Good and evil... Eternal philosophical concepts that trouble the minds of people at all times. Arguing about the difference between these concepts, it can be argued that goodness, of course, brings pleasant experiences to the people close to you. Evil, on the contrary, wants to bring suffering. But, as often happens, it is difficult to distinguish good from evil. “How can this be,” another ordinary person will ask. It turns out it can. The fact is that good is often embarrassed to talk about its motives for action, and evil is embarrassed to talk about its own. Good even sometimes disguises itself as a little evil, and evil can do the same. But it trumpets that it is great good! Why is this happening? It’s just that a kind person, as a rule, is modest, and it is a burden for him to listen to gratitude. So he says, having done a good deed, that it didn’t cost him anything at all. Well, what about evil? Oh, this is evil... It loves to accept words of gratitude, even for non-existent benefits.

Indeed, it is difficult to figure out where the light is and where the darkness is, where the real good is and where the evil is. But as long as a person lives, he will strive for good and to tame evil. You just need to learn to understand the true motives of people’s actions and, of course, fight evil.

Russian literature has repeatedly addressed this problem. Valentin Rasputin did not remain indifferent to her either. In the story “French Lessons” we see the state of mind of Lydia Mikhailovna, who really wanted to help her student get rid of constant malnutrition. Her good deed was “disguised”: she played “chika” (that’s the name of the game for money) with her student for money. Yes, this is not ethical, not pedagogical. The school director, having learned about this act of Lydia Mikhailovna, fires her from her job. But the French teacher played with the student and gave in to the boy, because she wanted him to buy food for himself with the money he won, not go hungry and continue to study. This is a truly kind deed.

I would like to recall another work in which the problem of good and evil is raised. This is a novel by M.A. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita". It is here that the author talks about the inseparability of the existence of good and evil on earth. This is a truism. In one of the chapters, Levi Matvey calls Woland evil. To which Woland replies: “What would your good do if evil did not exist?” The writer believes that the real evil in people is that they are by nature weak and cowardly. But evil can still be defeated. To do this, it is necessary to establish the principle of justice in society, that is, exposing meanness, lies and sycophancy. The standard of goodness in the novel is Yeshua Ha-Nozri, who sees only good in all people. During interrogation by Pontius Pilate, he says that he is ready to endure any suffering for faith and goodness, and also about his intention to expose evil in all its manifestations. The hero does not give up his ideas even in the face of death. “There are no evil people in the world, there are only unhappy people,” he tells Pontius Pilate.

Thus, the eternal problem - what is good and what is evil - will always worry the minds of people. The only task is to ensure that the advantage is always on the side of good!

PAGE 12

Federal Agency for Railway Transport

Siberian State Transport University

Department " Philosophy and cultural studies»

THE PROBLEM OF GOOD AND EVIL IN THE MODERN WORLD

Essay

In the discipline "Culturology"

Head Developed

Student gr._D-113

Bystrova A.N. ___________ Leonov P.G.

(signature) (signature)

_______________ ______________

(date of inspection) (date of submission for inspection)

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

The problem of choosing between good and evil is as old as the world, but at the same time it is still relevant today. Without awareness of the essence of good and evil, it is impossible to understand either the essence of our world or the role of each of us in this world. Without this, concepts such as conscience, honor, morality, ethics, spirituality, truth, freedom, decency, holiness lose all meaning.

Good and evil are two moral concepts that accompany a person throughout his life; these are the main, basic concepts of morality.

Good is opposed to evil. There has been a struggle between these categories since the very foundation of the world. Unfortunately, in this struggle, evil is sometimes stronger, because it is more active and requires less effort. Good requires hourly, daily patient labor of the soul, goodness. Good must be strong and active. Kindness is a sign of strength, not weakness. A strong person shows generosity, he is truly kind, but a weak person is kind only in words and inactive in actions.

The eternal questions of the meaning of human life are closely related to the understanding of the meanings of good and evil. It's no secret that these concepts are interpreted in countless different variations and, moreover, are interpreted differently by each individual person.

The purpose of the work will be to highlight the problem of good and evil.

It seems important to us to solve the following problems:

Consider the problem of understanding good and evil;

Identify the problem of evil and good in literature based on the works of E.M. Remark “Time to live, time to die”, B. Vasiliev “And the dawns here are quiet” and A.P. Chekhov's "Lady with a Dog".

The work consists of an introduction, two main parts, a conclusion and a bibliography.

CHAPTER 1. The problem of understanding good and evil

The works of outstanding Russian thinkers are devoted to the problem of destructive tendencies manifesting themselves at the individual and collective level: V.V. Rozanova, I.A. Ilyina, N.A. Berdyaeva, G.P. Fedotova, L.N. Gumilyov and many others.(And you read them all, of course? And if not, what do they have to do with it?)They provide an ideological and philosophical characterization and assessment of the negative, destructive phenomena of the human soul, showing that one of the most important themes of Russian literature from its inception to the present day is the problem of good and evil, life and death. Classics of Russian literature X I X century not only managed to convey the severity of the problem of evil, the tragic existence of man who has lost connections with nature and spiritual roots, but also predicted the destructive trends in the development of civilization. Many of their predictions came true in the past millennium.

