Deeds of a man: good deeds, heroic deed. What is an act: the essence

2024 Author: Henry Conors | [email protected]. Last modified: 2024-02-12 02:54

A deed is a certain action motivated by the inner world of a person, formed at that moment. Actions can be moral or immoral. They are committed under the influence of a sense of duty, beliefs, upbringing, love, hatred, sympathy. Every society has its heroes. There is also a certain scale by which human actions are evaluated. According to it, you can determine whether this is an act of a hero, which will serve as an example for future generations.

Ancient philosophers thought about the concept of achievement. Reflections on this topic have not escaped modern thinkers. All human life consists of a continuous chain of actions, i.e. actions. It often happens that the behavior and thoughts of a person differ. For example, a child wants only the best for his parents. However, their actions often upset them. We can say with confidence that our tomorrow depends on today's action. In particular, our whole life.

Socrates' search for the meaning of life

Socrates was one of the active seekers of the meaning of this concept. He was trying to figure out what a real heroic deed should be. What is virtue and evil, how a person makes a choice - all this worried the ancient philosopher. He penetrated into the inner world of this or that personality, its essence. I was looking for a higher purpose of actions. In his opinion, they should be motivated by the main virtue - mercy.

At the heart of actions is the goal to learn to distinguish between good and evil. When a person can penetrate the essence of these concepts, he will be able, according to Socrates, to always act courageously. Such a person is sure to perform a heroic deed for the greater good. The philosophical reflections of Socrates were aimed at finding such an incentive, a force that would not need to be recognized. In other words, the philosopher speaks of self-knowledge, when a person will have inner motivations that replace centuries-old traditions.

Sophists against Socrates

The philosophy of Socrates tried to explain the essence of the concept of "act": what is it? The motivating component of his action is the opposite of the position of the sophists, who teach to find out their hidden motives, giving them the status of conscious ones. According to Protagoras, who was a contemporary of Socrates, the meaning of human life as an individual is a clear and successful expression with the ultimate satisfaction of personal desires and needs.

The Sophists believed that every action of a selfish motive must be justified in the eyes of relatives and other people, since they are part ofsociety. Therefore, the environment must be convinced, using sophistic speech construction technologies, that it needs it. That is, a young man who adopted sophistic views learned not only to know himself, but also, having set a certain goal, to achieve it and prove his case under any circumstances.

Socratic Dialogue

Socrates departs from the earthly. He rises higher in the consideration of such a concept as an act. What is it, what is its essence? This is what the thinker wants to understand. He is looking for the meaning of all human existence, starting from the bodily and selfish. Thus, a complex system of techniques is developed, which is called "Socratic dialogue". These methods lead a person along the path of knowing the truth. The philosopher brings the interlocutor to an understanding of the deep meaning of masculinity, goodness, valor, moderation, virtue. Without such qualities, an individual cannot consider himself a man. Virtue is a developed habit of always striving for good, which will form the corresponding good deeds.

Vice and driving force

The opposite of virtue is vice. It shapes the actions of a person, directing them to evil. In order to be established in virtue, a person must acquire knowledge and acquire prudence. Socrates did not deny the presence of pleasure in human life. But he denied their decisive power over him. The basis of bad deeds is ignorance, while moral deeds are based on knowledge. In his research, he analyzedhuman act: what is its driving force, motive, impulse. The thinker comes close to the later formed Christian views. We can say that he deeply penetrated into the human essence of a person, into the concept of the essence of freedom of choice, knowledge, prudence and the origin of vice.

Aristotle's view

Socrates is criticized by Aristotle. He does not deny the importance of knowledge in order for a person to always do good deeds. He says that actions are determined by the influence of passion. Explaining this by the fact that often a person who has knowledge acts badly, since feeling prevails over wisdom. According to Aristotle, the individual has no power over himself. And, accordingly, knowledge does not determine his actions. In order to perform good deeds, a person needs a morally stable position, his strong-willed orientation, some experience gained when he experiences grief and enjoys. It is grief and joy that, according to Aristotle, are the measure of human actions. The guiding force is the will, which is formed by the freedom of choice of a person.

Measure of actions

He introduces the concept of the measure of actions: lack, excess and what is in between. It is by acting according to the patterns of the middle link, the philosopher believes, that a person makes the right choice. An example of such a measure is masculinity, which is between such qualities as reckless courage and cowardice. He also divides actions into arbitrary, when the source lies within the person himself, and involuntary, forced by externalcircumstances. Considering the act, the essence of the concept, the corresponding role in the life of a person and society, we draw some conclusions. We can say that both philosophers are right to a certain extent. They considered the inner man quite deeply, avoiding superficial judgments and being in search of truth.

Kant's view

Kant made a significant contribution to the theory that considers the concept of an act and its motivation. He says that it is necessary to act in such a way that you can say: "Do as I do …". By this, he emphasizes that an act can be considered truly moral when the motivation is free morality, which sounds in the human soul like an alarm. Historians of philosophy believe: human actions, their motives are determined by Kant, from the point of view of rigorism.

For example, considering the situation with a drowning person, Kant argues: if a parent saves his child, this act will not be moral. After all, he is dictated by a feeling of natural love for his own heir. A moral act will be if a person saves a drowning man unknown to him, guided by the principle: "Human life is the highest value." There is one more option. If the enemy was saved, this is a truly moral heroic deed worthy of high recognition. Later, Kant softened these concepts and combined in them such human impulses as love and duty.

Relevance of the concept of an act

The concept of good deeds continues to be discussed today. howoften society recognizes as moral the actions of great people, whose motives were in fact not at all good goals. What today is heroism, courage? Of course, to save a person or animal from death, to feed the hungry, to clothe the needy. A real act of kindness can be called even the simplest action: advising a friend, helping a colleague, calling your parents. Carrying an old woman across the road, giving alms to a poor man, picking up a piece of paper in the street are acts that also fall into this category. As for heroism, it is based on sacrificing one's life for the benefit of others. This is primarily the defense of the Motherland from enemies, the work of firefighters, police, and rescuers. Even an ordinary person can become a hero, if he took a baby out of the fire, neutralized a robber, covered with his chest a passer-by who was aimed at by the muzzle of a machine gun.

According to many psychologists, philosophers and theologians, until the age of seven, a child is not able to fully distinguish between good and evil. Therefore, it is useless to appeal to conscience, due to the fact that the concept for it has very blurred boundaries. However, from the age of seven, this is a fully formed personality, which can already consciously make a choice in one direction or another. The actions of children at this time should be skillfully directed by parents in the right direction.