From ancient times to the present stage of the development of society, the understanding of "good" and "evil" has been constantly studied and changed. There were such theories as: naturalistic, coming from the nature of man, his pleasures and pleasures (hedonism), happiness and unhappiness (eudemonism), non-contradiction/contradiction to the cosmic law, the natural course of things (stoicism), emotional reactions that do not contain scientific knowledge (emotivism), good as an unattainable perfection (Plato's theory), various religious theories.

Since ancient times, there has been a problem of mixing the concepts of good and evil with concepts that are similar in their semantic group. For example, for the category of "good" similar concepts were: joy (the theory of emotivism), pleasure (the theory of hedonism).

Good and evil are non-absolute, ambiguous, rather general concepts that reflect phenomena whose essence is questioned by some theories (emotivism)

On the other hand, there are theories that elevate to the absolute, with some reservations, the concepts of "good" and "evil" (religious theories, the theory of I. Kant)

There is a noticeable general pattern of revealing the dualistic nature of the concepts of "good" and "evil", their multidirectionality, and at the same time, inseparability, connection with each other.

Social work as a profession, more than others, is within the boundaries of morality and morality. And in this regard, it is especially important to understand the fundamental foundations of social work. Such a basis is the idea of ​​"good" and "evil" as a value-oriented, meaning-forming factor of professional activity. Based on ideas about the highest values ​​of society and the individual, social work, as a social subsystem, carries out its activities. That is why it is important that every social worker, as part of this system, clearly understands what the fundamental ethical foundations of social work are, because in his work a professional social worker needs to adhere to clear moral guidelines, such an understanding of the good in which he would avoid manifestations in his actions. evil.

Good and evil are the fundamental ethical foundations of social work for a number of reasons. The dialectical relationship between good and evil is the central issue of ethics. Only by answering questions about the essence of good and evil, one can make judgments about such concepts as morality, morality, duty, justice. In this context, "good" and "evil" are defining subjects, phenomena that determine and guide being and consciousness. Social work, as a professional activity, in which the issues of morality, morality, goodness, evil, justice and injustice are updated every day, carries out its activities in accordance with the fundamental ethical foundations, in which the dialectical relations of good and evil are the worldview-setting subjects.

“Good” and “evil” are categories of ethics and concepts of moral consciousness, in an extremely general form showing the distinction between moral and immoral, proper and reprehensible in the motivation of activities and actions, moral qualities and human relations, social phenomena. The extremely general categories that define the phenomena of good and evil are its foundations.

Since the ethics of professional social work is one of the sections of philosophical ethics, good and evil are also its foundations. From ancient times to the present stage of the development of society, the understanding of "good" and "evil" has been constantly studied and changed. There were such theories as: naturalistic, coming from the nature of man, his pleasures and pleasures (hedonism), happiness and unhappiness (eudemonism), non-contradiction/contradiction to the cosmic law, the natural course of things (stoicism), emotional reactions that do not contain scientific knowledge (emotivism), good as an unattainable perfection (Plato's theory), various religious theories and many others.

Good and evil are the ethical foundations of social work. Analyzing the nature of social work in the aspect of ethical and philosophical theories, we can say that while some theories recognize the fact that social work is only a means of reducing social tension, a means of reducing discontent in society, many theories recognize the fact that for a single individual and for society as a whole, the phenomenon of "social work" has a positive characteristic, is considered good, or at least beneficial, because it theoretically contributes to an increase in happy and successful people, or, at least, contributes to solving the problems of social work clients and guides them on the path to happiness and well-being.

In the course of the practical multifactorial social research “Modern ideas of social workers about “good” and “evil” and their role as fundamental ethical foundations in their professional activities”, modern ideas of social workers about “good” and “evil” were revealed and their role as fundamental ethical grounds in professional activity.

Based on the results of the study, the following conclusions can be drawn:

According to the majority of respondents, the functioning of modern society is based on humanistic values ​​(kindness, humanism, human freedoms, human personality, love, social justice, kindness, equality, tolerance). The second place, according to the respondents, is based on the functioning of modern society is material values, but every eighth believes that the functioning of modern society is based on no values.

In the understanding of three-quarters of the respondents, humanistic values ​​are the highest in professional social work.

Every tenth believes that the highest value in social work is the professional qualities of a social worker, which corresponds to the previously identified trend of “professional understanding” of fundamental ethical grounds

On average, only one quarter of the respondents find it difficult to answer the question about values ​​in society and in social work, in particular, which can serve as confirmation of the high degree of relevance of this study, and at the same time, be an incentive for further deepening the study of fundamental ethical grounds by respondents .

The least significant in social work, according to the respondents, was the social status. More than half of the respondents could not identify the least significant in social work.

However, unfortunately, to the question of possible directions for the transformation of social work to better meet the criteria of goodness, it was not possible to get an unambiguous answer. But, nevertheless, these results are of undoubted practical and research value, which proves the need for an in-depth study of the fundamental ethical foundations of social work as necessary moral guidelines for professionally carried out activities, based on higher professional education.

Thus, the research hypothesis is confirmed: in the worldview of students, teachers, practical social workers, the categories of "good" and "evil" occupy a significant place, but these phenomena do not have a clear interpretation.

The study also found confirmation of the following statements:

1)In the minds of practical social workers, an “ordinary-empirical” understanding of the ethical foundations of social work has been formed, concluded in the idea that “good” is a professional, executive implementation of one’s activities as a specialist, and “evil” is the incompetence of a social worker

2)The urgency of problems concerning the ethical foundations of social work in professional activities is growing.

)Humanistic values ​​occupy the highest places in the hierarchy of values ​​of practical social workers.

)The understanding of social work prevails as a manifestation of humanistic values, the social policy of the state, goodness.

5)From the point of view of social workers, the public good takes precedence over the private good.

6)The value-oriented, worldview, ideological, motivational function of humanistic ideas about the ethical foundations of social work in the minds of social workers has been implemented.

Of particular interest is the identification of a phenomenon not previously reflected in scientific knowledge, which consists in a specific understanding for social workers of the essence of “good” (as a professional, executive activity of a social worker) and “evil” (incompetence of a social worker), as well as the above-mentioned modern ideas of social workers about the fundamental ethical foundations of social work and the impact of these ideas on professionally carried out activities.

The study made it possible to formulate recommendations aimed at improving the ethical competence of a social worker:

undertake a further study of the ideas of social workers about the fundamental ethical foundations, in connection with the potential opportunity to more fully highlight the complex of ethical views of social workers that is relevant today;

in accordance with the trends of the state and social policy of the Russian state, the development of ethical and professional and ethical knowledge, update the professional and ethical code of a social worker, with the prioritization in the professional and executive implementation of their activities by a social work specialist, which corresponds to the identified trends in understanding the phenomena of "good" and "evil";

to strengthen the ethical training of social workers, for which purpose to increase the number of hours devoted to the study of the ethics of professional social work and to include the basics of professional and ethical knowledge in the programs of courses and faculties for advanced training, training and retraining of social workers as a mandatory academic discipline.

Bibliography

1.Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Adopted and proclaimed by the UN General Assembly December 10, 1948 / United Nations. Official records of the first part of the third session of the General Assembly. - St. Petersburg: Publishing house "Region-Pro", 2004.