Representatives of Russian and foreign literature of the twentieth century have already encountered the negative manifestations of modern civilization: wars, revolutions, terror, environmental disasters. Having different attitudes and assessments of destructive phenomena, they, nevertheless, reflected them in their art, introducing their own, subjective, vision of the world into objective images of reality. M. Gorky, M. Bulgakov, A. Platonov Russian classics
The twentieth century left us with an artistic image of the tragic events in the history of Russia, its people, and individual destinies.(Where, in which books and on what pages exactly did they do this?)Depicting the crisis processes of the collapse of cultural values ​​required writers not only to creatively rethink the artistic heritage of literature X I X century, but also attracting new poetic forms of expression.

Good in the broad sense of the word as good means a value concept that expresses the positive value of something in its relation to a certain standard or this standard itself. Depending on the accepted standard, goodness in the history of philosophy and culture has been interpreted as pleasure, benefit, happiness, generally accepted, appropriate to circumstances, expedient, etc. With the development of moral consciousness and ethics, a more rigorous concept of moral good itself is developed.

Firstly, it is perceived as a special kind of value that does not relate to natural or spontaneous events and phenomena.

Secondly, goodness marks actions that are free and consciously correlated with the highest values, and ultimately with the ideal. Associated with this is the positive normative value content of good: it consists in overcoming isolation, disunity and alienation between people, establishing mutual understanding, moral equality and humanity in relations between them; it characterizes a person’s actions from the point of view of his spiritual exaltation and moral perfection.

Thus, good is connected with the spiritual world of man himself: no matter how the source of good is determined, it is created by man as an individual, i.e. responsibly.

Although good seems to be proportionate to evil, their ontological status can be interpreted differently:

1. Good and evil are the same-order principles of the world, in constant combat.

2. The real absolute world principle is the divine Good as Good, or absolute Being, or God, and evil is the result of erroneous or vicious decisions of a person who is free in his choice. Thus good, being relative in opposition to evil, is absolute in the fulfillment of perfection; evil is always relative. This explains the fact that in a number of philosophical and ethical concepts (for example, Augustine, V.S. Solovyov or Moore) good was considered as the highest and unconditional moral concept.

3. The opposition of good and evil is mediated by something else - God (L.A. Shestovin which book, on which page?), “the highest value” (N.A. Berdyaevin which book, on which page?), which is the absolute beginning of morality; thereby asserting that good is not a final concept. It can be clarified that the concept of good is actually used in a twofold “application”, and then Moore’s difficulties(Who else is this?), associated with the definition of good, can be resolved by taking into account the difference between good as an absolute and simple concept and good as a concept correlated with others in the system of ethical concepts. In clarifying the nature of good, it is useless to look precisely for its existential basis. An explanation of the origin of good cannot serve as its substantiation, therefore the logic of value reasoning itself can be the same for someone who is convinced that basic values ​​are given to a person in revelation, and for someone who believes that values ​​are “earthly” social and anthropological origin.

Already in ancient times, the idea of ​​the irresistible connection between good and evil was deeply understood; it runs through the entire history of philosophy and culture (in particular, fiction) and is concretized in a number of ethical provisions.

Firstly, good and evil are mutually determined and are known in antithetical unity, one through the other.

However, secondly, the formal transfer of the dialectic of good and evil to individual moral practice is fraught with human temptation. “Testing” (even only mentally) evil without a strict, albeit ideal, concept of good can much more likely turn into vice than actual knowledge of good; the experience of evil can be fruitful only as a condition for the awakening of the spiritual power of resistance to evil.

Third, understanding evil is not enough without a willingness to resist it; but opposition to evil in itself does not lead to good.

Fourthly, good and evil are functionally interdependent: good is normatively significant in contrast to evil and is practically affirmed in the rejection of evil; in other words, real good is an act of good, i.e. virtue as the practical and active fulfillment by a person of the moral requirements imputed to him.

CHAPTER 2. The problem of good and evil in creativity
EM. Remarque, B. Vasilyeva, A.P. Chekhov

2.1 The problem of good and evil in the work
EM. Remark “A time to live and a time to die”

E. M. Remarque is one of the most significant German writers of the twentieth century. Dedicated to the burning problems of modern history, the writer’s books carried hatred of militarism and fascism, of a state system that gives rise to murderous massacres, which is criminal and inhuman in its essence.

