Abstract

I think we will agree that there are questions that it is not always preferable to put point-blank. Among them we may class that of whether ethics belongs to the category of philosophical knowledge. We know that the custom of regarding ethics as knowledge exclusively philosophical in nature persists to this day. Such a notion, with origins in the past, expresses, in our view, the dominance of spontaneous, uncontrollable factors in the real morality of society. In Hegel's expression, ethical theory usually came too late: all that was left for it to do was to interpret various changes that had taken place in moral attitudes, shifts in the world of moral reflection and moral feeling. But sometimes it entered the picture entirely too early. On the one hand, this means that ethical theory has been insufficiently oriented toward practice, limiting itself to the rationalization of spontaneously established views and preferences of moral consciousness that we were incapable of abandoning. On the other hand, it testifies that the moral regulation of people's behavior was to only a very small degree subject to the need to be equipped with theory, inasmuch as practice itself was strongly constrained within the narrow limits of the processes of life . Ethical theory, for the most part, provided the morality actually being practiced with various philosophical illusions, in the form of compensatory and adaptive viewpoints, and, along with this, offered certain regulatory notions in the area of socialization to morality