2.The Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993 (as amended on February 5, 2014) M .: Publishing house "Phoenix", 2014.

.Federal Law of 10.12. 1995 No. 195-FZ (as amended on November 25, 2013) "On the basics of social services for the population in the Russian Federation"

4.GOST R 52883-2007 Social services for the population. Requirements for the personnel of social service institutions” dated December 27, 2007 No. 561-st

5.GOST R 52142-2003 “Social services for the population. The quality of social services. General provisions» No. 326-st dated November 24, 2003

6.Bentham I. Introduction to the foundations of morality and legislation. - M.: Publishing house "Direct-Media", 2009. - 734 p.

7.Galkin. B. Theoretical aspects and foundations environmental problem: interpreter of words and idiomatic expressions. - Cheboksary: ​​Publishing House "Laboratory of Civilization Problems", 1997 -105 p.

8.Goss J. Key concepts of humanistic and Christian non-violence // Ethics of non-violence. M., 2011. - 195-196 p.

.Gusev N.N. Pedagogical statements of L. N. Tolstoy / coll. N. N. Gusev; with preface A.P. Pinkevich. - M.: Publishing house "Worker of Education", 1928. - 40 p.

10.Melon ?. ?., Essay on the history of the philosophy of classical Greece. - M.: Publishing house "Publishing house of the Leningrad University", 2003. -53 p.

11.Zolotukhina-Abolina E.V. Modern Ethics: tutorial. - Moscow - Rostov-on-Don: Publishing House "Mart", 2003. - 127 p., 195-196 p.

12.Letters and Fragments of Epicurus, in the collection: Materialists ancient greece. - M.: Politizdat Publishing House, 1955. - 587 p.

.Professional and ethical code of a social worker in Russia. M., 2003. - 20s

14.Firsov M.V. Introduction to the specialty and the basics of professional ethics of a social worker. - M .: Publishing house of the RSSU "Soyuz", 1993.

.Fromm E. Escape from freedom. Per. from English. A. Laktionova. - M.: Publishing house "AST", 2009 - 38 p.

16. Schweitzer<#"justify">APPENDIX

Appendix 1

Dear colleagues! You are invited to take part in a study of social workers' current ideas about the ethical foundations of social work, in which we ask you to fill out this questionnaire. You will be asked several questions. Questions open ie. suggesting a detailed full answer representing your personal opinion.

The questionnaire is completely anonymous. All questions must be answered. Filling out the questionnaire will take you 5-10 minutes.

Your feedback is very important to us.

1. What is good?

2.What is debt?

3.What is injustice?

4.How often do you have to deal with issues related to professional ethics in your professional activities?

5. What is good?

6.What is the role of good and evil in human life?

7.Is social work generally good or bad?

8.Modern Russian social work - is it good or evil?

9.Are paid services a manifestation of good or evil?

10.What is the manifestation of good and evil in the implementation of professional social work?

11.What is the social worker's responsibility to society?

12.What values ​​underlie the functioning of modern society?

13.What. in your opinion, the ratio of good and evil in modern Russian social policy?

14.What are the highest values ​​in professional social work?

15.What, in your opinion, is the least significant in social work?

16.How should social work be transformed in order to best meet the criteria of good and good?

A few words about myself:

Education (type, profile, specialty, scientific degree, title, additional courses):

Place of work:

Thank you for participating in the study.

Appendix 2

Table #1

Department of the ECStudentsWorkingControl group102305010Total:102

Diagram #1

Annex 3

Table number 2

Distribution of respondents by education:Incomplete higher60Higher42

Diagram #2

Appendix 4

Table #3

Total: men women now indicated 103753

Diagram #3

Annex 5

Table No. 4

Average age Average age 28.9169697 Department 40.5 Volunteer center 27 Students 22.8 Working 32.6 Control group 21.6

Diagram #4

Appendix 6

Table number 5

Summary Presentation on the ethical grounds of social work of the Blagly - Good24 Blagoi - that well 43BLALO - objects representing the value of the answer 5Blago - help6 Blago - what is useful - the obligation 47 debt - good value - moral value - Social unequality - non -destruction - evil -proceeding - evil -proceedings - everyday life 2 Injustice - subjective assessment 8 Injustice - violation of social norms 25 Difficult to answer 24 Injustice - a bad deed 20 Good - help compassion 19 Good - the realization of goodness 32 Good - love 6 Good - evaluation category 1 Good - justice 4 Good - the opposite of evil 9 Good - something positive 15 Difficult to answer 12

Diagram #5

Annex 7

Diagram #6

Annex 8

Diagram #7

Annex 9

Diagram #8

Annex 10

Diagram #9

Annex 11

Table No. 6

SUMMARY TABLE The attitudes of social workers in terms of ethics to social work, state social policySocial work - good72Social work should not be considered from the point of view of good and evil11Social work - evil14Social work should not be considered from the point of view of good and evil6Social work in the Russian Federation - good46Social work in the Russian Federation - evil32Paid services - good25Paid services - this is a necessary measure18For the benefits you have to pay3Paid services - evil57Good in implementation. Social The work is manifested in Spanish. Prof. Debt31Good in implementation. Social Work is manifested in the very existence of social. Work5Good to implement. Social The work is manifested in helping45Evil in the implementation. Social The work is manifested in the dependence of clients30Difficult to answer47Evil in the implementation. Social The work is manifested in the incompetence of a specialist38Evil in the implementation. Social The work is manifested in action. "states"17The ratio of good and evil in social policy in the Russian Federation: 60% good / 40% evil 650% good / 50% evil31 Difficult to answer 5090% good / 10% evil10

Annex 12

Diagram #10

Appendix 13

Diagram #11

Annex 14

Diagram #12

Diagram #13

Annex 15

Diagram #14

Annex 16

Diagram #15

Annex 17

Table number 7

Pivot tableValue-oriented factors of social workers' worldviewThe role of goodness in human life? In perception10In filtering people1In identifying people14Acts as a regulator of social relations8Difficult to answer65Happiness and well-being3Salvation of the soul1The role of evil in human life?In filtering people1In perception10In identifying people17Acts as a regulator of social relations4Difficult to answer70What values ​​underlie the functioning of modern society ?Никаких15Материальные30Добро,Гуманизм, Свободы человека20Соц.справедливость4Толерантность1Равенство1Добро2Любовь4Затрудняюсь ответить36Личность как высшая ценность6Какие ценности являются высшими в профессиональной социальной работе?Соблюдение этического кодекса5Гуманизм35Соц.справедливость7Толерантность7Профессиональные качества13Уважение7Милосердие13Доброта12Ответственность8Понимание3Честность3Затрудняюсь ответить34Что является наименее значимым в социальной работе?Ничего20Затрудняюсь ответить62С social status11 Making a profit2 Non-beneficial activities2 Pensions4 How should social work be transformed in order to best meet the criteria of good and good? Targeting, accessibility, fairness4 Develop together with society and respond to emerging challenges communicated to every person3Constant increase of staff at all levels8Reformation initiative "from above"1It is necessary to raise the prestige of the profession2Be patient with each other1There is no perfect solution5Government should meet the needs of social workers2Remove paid services2Difficult to answer71

Appendix 18

Diagram #16

Diagram #17

Annex 19

Diagram #18

Diagram #19

Annex 20

Diagram #20

Annex 21

Diagram #21

a) social work social institution;

b) activities of a social worker;

c) activities of social services;

d) relations between a social worker and a client;

e) relations between a social worker and a social worker.