The novel “A Time to Live and a Time to Die” (1954) about the Second World War, is the writer’s contribution to the discussion about the guilt and tragedy of the German people. In this novel, the author achieved such merciless condemnation as his work had never known before. This is the writer’s attempt to find in the German people those forces that fascism could not break.(Why didn’t you say that when you answered?)

Such is the communist soldier Immermann, such is Dr. Kruse, who dies in a concentration camp, and his daughter Elisabeth, who becomes the wife of soldier Ernst Graeber. In the image of E. Graeber, the writer showed the process of awakening anti-fascist consciousness in a Wehrmacht soldier, his comprehension of the extent to which he “bears responsibility for the crimes of the last ten years.”

An involuntary accomplice in the crimes of fascism, E. Graeber, having killed the Gestapo executioner Steinbrenner, frees the Russian partisans brought to be shot, but he himself dies at the hands of one of them. Such is the harsh judgment and retribution of history.

2.2 The problem of good and evil in the work
B. Vasilyeva “And the dawns here are quiet”

The characters in the story “And the Dawns Here Are Quiet...” find themselves in dramatic situations, their fates are optimistic tragedies(And what does it mean?). Heroes yesterday's schoolchildren(and not schoolgirls?), and now participants in the war. B. Vasiliev, as if testing the characters for strength, puts them in extreme circumstances. The writer believes that in such situations a person’s character is most clearly revealed.

B. Vasiliev brings his hero to the last line, to the choice between life and death. Die with a clear conscience or live, tainting yourself. The heroes could save their lives. But at what cost? You just need to give up your own conscience a little. But B. Vasiliev’s heroes do not recognize such moral compromises. What is needed to save the girls? Abandon Vaskov without help and leave. But each of the girls performs a feat in accordance with their character. The girls were somehow offended by the war. Rita Osyanina's beloved husband was killed. A child was left without a father. In front of Zhenka Komelkova's eyes, the Germans shot her entire family.

Almost no one knows about the exploits of the heroes. What is the feat? In this cruel, inhumanly difficult fight against enemies, remain human. Feat is overcoming oneself. We won the war not only because there were brilliant commanders, but also because there were such unsung heroes as Fedot Vaskov, Rita Osyanina, Zhenya Komelkova, Lisa Brichkina, Sonya Gurvich.

What the heroes of B. Vasiliev's work did - good or evil, killing people, even enemies - this question remains, in the modern concept, unclear. People defend their homeland, but at the same time they kill other people. Of course, it is necessary to repel the enemy, which is what our heroes do. For them there is no problem of good and evil, there are invaders of their native land (evil) and there are its defenders (good). Other questions arise: did specific invaders come to our land of their own free will, do they want to seize it, etc. However, good and evil are intertwined in this story, and there is no clear answer to the question of what is evil and what is good.

2.3 The problem of good and evil in the work
A.P. Chekhov's "Lady with a Dog" th"

The story “The Lady with the Dog” was conceived at a turning point, both for Russia and for the whole world. Year of writing 1889. What was Russia like at that time? A country of pre-revolutionary sentiments, tired of the ideas of “Domostroy” that have been put into practice for centuries, tired of how wrong everything is, how untrue everything is, and how little a person means in himself, and how little his feelings and thoughts mean. In just some 29 years, Russia will explode and inexorably begin to change, but now, in 1889, thanks to A.P. Chekhov, appears before us in one of its most threatening and terrifying guises: Russia is a tyrant state.

However, at that time (by the way, we note that the time of writing the story and the time depicted by the author coincide) few people could see the impending, or rather, closely approaching threat. Life continued as before, for everyday troubles are the best remedy for insight, since behind them you see nothing but themselves. As before, fairly wealthy people go on vacation (you can go to Paris, but if funds do not allow, then to Yalta), husbands cheat on their wives, owners of hotels and inns earn money. On top of everything else, there are more and more so-called “enlightened” women or, as Gurov’s wife said to herself, “thinking” women, whom men treated, at best, condescendingly, seeing in this, firstly, a threat to patriarchy , and secondly, obvious female stupidity. Subsequently it turned out that both were wrong.

The author shows seemingly insignificant, but life situations entailing so much, depicts integral, extremely realistic characters with all their shortcomings and knows how to convey to the reader not only the content, but also the ideas of the story, and also makes us feel confident that true love and loyalty can accomplish a lot.

CONCLUSION

Goodness is the highest moral value. The opposite of good is evil. It is anti-value, i.e. something incompatible with moral behavior. Good and evil are not “equal” principles. Evil is “secondary” in relation to good: it is only the “other side” of good, a deviation from it. It is no coincidence that in Christianity and Islam God (good) is omnipotent, and the devil (evil) is only capable of tempting individual people to violate the commandments of God.

The concepts of good and evil underlie the ethical assessment of human behavior. Considering any human action to be “kind” or “good”, we give it a positive moral assessment, and considering it “evil” or “bad” - a negative one.

In real life there is both good and evil, people do both good and bad deeds. The idea that in the world and in man there is a struggle between the “forces of good” and the “forces of evil” is one of the fundamental ideas that permeate the entire history of culture.

In all the works we have chosen, we see the struggle between good and evil. In the work of E.M. In the remark “A time to live, a time to die,” the author presents a hero who overcomes his evil, who is trying with all his might to bring peace on earth.

For B. Vasiliev, the problem of good and evil turns out to be somewhat hidden: there is an enemy who needs to be defeated, and there is a force that defeats him (even if this force turns out to be weak).

At A.P. Chekhov’s “The Lady with the Dog” makes it very difficult to consider the forces of good and the forces of evil. However, the author examines ambiguous, but real life situations, describes the integral, exclusively realistic characters of the heroes with all their shortcomings and tries to convey to the reader not only the content, but also the ideas of the story, and also makes us feel confident that true love, fidelity can do a lot.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Vasiliev, B. And the dawns here are quiet.../ B. Vasiliev. M.: Eksmo, 2008. 640 p.
2. Karmin, A. Culturology / A. Karmin. M.: Lan, 2009. 928 p.
3. Tereshchenko, M. Such a fragile cover of humanity. Banality of evil, banality of good / M. Tereshchenko; Per. from French And Pigaleva. M.: Russian Political Encyclopedia, 2010. 304 p.
4. Remarque, E.M. Time to live and time to die / E.M. Remarque. M.: AST, 2009. 320 p.
5. Hauser, M. Morality and Reason. How nature created our universal sense of good and evil / M. Hauser; Per. from English: T. Maryutina. M.: Bustard, 2008. 640 p.
6. Chekhov, A.P. Stories and tales / A.P. Chekhov. M.: Children's Library, 2010. 320 p.

The eternal theme for every person, the most relevant in our time - “good and evil” - is very clearly expressed in Gogol’s work “Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka”. We encounter this theme already on the first pages of the story “May Night, or the Drowned Woman” - the most beautiful and poetic. The action in the story takes place in the evening, at dusk, between sleep and reality, on the verge of the real and the fantastic. The nature surrounding the heroes is amazing, the feelings they experience are beautiful and trembling. However, there is something in a beautiful landscape that disturbs

This harmony worries Galya, who feels the presence of evil forces very close by, what is it? A wild evil happened here, an evil from which even the house changed in appearance.

The father, under the influence of the stepmother, kicked his own daughter out of the house and pushed her to commit suicide.

But evil is not only in terrible betrayal. It turns out that Levko has a terrible rival. His own father. A terrible, evil man who, being the Head, pours cold water on people in the cold. Levko cannot get his father’s consent to marry Galya. A miracle comes to his aid: the lady, a drowned woman, promises any reward if Levko helps get rid of the witch.

Pannochka

He turns specifically to Levko for help, since he is kind, responsive to someone else’s misfortune, and with heartfelt emotion he listens to the lady’s sad story.

Levko found the witch. He recognized her because “she had something black inside her, while others had something glowing.” And now, in our time, these expressions are alive among us: “black man”, “black insides”, “black thoughts, deeds”.

When the witch rushes at the girl, evil joy and gloating sparkle on her face. And no matter how evil is disguised, a kind, pure-hearted person is able to feel and recognize it.

The idea of ​​the devil as the personified embodiment of the evil principle has worried the minds of people since time immemorial. It is reflected in many spheres of human existence: in art, religion, superstitions and so on. This topic also has a long tradition in literature. The image of Lucifer - the fallen but unrepentant angel of light - as if by magical force, attracts the uncontrollable imagination of the writer, each time opening up from a new side.

For example, Lermontov's Demon is a humane and sublime image. It evokes not horror and disgust, but sympathy and regret.

Lermontov's demon is the embodiment of absolute loneliness. However, he did not achieve it himself, unlimited freedom. On the contrary, he is lonely against his will, he suffers from his heavy, curse-like loneliness and is filled with longing for spiritual intimacy. Cast down from heaven and declared an enemy of the celestials, he could not become part of the underworld and did not become close to people.

The demon is, as it were, on the verge of different worlds, and therefore Tamara represents him as follows:

It was not a celestial angel,

Her divine guardian:

Wreath of rainbow rays

Didn't decorate it with curls.

It was not a terrible spirit from hell,

Vicious Martyr - oh no!

It looked like a clear evening:

Neither day nor night - neither darkness nor light!

The demon yearns for harmony, but it is inaccessible to him, and not because in his soul pride fights with the desire for reconciliation. In Lermontov’s understanding, harmony is generally inaccessible: for the world is initially split and exists in the form of incompatible opposites. Even an ancient myth testifies to this: during the creation of the world, light and darkness, heaven and earth, firmament and water, angels and demons were separated and opposed.