11. The core ethical values ​​of social work are:

a) moral values ​​of the client;

b) the well-being of people, social justice and the dignity of the individual;

c) the values ​​of the client and the social group;

d) moral values ​​of social workers;

e) material means and resources.

From a naturalistic point of view, morality is

a) it is the result of the socio-historical development of mankind;

b) it is the result of biological evolution;

c) there is a manifestation of superhuman, supernatural consciousness;

d) has an a priori character;

e) is an expression of human will.

What is the name of the moral principle, which is expressed in the fact that moral norms are given a relative, completely conditional and changeable character?

a) rationalism;

b) absolutism;

c) relativism;

d) dualism;

e) eudemonism.

How is the "golden rule" of morality formulated?

a) love your neighbor as yourself;

b) don't kill

c) do not steal;

d) treat others as you would like to be treated;

e) an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

From the point of view of hedonism, the highest good and the criterion of behavior is

a) happiness;

b) benefit;

c) pleasure;

d) suppression of sensual desires;

e) knowledge of the truth.

16. What is the name of the moral position, according to which each person must perform disinterested actions aimed at the benefit (satisfaction of interests) of another person?

a) altruism;

b) selfishness;

c) rationalism;

d) voluntarism;

e) idealism.

17. The basic principle of Christian ethics is:

a) reverence for life;

b) serenity and equanimity;

c) the principle of benefit;

d) mercy and compassion;

e) justice.

What ethical concept denies the absolute nature of morality?

a) "reasonable egoism";

b) stoicism;

c) Eastern religions;

d) Christianity;

e) Kant's concept.

Domostroy", as a secular code of ethics, extends to Russia in

In what religious direction is poverty considered one of the most charitable deeds?

a) in Catholicism;

b) in Orthodoxy;

c) in Islam;

d) in Buddhism;

e) in Protestantism.

Which of the Russian philosophers believed that the main moral commandment is non-resistance to evil?

a) L. Tolstoy;

b) V. Solovyov;

c) I. Ilyin;

d) N. Berdyaev;

e) S. Frank.

In what religious direction does honest labor as “worldly asceticism” act as an ethical ideal?

a) in Islam;

b) in Judaism;

c) in Orthodoxy;

d) in Buddhism;

e) in Protestantism.

What is the name of the direction in ethics, which considers utility the basis of morality and the criterion of human actions?

a) eudemonism;

b) utilitarianism;

c) hedonism;

d) deontological ethics;

a) Spinoza

d) V. Solovyov;

e) F. Dostoevsky.

The term "altruism" was introduced into scientific use

a) I. Bentham;

b) Feuerbach;

c) Kant;

d) Epicurus;

a) M. Luther;

b) M. Weber;

c) G. Spencer;

d) N. Berdyaev;

e) I. Bentham.

27. The ideal in social work is:

a) an idea of ​​the perfect state of a specialist, client, social work;

b) the subject of the professional and ethical code;

c) deontological criterion;

d) direction of activity of the social service;

e) the criterion of morality.

28. The ethical consciousness of a social worker presupposes the presence and combination of:

a) the moral knowledge of the social worker and the needs of society;

b) moral knowledge, moral convictions and moral needs;

c) the moral needs of the social worker and the needs of the client;

d) personal beliefs of the specialist and values ​​of the client;

e) the moral knowledge of the social worker and the needs of the client.

29 . The professional and ethical code of social work is:

a) the system of values ​​and ideals of modern society;

b) the main component of the ethical consciousness of a specialist;

c) a set of personal values ​​of social workers;

d) a set of value orientations;

e) a set of ethical rules and norms of behavior, requirements for the personality of a specialist;

When working with the family system, one of the issues that attracts particular attention is the change in the life cycle. Any such change disturbs the organization of the family and causes opposition. Often this is due to the inability to make the necessary changes designed to stabilize the precarious balance of life. J. Haley (1980), for example, applied her approach to families in which young people could not "leave the house", and E. Carter and M. McGoldrick (1980) made a huge scientific contribution to this issue with the publication of their work on the cycle of family life.

3.3. Organizational aspects of social work

3.3.1. Organizational models of social work

Organizations providing social services have a number of distinctive features. First of all, they work with those people who are, as it were, “immediate material” in their production process. The end result that justifies the existence of these types of organizations is to protect, strengthen, and improve the well-being of the people they serve.

There are two organizational models that can help you understand the relationships between these components. The centralized form is used in cases where the current work is routine, repetitive, well mastered by the staff, the goals are clearly defined, and the source material is stable and homogeneous. The decentralized model is more suitable for organizations dealing with a variety of inputs or solving non-traditional tasks. Under these conditions, employees should be able to act at their own discretion, since it is difficult to foresee all options for their actions in advance.

In cases where customer requests have to be responded to immediately, in person, a democratic style of leadership is needed, involving participation in the discussion of problems and dispersal of authority in decision-making. If the task is to influence the behavior of the client, then especially wide freedom of choice and the use of the most effective means are needed. Decisions in these cases depend on the ability of the staff to correctly take into account the changed circumstances.

leadership, and management should be about helping employees find themselves in the context of organizational and professional tasks. The larger the part of the investment in the program that is allocated to work with personnel, the more likely it is to achieve the goal.

3.3.2. Theoretical aspects of the organization of services providing social services

Organizations providing various kinds of social services are associated with many often contradictory theories representing different views on the activities of social services.

classical school. The theory of organization adopted by the classical school emphasized formal structure. In a classic essay on bureaucracy, M. Weber proposed an ideal model of a formal, reasonably organized structure, derived from legal and rational premises. In his opinion, the bureaucratic structure is the most effective means of mobilizing resources and power. Legal power is considered by him as the basis of powers that find their formal expression in a clearly defined hierarchy of institutions and are carried out using the most appropriate procedures. The organization is managed on the basis of the established order, based on specific knowledge. The ideal bureaucratic structure is characterized by unity of command, a high level of specialization, impersonal relationships between its members, and certain a priori qualities necessary to obtain the prerogatives associated with the position.

School scientific management. Father of the scientific management school, which sees organizations as effective tools production of goods and provision of services, consider F. Taylor. His followers tried to derive precise laws governing the activities of each worker, based on accurate analysis, experiments and measurements of the parameters of the organization's activities. This methodology examined time and operations to determine which combination of worker and machine is optimal for the task. The results obtained determined the necessary organizational measures. The main task of organizing

tors was to force the employee to focus on the specific task assigned to him.

School of Human Relations. The school of human relations arose as a reaction to the theory of F. Taylor. She emphasized the role of informal socio-psychological components of the organization. The School of Human Relations rose to prominence in the 50s and 60s. The focus of this school was human behavior, informal group connections within the organization, the role of the work team and its impact on the effectiveness of the organization was emphasized in every possible way. It was believed that the organizers of production should be attentive to informal organizations, i.e., to those social relations that arise between workers in naturally formed groups. The emphasis was on people, not on machines, on consent, not on mechanical performance.