The demon suffers from contradictions that tear apart everything around him. They are reflected in his soul. He is omnipotent - almost like God, but both of them are unable to reconcile good and evil, love and hate, light and darkness, lies and truth.

The demon yearns for justice, but it is also inaccessible to him: a world based on the struggle of opposites cannot be fair. An assertion of justice for one side always turns out to be injustice from the point of view of the other side. In this disunity, which gives rise to bitterness and all other evil, lies a universal tragedy. Such a Demon is not like his literary predecessors in Byron, Pushkin, Milton, Goethe.

The image of Mephistopheles in Goethe's Faust is complex and multifaceted. This is the image of Satan from folk legend. Goethe gave him the features of a concrete, living individuality. Before us is a cynic and a skeptic, a witty creature, but devoid of everything sacred, despising man and humanity. Acting as a specific personality, Mephistopheles is at the same time a complex symbol. Socially, Mephistopheles acts as the embodiment of an evil, misanthropic principle.

However, Mephistopheles is not only a social symbol, but also a philosophical one. Mephistopheles is the embodiment of negation. He says about himself: “I deny everything - And this is my essence.”

The image of Mephistopheles must be considered in inextricable unity with Faust. If Faust is the embodiment of the creative forces of humanity, then Mephistopheles represents the symbol of that destructive force, that destructive criticism that forces us to move forward, to learn and to create.

In the “Unified Physical Theory” by Sergei Belykh (Miass, 1992) you can find words about this: “Good is static, peace is a potential component of energy.

Evil is movement, dynamics is the kinetic component of energy.”

This is exactly how the Lord defines the function of Mephistopheles in the “Prologue in Heaven”:

Man is weak: submitting to his lot,

He is glad to seek peace, because

I will give him a restless companion:

Like a demon, teasing him, let him excite him to action.

Commenting on “Prologue in Heaven,” N. G. Chernyshevsky wrote in his notes to “Faust”: “Denials lead only to new, purer and truer convictions... Reason is not hostile to denial and skepticism; on the contrary, skepticism serves its purposes...”

Thus, denial is only one of the turns of progressive development.

Denial, “evil,” of which Mephistopheles is the embodiment, becomes the impetus for the movement aimed

Against evil.

I am part of that force

that always wants evil

and always does good -

This is what Mephistopheles said about himself. And M. A. Bulgakov took these words as the epigraph to his novel “The Master and Margarita.”

With the novel “The Master and Margarita” Bulgakov tells the reader about the meaning and timeless values.

In explaining the incredible cruelty of the procurator Pilate towards Yeshua, Bulgakov follows Gogol.

The dispute between the Roman procurator of Judea and the wandering philosopher over whether there will be a kingdom of truth or not sometimes reveals, if not equality, then some kind of intellectual similarity between the executioner and the victim. For minutes it even seems that the first one will not commit a crime against a defenseless stubborn person.

The image of Pilate demonstrates the struggle of the individual. The principles in a person collide: personal will and the power of circumstances.

Yeshua spiritually overcame the latter. Pilate was not given this. Yeshua is executed.

But the author wanted to proclaim: the victory of evil over good cannot be the end result of social and moral confrontation. This, according to Bulgakov, is not accepted by human nature itself, and the entire course of civilization should not allow it.

The author is convinced that the prerequisites for such faith were the actions of the Roman procurator himself. After all, it was he, who doomed the unfortunate criminal to death, who ordered the secret killing of Judas, who betrayed Yeshua:

The human is hidden in the satanic and retribution for betrayal is carried out, albeit cowardly.

Now, many centuries later, the carriers of devilish evil, in order to finally atone for their guilt before the eternal wanderers and spiritual ascetics, who always went to the stake for their ideas, are obliged to become creators of good, arbiters of justice.

The evil that has spread in the world has acquired such a scale, Bulgakov wants to say, that Satan himself is forced to intervene, because there is no other force capable of doing this. This is how Woland appears in The Master and Margarita. It is Woland who the author will give the right to execute or pardon. Everything bad in that Moscow bustle of officials and elementary inhabitants suffers the crushing blows of Woland.

Woland is evil, a shadow. Yeshua is good, light. The novel constantly contrasts light and shadow. Even the sun and moon become almost participants in the events..

The sun - a symbol of life, joy, true light - accompanies Yeshua, and the moon - a fantastic world of shadows, mysteries and ghostliness - the kingdom of Woland and his guests.

Bulgakov depicts the power of light through the power of darkness. And vice versa, Woland, as the prince of darkness, can feel his power only when there is at least some light that needs to be fought, although he himself admits that light, as a symbol of good, has one undeniable advantage - creative power.

Bulgakov depicts light through Yeshua. Yeshua Bulgakov is not exactly the Jesus of the Gospels. He's just a wandering philosopher, a little strange and not at all evil.

“Behold the man!” Not God, not in a divine aura, but just a man, but what a man!

All his true divine dignity is within him, in his soul.

Levi Matthew does not see a single flaw in Yeshua, therefore he is not even able to retell the simple words of his Teacher. His misfortune is that he never understood that light cannot be described.

Levi Matvey cannot object to Woland’s words: “Would you be so kind as to think about the question: what would your good do if evil did not exist, and what would the earth look like if all the shadows disappeared from it? After all, shadows come from objects and people? Don't you want to rip off every living thing because of your fantasy of enjoying the full light? You are stupid". Yeshua would answer something like this: “For there to be shadows, sir, not only objects and people are needed. First of all, we need a light that shines in the darkness.”

And here I remember Prishvin’s story “Light and Shadow” (the writer’s diary): “If flowers and trees rise into the light everywhere, then from the same biological point of view a person especially strives upward, towards the light, and, of course, he is his very movement upward, towards the light calls progress...

Light comes from the Sun, shadow from the earth, and life generated by light and shadow takes place in the usual struggle of these two principles: light and shadow.

The sun, rising and leaving, approaching and moving away, determines our order on earth: our place and our time. And all the beauty on earth, the distribution of light and shadow, lines and colors, sound, the outlines of the sky and horizon - everything, everything is phenomena of this order. But: where are the boundaries of the solar order and the human?

Forests, fields, water with its vapors and all life on earth strives for light, but if there were no shadows, there could be no life on earth, everything would burn in the sunlight... We live thanks to the shadows, but we do not thank the shadows and We call everything bad the shadow side of life, and everything that is best: intelligence, goodness, beauty - the light side.

Everything strives for light, but if there was light for everyone at once, there would be no life: clouds cover the sunlight with their shadow, so people cover each other with their shadow, it is from ourselves, we protect our children with it from the overwhelming light.

Whether we are warm or cold - what does the Sun care about us, it roasts and roasts, regardless of life, but life is structured in such a way that all living things are drawn to the light.

If there were no light, everything would plunge into night."

The necessity of evil in the world is equal to the physical law of light and shadows, but just as the source of light is outside, and shadows are cast only by opaque objects, so evil exists in the world only due to the presence in it of “opaque souls” that do not allow the divine to pass through them. light. Good and evil did not exist in the primordial world; good and evil appeared later. What we call good and evil are the result of imperfect consciousness. Evil began to appear in the world when a heart appeared that was capable of feeling evil, that which is evil in essence. At the moment when the heart first admits that evil exists, evil is born in this heart, and two principles begin to fight in it.

“A person is given the task of searching for the true measure within himself, therefore, among “yes” and “no,” among “good” and “evil,” he fights with the shadow. Evil inclination - evil thoughts, deceitful deeds, unrighteous words, hunting, war. Just as for an individual person the absence of spiritual peace is a source of anxiety and many misfortunes, so for an entire people the absence of virtues leads to famine, wars, world plagues, fires and all kinds of disasters. With his thoughts, feelings and actions, a person transforms the world around him, making it hell or heaven, depending on his inner level” (Yu. Terapiano. “Mazdeism”).

In addition to the struggle between light and shadow, the novel “The Master and Margarita” examines another important problem - the problem of man and faith.

The word “faith” is heard repeatedly in the novel, not only in the usual context of Pontius Pilate’s question to Yeshua Ha-Nozri: “...do you believe in any gods?” “There is only one God,” answered Yeshua, “in Him I believe,” but also in a much broader sense: “Everyone will be given according to his faith.”

In essence, faith in the latter, broader sense, as the greatest moral value, ideal, meaning of life, is one of the touchstones on which the moral level of any of the characters is tested. Belief in the omnipotence of money, the desire to grab more by any means - this is a kind of credo of Bosogo, the bartender. Faith in love is the meaning of Margarita's life. Belief in kindness is the main defining quality of Yeshua.

It’s scary to lose faith, just as the Master loses faith in his talent, in his brilliantly guessed novel. It’s scary not to have this faith, which is typical, for example, of Ivan Bezdomny.

For belief in imaginary values, for inability and spiritual laziness to find one’s faith, a person is punished, just as in Bulgakov’s novel the characters are punished by illness, fear, and pangs of conscience.

But it’s completely scary when a person consciously devotes himself to serving imaginary values, realizing their falsity.

In the history of Russian literature, A.P. Chekhov has a firmly established reputation as a writer, if not completely atheistically inclined, then at least indifferent to issues of faith. It's a delusion. He could not be indifferent to religious truth. Brought up in strict religious rules, Chekhov in his youth tried to gain freedom and independence from what had previously been despotically imposed on him. He also knew, like many, doubts, and those statements of his that expressed these doubts were later absolutized by those who wrote about him. Any, even not quite specific, statement was interpreted in a very specific sense. With Chekhov it was all the more simple to do this because he expressed his doubts clearly, but was in no hurry to expose the results of his thoughts and intense spiritual search to human judgment.