Modern theories. Theory scientific organization labor and human relations theory emphasized each only one of the facets of organizational work. Modern theories, on the other hand, seek to integrate the formal and informal mechanisms of the activities of organizations in such a way as to trace the types of their mutual influence as a result. It is believed that the functional organization is a complex synthesis of dynamic structural and interpersonal processes, where elements of rationality and efficiency are intertwined. The main modern school is the structuralist, or systemic. The corresponding approach considers the organization as a social system consisting of interrelated parts (subsystems) that interact and balance each other. Supporters of structuralism believe that all activity is aimed at preserving and protecting a system that is political in nature and subject to conflict and deformation. In their opinion, the distribution of power is the main source of conflicts, since it is at the center of social processes that regulate the allocation and control of resources, control over people, decision-making, policy development and the formation of organizational goals.

3.3.3. Goals and activities of organizations for the provision of social services in modern society

Organization goals. Organizations engaged in social services are called upon to perform tasks that coincide with the basic functions of society. How are their goals determined, which can be programmatic and tactical? The official goals are the translation of legislation and policy in the field of social support into the language of programmatic actions. Official, program goals contain value preferences, as well as ideological and theoretical ideas about the problems and needs of people. The organization formulates goals for itself, and based on this it will be evaluated and asked to report from it. They indicate the spectrum of human concerns and needs within the legal prerogatives of the organization, as well as the most appropriate strategic ways to achieve results.

Since it is necessary to satisfy the needs of different groups of customers, organizations usually have several goals. They may be compatible or incompatible, and sometimes they are deliberately given a vague, indefinite form to reconcile different interests.

Organizational goals are divided into two types depending on their functional purpose. Transitive (transitional) goals include the impact of a program or service on the external environment, in other words, changing or maintaining a certain situation. These goals, which are usually the main reason for the existence of the organization, coexist with reflexive goals that ensure the survival of the organization. These last goals take the form of a motive that encourages all members to contribute adequately. For example, the transitional goal of a community center may be to reduce juvenile delinquency in the area by providing recreational and educational opportunities. In order to maintain its own existence as an organization, the center needs to have a reflexive goal, which is to find means and other necessary resources. To be successful, an organization must maintain a dynamic balance between these goals, although it will be judged primarily in relation to transitive goals, because through them the organization fulfills the mandate given to it by society.

Social service organizations exist in the changing world of the community. Funding must be sought, retained and defended from public and private sources as community interests and priorities shift from one problem or need to another. The legal requirements governing the activities of organizations are changing. Service methods are getting a new direction, and this does not always coincide with the desires of consumers. Feeling a threat to their existence under these conditions, social organizations are forced to study the external environment and adapt to countless options for pressure from outside. The decisive influence remains with those circles on which the direct allocation of funds depends, among state sources - this is the Ministry of Health and Human Services, departments of social security in the states, community councils of mental health. In the private sector, funds come from various programmes, funds and client contributions. The organization receives legalization of its activities through state acts or from a private board of trustees. The bodies that give the organization legal prerogatives evaluate its activities and confirm its expediency.

An organization providing social services cannot exist without clients. The clientele deserves every attention in terms of its preservation and expansion. Another critical factor on which the success of many programs depends is the availability of support services. For example, a child services agency needs a hospital to treat its clients, while a community center is reaching out to nearby churches for volunteers to run its programs. Among these supportive forms of interaction between organizations may be the mutual referral of clients and the allocation of trained personnel.

Possible forms of relationships between organizations and the external environment form a continuum. In its initial stage, the agencies have almost no contact with each other, and, therefore, they do not need to take into account the existence of each other. Some organizations in this situation may establish a stable complementary relationship among themselves.

cooperation. It is a peaceful, stable environment. The intermediate option is characterized by a certain level of instability and competition, as a result of which, when planning your own actions, you have to take into account possible steps or opposition from other organizations. In order to achieve greater predictability of the behavior of partners, one can try to conclude an appropriate agreement, create joint or coordinating bodies such as a community planning council. In certain cases, agencies may find that they are in a highly unstable environment with an ever-changing nature of relationships, instability in the distribution of spheres of influence and resources. The course of events is unpredictable, and the receipt of funds is associated with intense competition. In such a situation, the purpose and nature of the services provided by the agency may undergo significant changes. The creation of coordinating structures within the community can reduce instability and stabilize the activities of competitors in the territory where they operate. At the same time, interaction, trust and cooperation between organizations to a large extent depend on whether consistency in relations between agencies is achieved under pressure from above (from a funding organization or legislative body) or on a voluntary basis.

Thus, four types of relationships between organizations can be distinguished:

- voluntary, unregulated;

- voluntary coordination based on agreements;

- regulated relations (forced contracts without agreement on the decision-making mechanism);

- mandatory regulated hierarchical coordination.

A relationship based on the principle of voluntariness leaves each participant the right to withdraw from the agreement if the losses for him will exceed the benefits received. In cases where communications are mandatory, the parent organization may insist that the agencies interact regardless of their wishes and make their interaction a condition of approval of their budget. An agency whose existence depends on a given source of funds is deprived

choice and must participate in the agreement, even if it is contrary to his interests. If there are sharp disagreements among the participants, such a binding agreement may be undermined, disintegrate or give way to a hierarchical system in which individual programs are forcibly combined.

The most regulated is this type of relationship, when connections and goals are dictated. For example, a county psychiatric hospital board can oversee service programs in its territory, have the power to determine the need for services, decide on their provision, enter into contracts and give grants under certain conditions, evaluate programs and plan further work. Individual agencies depend on the center for resources and must comply with its requirements, but in return receive greater predictability in terms of providing financial resources, clientele and additional services from other organizations in the area. Thus, the environment in which a social organization operates has a significant impact on it.

3.3.4. Organizational structure social services

The division of labor and coordination are key aspects of the internal organizational structure and require targeted control over the progress of work, which allows you to maintain its effectiveness. The organizational structure is an administrative mechanism designed to balance the differentiation generated by the division of labor with the integration and coordination necessary to carry out the assigned tasks. One of critical aspects structure is centralization - a combination of concentration and distribution of powers in decision-making within the organization. The concentration of power in the upper echelon reflects a high degree of centralization. How more quantity personnel involved in decision-making, and the more areas in which this participation takes place, the more decentralized the organization. Organizations with a strictly centralized hierarchy are called bureaucratic. Organizations with a decentralized or collegiate structure with an emphasis on a collaborative leadership process have been called non-bureaucratic.

Note that as organizations grow and the skill level of their staff increases, it becomes increasingly difficult for top managers to keep all the functions associated with decision-making in their hands. Thus, decentralization is partly driven by necessity; it cultivates the qualities necessary for an organization to successfully adapt to various situations, instills in people a sense of belonging to its goals. More active participation of the employee in decision-making reduces the feeling of alienation from work, dissatisfaction with work, causes respect for managers, increases productivity and improves mutual contacts. In social organizations, the problem of power and leadership style is complicated by the uncertainty of program goals and methods used, frequent changes in staff and clients and instability environment. These organizations are "loosely constructed systems" whose components are not very precisely and carefully fitted together. Employee activities are poorly monitored. Managers depend on their subordinates to obtain the information they need to direct the work of the organization. To achieve success here, professionalism is more useful than bureaucratic control. In social organizations, it is impossible to predict in advance how the relationship between employee and client will develop, and this circumstance can only be overcome on the basis of interaction between the parties, and not relying on a formal administrative structure. The overall success of such an organization depends on a sense of professional duty and common sense employees working directly with clients.

Summing up, we can say that participation in decision-making meets the needs of staff, contributes to the effectiveness of existing procedures, improves the morale of employees and their satisfaction with the results of their work, facilitates the solution of the tasks facing the organization, stimulating productivity and quality of work, minimizing possible failures in work. Participation brings joy from work, improves the general mood, increases the cohesion of employees, and the interest of staff in customers and the effectiveness of working with them, the accuracy of information necessary for decision-making.

3.4. Features of the technology for the provision of social services

Distinctive feature social organizations is that they serve people, helping them to change, develop or preserve themselves. The modus operandi here can be as diverse as the source material itself and the future results. The tasks that need to be solved to achieve the goals and the necessary actions are technology. Technology - actions performed by an individual on an object in order to change it with or without the use of tools and mechanical devices. An object or "raw material" can be a living being, including a person, or an inanimate object. This view of the performance of an organization has several components: the fluid or fixed nature of the tasks, the predictable range of search in non-routine situations, the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the source material. Comparison of social organizations can be carried out on the basis of such assumptions as the characteristics of the clients with whom they have to work; knowledge used in the process of this work; the nature of the interaction between the employee and the client; the control exercised by the client in relation to the procedures used, as well as the organization and consequences of the activities of the personnel.

Standardization of workflow tasks becomes possible when they are routine, predictable, and the source material is uniform. In other cases, tasks may follow from a specific situation and therefore be very diverse. The search for alternative solutions has to be carried out in a wide range, without sufficient certainty, and the source material is very heterogeneous. The main thing in the technology of social services is an adequate assessment of the client and his needs. There was a point of view that, in principle, all clients are the same, the difference lies only in the nature and degree of their infirmity and the necessary services, and therefore all actions of the organization should proceed from these features. People's needs may vary by type (lack of food, shelter, medical care) and degree (ranging from extensive to minimal need and long-term to temporary). From these well-defined categories, very specific measures can be planned and implemented.

Another approach is dictated by the differences rather than the similarities of the clients. Clients are seen as individuals whose unique traits, characteristics, and goals should be the focus, so that action should be planned on a case-by-case basis, not for entire categories. Obviously, in these conditions, effective intervention requires a wide range of staff training and a wide range of professional skills.

The social worker seeks an adequate response to the specific need of the client. If the task is familiar to him, his actions will be quick, not requiring much thought. In unfamiliar conditions, finding the right solution will take time. It may be routine, in the form of reference to literature or a supervisor, or it may be informal, based on intuition, trial and error, experience, professional judgment, etc. Possible changes in technical execution should be taken into account. and in the source material. The client and the situation can be perceived as something stable, uniform and understandable, or they can be seen as multifaceted, unstable, insufficiently understood phenomena. In the same way, intervention technology can be routine and only slightly modified, or it can provide for non-standard situations and the search for new solutions.

Organizations strive to align their technology and structure. When tasks, inputs, and events can be anticipated, activities can be planned in advance and individual workers have less need for autonomy. Conversely, organizations that frequently encounter exceptional situations regarding their clients or methods of assistance are less able to pre-specify their actions. Therefore, coordination should be carried out through interaction, feedback and mutual agreement rather than through centralized control.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru

Introduction

People acquire spiritual strength only when, in any particular case, they seem to achieve humanity. Everyone knows that this is not enough. A person, feeling in the power of a prudent and impersonal morality, suitable events, which traditionally does not require significant costs of reason and will, is able, based on this morality for the sake of embodying miserable interests, in general, to justify any evil. It would be bad if we did not note that, therefore, often one impersonal morality of suitable events opposes just as much, as everyone knows, the impersonal morality of suitable events. Everyone knows that all difficulties are solved, as it were, by the aimless struggle of these forces, for there are no moral convictions capable of making these difficulties solvable. It goes without saying that only in efforts to achieve humanity do forces emerge that are capable of acting in the direction of the truly reasonable and expedient and immediately having a beneficial effect on existing moral convictions.

Raising life to the level of the highest value also inspires people, therefore, to feel unlimited responsibility in their relationships with other people. Few people know that a person is moral only when he obeys the inner impulse, finally, to help any life that he is able to contribute to, and refrains from doing harm as well. It must be emphasized that he does not ask how this or that life also deserves his efforts, as well as whether and to what extent she can feel his kindness. It should be noted that life as such is sacred to him. Undoubtedly, it is worth mentioning that if the subjective will of the 1st individual acts for the benefit of the life of another, then this will experiences unity with the endless, in which all life is one and, in general, is the highest value dimension and instance. Few people know that this contributes to the neutralization of the existential vacuum and the acquisition of the fullness of being in a world that is a drama of the bifurcation of the will to live as a result of the self-affirmation of one will to live at the expense of another.

1. Moral values ​​of social processes and their dynamics

In modern conditions, post-nonclassical rationality is rapidly progressing, which is engaged in the study of complex self-developing systems, including social systems, whose important individuality, after all, is their human dimension. Undoubtedly, it is worth mentioning that this, as it were, imposes special requirements on taking into account the sociocultural determinants of scientific research, their axiological qualities. Strange as it may seem, but in connection with this, “post-nonclassical rationality can be assessed as a point of growth for new values ​​and worldview orientations, which, so to speak, opens up new perspectives for the dialogue of cultures.”

The model of the world, created by post-non-classical science and philosophy, contains such properties as instability, impermanence, uncertainty, polyvariance. It is also possible that mobility in terms of the spatial component and speed in terms of time are important qualities of social reality.

In the face of the global trends of “fluid modernity”, national countries reveal their weakness. It must be said that the latest pragmatism of modern globalization throws a sharp challenge to the spiritual culture of civilization. It must be emphasized that the only object of worship of the globalist economy is capital, the market seeps into all areas and, therefore, leads to the devaluation of values ​​and their displacement to the periphery of public attention.

At the same time, at the level of multi-valued historical challenges, the demand for moral values ​​is extremely high. And indeed, history finally shows that those cultures that could not correctly respond to the demands of the time do not have a future.

The post-non-classical methodological paradigm is aimed at a holistic attitude, at understanding the world as a whole, therefore it is open to, as we put it, cultural and value attitudes.

In an unreliable world of fluidity, people seek support in the bonds of solidarity, but the isolationism of groups of "their own kind" is futile. Needless to say, it is necessary to learn how to live next to the other, this, finally, is a severe test for our own values. Everyone knows that in this regard, the Belarusian state mentality has passed the test of time, our historical experience, so to speak, is a striking illustration of the art of arranging a life together on the basis of tolerance. Imagine one fact that although there is a certain one-sidedness here: living on your own land, you could more clearly declare your own state interests.