Bulgakov was the first to point out the global significance of ideas" and the writer's artistic thinking: "In terms of the strength of his religious quest, Chekhov leaves even Tolstoy behind him, approaching Dostoevsky, who has no equal here."

Chekhov is unique in his work in that he searched for truth, God, the soul, the meaning of life, exploring not sublime manifestations of the human spirit, but moral weaknesses, downfalls, powerlessness of the individual, that is, he set himself complex artistic tasks. “Chekhov was close to the cornerstone idea of ​​Christian morality, which is the true ethical foundation of all democracy, “that every living soul, every human existence represents an independent, unchangeable, absolute value, which cannot and should not be considered as a means, but which has the right to the alms of human attention."

But such a position, such a formulation of the question requires extreme religious tension from a person, because it is fraught with a danger that is tragic for the spirit - the danger of falling into the hopelessness of pessimistic disappointment in many life values.

Only faith, true faith, which is subjected to a serious test in Chekhov’s formulation of the “riddle of man,” can save a person from hopelessness and despondency - but otherwise the truth of faith itself cannot be discovered. The author forces the reader to approach the edge beyond which boundless pessimism reigns, arrogance is powerful “in the decaying lowlands and swamps of the human spirit.” In his short work “The Head Gardener's Tale,” Chekhov argues that the spiritual level at which faith is affirmed is invariably higher than the level of rational, logical arguments at which unbelief resides.

Let's remember the content of the story. In a certain town there lived a righteous doctor who devoted his life completely to serving people. One day he was. found murdered, and the evidence indisputably exposed the scoundrel “known for his depraved life”, who, however, denied all charges, although he could not provide convincing evidence of his innocence. And at the trial, when the chief judge was ready to announce the death sentence, he unexpectedly shouted to everyone and to himself: “No! If I judge incorrectly, then may God punish me, but I swear it’s not his fault! I cannot imagine that there could be a person who would dare to kill our friend, the doctor! Man is not capable of falling so deep! “Yes, there is no such person,” the other judges agreed. - No! - the crowd responded. - Let him go!

The trial of a murderer is an exam not only for the residents of the town, but also for the reader: what will they believe - the “facts” or the person who denies these facts?

Life often requires us to make a similar choice, and sometimes our fate and the fate of other people depend on such a choice.

In this choice there is always a test: will a person maintain faith in people, and therefore in himself and in the meaning of his life.

Preservation of faith is affirmed by Chekhov as the highest value in comparison with the desire for revenge. In the story, the town's residents chose to believe in people. And God, for such faith in man, forgave the sins of all the inhabitants of the town. He rejoices when they believe that man is His image and likeness, and grieves when human dignity is forgotten and people are judged worse than dogs.

It is easy to notice that the story does not deny the existence of God at all. In Chekhov, faith in man becomes a manifestation of faith in God. “Judge for yourselves, gentlemen: if judges and juries believe in a person more than in evidence, material evidence and speeches, then isn’t this faith in a person in itself above all everyday considerations? Believing in God is not difficult. The inquisitors, Biron, and Arakcheev believed in him. No, you have to believe in the person! This faith is available only to those few who understand and feel Christ.” Chekhov reminds us of the inextricable unity of Christ’s commandment: love for God and man. As was said earlier, Dostoevsky has no equal in the power of religious quest.

Dostoevsky's way to achieve true happiness is to join the universal feeling of love and equality. Here his views converge with Christian teaching. But Dostoevsky’s religiosity went far beyond the scope of church dogma. The Christian ideal of the writer was the embodiment of the dream of freedom and harmony of human relations. And when Dostoevsky said: “Humble yourselves, proud man!” - he did not mean submission as such, but the need for refusal

everyone from the selfish temptations of the individual, cruelty and aggressiveness.

The work that brought the writer worldwide fame, in which Dostoevsky calls for overcoming selfishness, for humility, for Christian love for one’s neighbor, for purifying suffering, is the novel “Crime and Punishment.”

Dostoevsky believes that only through suffering can humanity be saved from defilement and get out of a moral impasse, only this path can lead it to happiness.

The focus of many researchers studying Crime and Punishment is the question of the motives for Raskolnikov’s crime. What prompted Raskolnikov to commit this crime? He sees how ugly St. Petersburg is with its streets, how ugly the always drunk people are, how ugly the old woman pawnbroker is. All this disgrace repels the smart and handsome Raskolnikov and evokes in his soul “a feeling of deepest disgust and malicious contempt.” From these feelings the “ugly dream” is born. Here Dostoevsky with extraordinary power shows the duality of the human soul, shows how in the human soul there is a struggle between good and evil, love and hate, high and low, faith and unbelief.