Global challenges require, as we put it, the solidarity actions of the entire population of the earth. I would like to emphasize that the rapidly emerging “knowledge society” needs the latest management policy, as we put it, social transformations, which finally implies the ability of science to work for the interests of the whole society, industries, companies, individuals.

The “knowledge society” is based on the “knowledge economy”, it is in it that fundamental values ​​are finally formed, although it itself, finally, depends on the maturity of culture.

The "knowledge economy" comes to the organic solidarity of the market, according to F. Hayek, through self-organization, the establishment of a spontaneous order based on the division, distribution of knowledge and the interaction of its different types. Everyone has long known that the typical means of disseminating knowledge and information, finally, is the mechanism of prices.

The world monetary crisis is pushing for radical changes in the fundamental values ​​of the economic system. It goes without saying that, thanks to him, society, as it were, is experiencing a turbulent state, which is characterized by great complexity, the highest dynamism, an acceleration in the pace of changes, as a result of which some of the fundamental values ​​are eroded. It is also possible that today's crisis has a transformational nature in relation to the very philosophy of business. It should be emphasized that, according to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, it is necessary to create capitalism from the ground up, taking into account the moral component. Note that the main problem, in general, is that the economy has to work for the individual. In modern terms, the global economy, in general, shows the rise of a polycentric world order, within which a desire for unity and abundance is growing.

Needless to say, according to George Soros, the world, therefore, is experiencing not only the collapse of the monetary system, but also the collapse of the past picture of the world. And it is not even necessary to say that the individualistic paradigm has exhausted itself, the experience of China seems to indicate that the market and the government can successfully complement each other.

Strange as it may seem, but against the backdrop of the formation of a transnational global world, the importance of the state as an original cultural property is growing, as a result of which the popular, as everyone knows, philosophical formula about the connection between the individual, the special and the universal is filled with new content. And it is not even necessary to say that modernity is faced with the task of achieving, as everyone knows, a rational synthesis between the personal and the collective, universal and state, Western and Eastern.

The philosophical concept, as many people think, of all suitable humanism can become the ideological basis of globalization, directing it into the mainstream of pluralism, autonomy, complementarity, and public partnership.

2. Personality - ethical and cultural potential

The content of culture can, in general, be represented by a system of relics, generated, first, by the active activity of those human capabilities that are generally recognized as spiritual. It's no secret that the essence of the spiritual entirely, in general, lies in its active activity. Indeed, the spirit itself, “within itself”, has a “perpetual motion machine”. It should be noted that what is formed, so to speak, in the process of the active activity of the spirit, is formed into a system that forms the content of culture. The content of culture is a system of relics, which, as everyone knows, has qualitative specifics in each particular society of people. Undoubtedly, it is worth mentioning that in the world of cultural relics, with all this, one should also distinguish between 3 layers: artifacts-objects, artifacts-events and flawless artifacts.

The content of culture is constantly directly, constantly historically, therefore, justified, because it is born not in, as we put it, remote from, as we are accustomed to say, areas of life, but in the process of daily communication. I would like to emphasize that the life world is formed as a constant of spiritual activity. The concept of "life world" is, as everyone knows, central to the philosophical phenomenology of E. Husserl. " characteristic features, the life world, - as T.G. Rumyantsev, - Husserl considered the following: a) the life world is the basis of all scientific idealizations; b) the life world is subjective, i.e. given to a person in the form and context of practice - in the form of goals; c) the life world - the cultural-historical world, or, more precisely, the image of the world as it appears in the minds of different human communities at certain steps of historical development; d) life world is relative; e) the life world - as a problematic field, is not "thematized" either by the natural human research attitude, or by the attitude of objectivist science (as a result of which science loses sight of man); f) the life world - has a priori structural features - invariants - on the basis of which there can be the formation of scientific abstractions, etc., as well as the possibility of developing a scientific methodology. Of course, we all know very well that to analyze, as everyone knows, the life world of representatives of a certain culture means, in general, to reveal the origins of the content of this culture, because everything that is in it, say, moral maxims, religion, art, has its roots in it, as in nutrient soil. It's no secret that the concept of "life world" captures the defining meaning of a particular human environment.

And indeed, it contributes to the formation of samples of objective meaning, which are finally transferred to the latest and most recent cases, which finally leads to the formation of a unique, as usual, cultural whole. It must be said that, using a simple example, E. Husserl explains this: a child who understands the meaning of scissors sees scissors as such at first glance. The "superstruction" of the semantic level also occurs in the process of associations. Close in meaning to Husserl's, as we put it, "life world" is the concept of "world picture", which, in general, carries a huge semantic load in the philosophy of M. Heidegger. I would very much like to emphasize that the definition of a type or picture of the world, in general, then makes it possible to better understand what is finally the content of culture as it has become, defined, appeared in the high-quality originality of certain relics. “Saying the “image of the world,” notes M. Heidegger, “we mean the world itself, existing as a whole, as giving us a measure and obligatory for us. The "image" does not mean an imprint, but the fact that beings stand before us and, moreover, stand exactly as they appear from our point of view. To put something into an image is nothing else than to put beings before oneself, that is, to represent it as it is, and, moreover, to keep it constantly before oneself as precisely in this way represented.

Starting from the definitions of E. Husserl's "life world" and M. Heidegger's "picture of the world", under the content of culture, in general, we will, therefore, be aware of the image that "gives us a measure and is indispensable for us"; or, the totality of the relics that are coming before us such as they seem to be from our point of view, are presented to us.

The content of culture can be represented in the form of a pyramid. It goes without saying that it is based on empirical images generated by contacts with a specific environment. Imagine one fact that its peak is also images, which are ideas, motivated attitudes, principles, maxims, which are formed under the determining action of intelligible variables, which are finally set by educational institutions, religious dogmas, philosophical doctrines, social political concepts.

What was said is consistent with the fundamental principles of the philosophical phenomenology of E. Husserl, who, analyzing the "life world", also singled out the phenomena of the first, second, third, etc. order, to varying degrees separated from the objective world. I would very much like to emphasize that with all this, the higher the “quantitative indicator” of the paradox, the closer it is placed to the form of reality remote from the subject and further from the type specifically given to the subject. Everyone knows that the concrete given is “nature in my own sphere, which must be clearly distinguished from mere nature, i.e. the nature that becomes the theme of the natural scientist, ”writes E. Husserl.

Let us single out the main structural components of the content of culture.

We recognize the first of their world outlook, under which we will, in general, be aware of the images of things, objects and bodies, including the human body.

From the worldview we will distinguish the worldview - images of place and time.

The inclusion in the content of the culture of a historically conditioned type of time finally implies a certain attitude towards, as everyone knows, the ambivalent unity expressed by the concepts of "life" and "death".

This attitude, in the end, generates images already essentially, as everyone knows, remote from empirical knowledge, in the highest degree abstract. No matter how strange it may seem, but the images of life and death can be imagined as occupying a middle position between the base and the top of the pyramid of the content of culture, fastening one to the other. The "Top of the Pyramid" is constituted by a worldview. Everyone has long known that it is, so to speak, an image-generalization that includes ideas not only about what is, but also about what should be, setting motivated attitudes. I'd like to emphasize that the worldview can be distant from the images of a particular environment, worldview and worldview. An integral part of the worldview is self-consciousness. It is necessary to emphasize that the worldview can, therefore, be considered as, on the one hand, the result of the activity of the spirit, on the other hand, the beginning from which the transforming activity of the spirit is finally directed outward. Let us pay special attention to the fact that the content of different cultures, both in historical and spatial perspective, has a common structure, but differs from each other in the high-quality certainty of structural components. It should be noted that, say, all cultures contain such an element of content as a chronotope, but the attitude to place and time in different cultures is different. “Each person understands, first of all, his specific surrounding world with its center and unopened horizon,” E. Husserl wrote in this connection, “i.e. own culture, as a person belonging to the society that historically, as it were, forms this culture.

Everyone knows that but a person also has a potential that is not limited, as everyone knows, to spiritual possibilities. I would very much like to emphasize that, minus the spirit and everything that relates to the physical abilities of a person, there remains the soul-heart. It is no secret to anyone that it may be characterized by the concept of "loving-compassionate", in the sense of love and compassion, which is clearly represented by the mother's attitude towards the child, common to all cultures; in the sense of love and compassion spoken of by world religions and classical works of art. Everyone knows that the soul-heart potential of a person is not subject to changes in the process of the historical dynamics of society. Of course, we all know very well that because we are receptive in relation to the past, we do not lose hope that we will be close to the person of the future, therefore, we have the right, therefore, to assert that at the current time our life activity is both meaning-forming and purposeful.

Few people know that in this way, it will seem possible to have a decisive effect on the formation of a worldview, and its means on the content of culture as a whole, for moving along the path of meriting a small gap between spiritual activity and the mental-heart potential of a person.

3. Philosophical and ethical aspects of social work in modern society

The state of modern society in any part of the Earth is such that it also needs, albeit to varying degrees, development, as everyone knows, social sphere and a special kind of social activity - social work. It is also possible that both culture, philosophy, science, education, attitude to the past and future, and the level and quality of social work reflect the self-identification and self-awareness of civilization, the degree of civilization and humanity of the country.

Of course, we all know very well that the social. the work is called upon to help those whose physical, mental and moral resources are insufficient, their abilities are small, and the possibilities without the help of others, therefore, to solve their difficulties are unsatisfactory. Undoubtedly, it is worth mentioning that because, based on humanism and moral disposition, social. work, finally, focuses on the main elements of a set of values ​​that persist with insignificant changes throughout its history - the well-being of people, social. justice, the dignity of the individual. It must be emphasized that the daily ethical difficulties of social. workers under the influence of time are more subject to transformations. And it is not even necessary to say that the bioethics that appeared in the 70s was a response to “problem situations” in medical practice - euthanasia, artificial insemination, transplantation of vital organs, etc. Of course, we all know very well that the fundamental novelty of “problem situations” lies in the following. It must be emphasized that, firstly, they are connected with those areas of medicine and biology, where doctors and researchers manipulate the actions of birth and death. It should be noted that, secondly, within the framework of “problem situations”, some classical ethical standards of healing have found an obvious shortage. Few people know that the search for ways out of these situations is something more than the moral choice of a particular doctor, it is the moral choice of the population of the Earth as a whole, the openness of the very standard of humanity. It goes without saying that, thirdly, an extensive discussion of “problem situations” in society became a manifestation of the ideology of protecting human rights in medicine, which turned out to be consonant with the moral problems that arise in the provision of psychiatric care. Everyone knows that in this context the meaning of bioethics as a kind of intellectual activity and social practice as if it consists in an attempt to find the ability of dialogue and solidarity of people in the defense of good and opposition to evil in situations generated by modern medicine.

In the same way, as a result of large-scale computerization, social workers have faced ethical problems regarding the maintenance of confidentiality, which is a fairly new phenomenon in comparison with other circumstances and abilities of the past.

A wide range of ordinary and newest spiritual and moral determinants and value orientations of social work concerns 3 different and at the same time interconnected levels and qualities. It goes without saying that we are talking, firstly, about the dependence of its value base on the mission, goals and objectives, secondly, about the introduction of ethical standards of the profession, and thirdly, about the ethical problems with which also faced by social workers in fulfilling their own obligations.

The humanistic goal and main value of social work is, as noted, the well-being of people who have difficulties associated with poverty, health, mental state, employment, housing, childhood, old age, hunger, etc. It should be noted that this, in general, this means that the approach to the life of each individual as a high value dimension is complemented by the realization of the incident that this life itself must be worthy of a person. I must say that each person is valuable in his own uniqueness, which should also be taken into account and respected. And it doesn't even need to be said that, having basic needs - food, clothing, housing, health - people have the right to respect and a decent existence and must have equal ability to satisfy these needs. Imagine one fact that in this case we are talking about the principle of social justice, one of the main parts of the social work value complex. It should be noted that everyone who applies to them has the right to assistance from the subjects of social work, without discrimination based on gender, age, race, state, religion, political grounds and motives. (in fact, the recognition and respect for these rights in the practice of social work is connected with the UN Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the world society and other international conventions).

Humanistic guidelines, in general, encourage the subjects of social work to closely interact with the subjects of expectations and claims for the benefit of the latter, while not to the detriment of others. It would be bad if we did not note that when encouraging them to cooperate, social workers proceed from the fact that clients, together with them, decide on efforts to change their own situation, although this may not always be, especially when the specified category, these are people - helpless due to age, illness, or other circumstances. It would be bad if we did not note that, after all, the social. work is incompatible with direct or indirect support of individuals, groups, power structures that use terror, torture, unjustified violence or other acts aimed at suppressing people.

In view of the dynamism of the development of society, the problems of orientation in the considered values, all suitable ethical prescriptions in social work are hardly appropriate. Imagine the fact that there is only one way to rise to the occasion of today's and future moral challenges, and that is, where possible, to encourage moral conscience. Few people know that the development of prof. ethics and, accordingly, education.

Growth of enthusiasm for Prof. values ​​and ethics is justified by several reasons. It's no secret that, for example, technological progress has put experts in front of a moral choice that was unknown to previous generations of social science. workers. I would like to emphasize that the development of health care, computer technology, political and other reasons, therefore, were accompanied by an extreme complication of the requirements related to values ​​and ethics. It must be emphasized that, in addition, social workers are faced with the need, in the end, to rely on all the most limited resources, low social. the status of the profession, which brought its changes into the value orientations and ethics of prof. life. It would be bad if we did not note that attention to the latter also reflects the formation and development of the profession itself, because its reputation is based on them.

The behavior of a public worker in his personal life is, as it were, a personal matter for everyone to the extent that it does not interfere with the performance of official obligations. It's no secret that the social an employee, in general, is responsible for his professional competence, the quality of the services provided, but he is also responsible for the prestige of his own profession and must, in the end, promote respect for it.

Table 1 - Value Assumptions

The ability to perceive, differentiate and realize facts and values ​​was described by A. Maslow as a characteristic of a properly functioning person. According to his humanistic theory of personality, a person has a number of metavalues ​​(metaneeds), or existential values.

Despite their abstract nature, in real life they receive specific content and priority depending on the needs for self-actualization of the individual.

Dominant values ​​are associated not only with difficult life situation but also with existential priorities, vital needs, motives personal growth. According to the classification of A. Maslow, the existential values ​​of an individual, meta-values ​​can be represented in conceptual propositions (see Table 2).

Table 2 - Metavalues

Social work is characterized by the following structural scenarios, where the “person in need” is fully revealed: confessional, social, medical, socio-psychological. In these structural scenarios, traditional, radical, Marxist, interactional approaches to the "person in need" are reflected.

Each scenario is characterized by a certain system of understanding the “person in need”, the phenomenology of processes, basic concepts, a system of description and forms of the subject language.

Table 3 shows the main components of the structural scenario and the paradigm shift of scientific vision.

Table 3 - Components of the structural scenario

The modern step of comprehension of subject-object relations, finally, leads to the construction of global models of structural scenarios. And it is not even necessary to say that a person becomes a "hostage" of environmental disasters, regional conflicts, mass epidemics. Everyone knows that this is the newest type of problem, not previously encountered in the theory and practice of social work.

It has become a tradition for social work to study the problems of the client against the backdrop of public and socio-economic problems. And it doesn't even need to be said that in these variants, the difficulties facing the client go beyond the scope of his existence in the community, being connected with the questions of his existence as a sociobiological form of life. Few people know that here both the problems and the forms of assistance are not a local socio-economic or socio-psychological, but a macro-ecological approach, where subject reflection is built in relation to the life scenario of the individual. Everyone knows that this is why the life scenario becomes the basic concept of social work with such approaches to the theory and practice of assistance and, in the end, changes the mode of subject reflection.

One of the most difficult issues in the theory and practice of social work in this regard is the issue of adapting the subject to new forms, ways of life and social functioning as a result of a “pandemic” action, i.e. impact, after which the state of stress covers a fairly large number of people. The "pandemic" action, the "pandemic" environment, as well as the system of assistance and support in these conditions, have become a new problematic field of theory and practice, as everyone knows, of social work at the turn of the century.

Conclusion

post-nonclassical ethical social

Philosophical values ​​became an integral part of social work in the second half of the 19th century. It must be said that it is during this period that a departure from the practice of voluntary assistants and philanthropic activities based on individual support methods is planned, and a transition to solving these problems as collective ones. It is also possible that the concept of collective responsibility for social. the well-being of society as a whole is finally shifting the emphasis in the activities of volunteers. Note that paternalistic moralism, in which the awareness of poverty was somehow associated with "individual shortcomings of the individual", is replaced by the concepts of civil and political human rights. I would like to emphasize that social reformers are attracted by the difficulties of the consequences of the industrial revolution: urbanization, labor exploitation, working class poverty.

In the middle of the 20th century, approaches to the protection of human rights from various forms of discrimination began to prevail in the practice of social work. And indeed, in this regard, the difficulties considered by social workers in various areas of human life begin to be comprehended not only at the micro and meso levels, but also at the macro level, i.e., on the principles of global solidarity.

Everyone knows that such a context of comprehension required awareness not only of mental and socio-economic actions, but also an understanding of global value structures and actions. It should be noted that this required the substantiation of professional ideas about the real world, about the standards and guidelines of social work, brought to life the philosophy of social work.

The philosophical values ​​of social work in a multicultural space, therefore, act as the values ​​of prof. subcults, when the profession is finally considered at the level of international society. Everyone knows that hence the values ​​of prof. subcultures, after all, are considered at the meta level in the context of global civilizational goals and objectives.

Literature

1. Astapov V., Lebedinskaya O., Shapiro B. Problems of teaching people with disabilities / Social work: theory, technology, education. - 1996. - No. 1. - S. 80-93.

2. Bakshtanovskiy V.I. Applied ethics: idea, foundations, mode of existence / V.I. Bakshtanovsky, Yu.V. Sogomonov // Questions of Philosophy. - 2007. - No. 9.

3. Bible encyclopedia. Book. 1. - M .: Higher school, 1891. - 474 p.

4. Voronin S.V. The theory of "philanthropy". - M.: Higher School, 1981. - 99s.

5. Gadzhiev K.S. World economic crisis: political and cultural dimension // Questions of Philosophy. - 2010. - No. 6.

6. Garpushkin V.E. Social Universalism: A New Look// Socis. - 2010. - No. 9.

7. Huseynov A.A. Reflections on applied ethics // Vedomosti. Issue. 25: Professional ethics / Ed. IN AND. Bakshtanovsky and N.N. Karnaukhov. - Tyumen, 2004.

8. Kozlov A.L. Social work paradigms: theoretical constructs and principles / Social work: theory, technology, education. - 1996. - No. 1. - S. 35-48.

9. Naranjo K. Songs of Enlightenment (Evolution of the Hero in Western Poetry). - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg, 1997. - 371s.

10. Paradigms of Applied Ethics // Vedomosti. Issue. 35, special / ed. IN AND. Bakshtanovsky, N.N. Karnaukhov. - Tyumen, 2009.

11. Podvoisky D.G. Challenges of "fluid modernity": Zygmunt Bauman's answers // Man. - 2010. - No. 1.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Similar Documents

The main aspects of social work as a phenomenon of the modern world, mercy is an expression of its humanistic value. Features and structure of the humanistic concept of social work. Social work as a social and humanistic activity.

term paper, added 06/12/2012


The place of social work in the system of professions in the social sphere. Specific features of social work as a profession. Characteristics of a professional social worker as a subject of social work. Features of the Russian model of social work.

abstract, added 10/08/2014


Features of the interaction of psychosocial and social work in the system of social assistance and support of the population based on a psychodynamic model. Existential and humanistic models of correlation. Communicative-role theory of social work.

test, added 08/27/2011


The humanistic essence of the national model of development, its influence on the content and effectiveness of social work. Formation and improvement of social relations as the most important task of social work. Problems of social management and work.

term paper, added 02/09/2011


"Good" and "evil" as the ethical foundations of human existence. Modern theoretical approaches to understanding the phenomena of "good" and "evil" in various spheres of society and personality. Fundamental ethical foundations of modern social work.

thesis, added 06/17/2014


Problems of formation of professional and ethical qualities of a specialist. Characterization of the value-ethical foundations of social work as an activity. Features of the formation of the appropriate moral and ethical consciousness of social specialists.

term paper, added 06/26/2013


Relationship between theories and models of social work. Social radical, Marxist, psychologically oriented, existential and humanistic models. Analysis of modern social theories. Role, socio-pedagogical and cognitive theory.

test, added 01/17/2009


The purpose of social work, the means to achieve the goal. Characteristics of the stages and specifics of the formation of the system of professional social work in Russia. The history of the formation of social work as a professional activity, the essence of the methods used.

abstract, added 09/12/2011


The concept and stages of social adaptation, its levels and types. Characteristics of gender and age social adaptation. Typology of mechanisms of social adaptation of personality. Specific moments of the technology of social work on the regulation of adaptive processes.

term paper, added 11/12/2014


Sociological, psychological and complex-oriented paradigms and functionalist, interpretive, radical humanist and structuralist models in the theory of social work. Similarities and differences between Western and Russian paradigms.