The call to “Humble yourself, proud man!” couldn't be more suitable for Katerina Ivanovna. By pushing Sonya onto the street, she actually acts according to Raskolnikov’s theory. She, like Raskolnikov, rebels not only against people, but also against God. Only with pity and compassion could Katerina Ivanovna save Marmeladov, and then he would save her and the children.

Unlike Katerina Ivanovna and Raskolnikov, Sonya has no pride at all, but only meekness and humility. Sonya suffered a lot. “Suffering... is a great thing. There is an idea in suffering,” says Porfiry Petrovich. The idea of ​​purifying suffering is persistently instilled in Raskolnikov by Sonya Marmeladova, who herself meekly bears her cross. “Accepting suffering and redeeming yourself through it, that’s what you need,” she says.

In the finale, Raskolnikov throws himself at Sonya’s feet: the man has come to terms with himself, throwing away selfish daring and passions. Dostoevsky says that Raskolnikov is expected to undergo a “gradual rebirth,” a return to people, to life. And Sonya’s faith helped Raskolnikov. Sonya did not become embittered, did not become bitter under the blows of an unfair fate. She maintained her faith in God, in happiness, love for people, helping others.

The question of God, man and faith is even more touched upon in Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov. In “The Brothers Karamazov” the writer sums up his many years of searching, thinking about man, the fate of his Motherland and all humanity.

Dostoevsky finds truth and consolation in religion. Christ for him is the highest criterion of morality.

Mitya Karamazov was innocent of the murder of his father, despite all the obvious facts and irrefutable evidence. But here the judges, unlike Chekhov’s, preferred to believe the facts. Their lack of faith in the person forced the judges to find Mitya guilty.

The central question of the novel is the question of the degeneration of the individual, cut off from the people and work, trampling on the principles of philanthropy, goodness, and conscience.

For Dostoevsky, moral criteria and laws of conscience are the basis of human behavior. The loss of moral principles or oblivion of conscience is the highest misfortune, it entails the dehumanization of a person, it dries up the individual human personality, it leads to chaos and destruction of the life of society. If there is no criterion of good and evil, then everything is permitted, as Ivan Karamazov says. Ivan Karamazov subjects faith to repeated doubts and tests, that Christian faith, faith not just in some super-powerful being, but also the spiritual confidence that everything done by the Creator is the highest truth and justice and is done only for the good of man. “The Lord is righteous, my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him” (Ps. 91: 16). He is the rock: his works are perfect, and all his ways are righteous. God is faithful and there is no untruth in him. He is righteous and true...

Many people have broken down on the question: “How can God exist if there is so much injustice and untruth in the world?” How many people come to the logical conclusion: “If so, then either there is no God, or He is not omnipotent.” It was along this well-worn track that the “rebellious” mind of Ivan Karamazov moved.

His rebellion comes down to the denial of the harmony of God's world, for he denies the Creator justice, showing his unbelief in this way: “I am convinced that suffering will heal and smooth out, that all the offensive comedy of human contradictions will disappear, like a pathetic mirage, like a vile invention of the weak and small.” , like an atom of the human Euclidean mind, that, finally, in the world finale, at the moment of eternal harmony, something so precious will happen and appear that it will be enough for all hearts, to drown all indignations, to atone for all the atrocities of people, all the blood they have shed, enough so that it is not only possible to forgive, but also to justify everything that happened to people - let it all be and appear, but I don’t accept it and don’t want to accept it! »

Good and evil in Russian literature

Good and evil, as we know, exist only in symbiosis. In the modern world, good and evil have practically no clear boundaries. All this has been repeatedly proven by many writers and philosophers.

Good and evil relate to philosophical, “eternal” topics. Good is a fairly broad concept, including both the qualities of an object (kind, good, gentle, capable of love, etc.) and manifestations of qualitative individual characteristics (merciful, kind-hearted, sympathetic).

Note 1

Unlike good, evil is a relative concept. From a philosophical point of view, evil is the absence of good and its manifestations; “evil” itself is an emptiness that arises where there is no kindness, justice, or sympathy. Any absence of something is inevitably filled with its opposite, one such example is evil.

What are “evil” and “good” in Russian literature? What are their manifestations and distinctive characteristics? To understand this issue, let’s analyze several works of Russian classics:

• First, let's look at the theme of good and evil in Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky's work "Crime and Punishment." Each of the main characters in this work contains both good and evil. Evil is presented in the characters as a spiritual and moral failure, with which they struggle throughout the novel. Thus, evil can manifest itself not only as obvious cruelty, thirst for blood, revenge, and so on, but also as a complex with good, which in a particular hero can overcome this evil.
• Secondly, goodness can be presented not only as mercy, but also as sympathy. This is especially true in military works.
• Thirdly, evil can be presented as malice or anger, hatred. The exception is anger that motivates a person or can inspire creativity. An example of this is the work of Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy “War and Peace”.

Thus, we found out that in various works good and evil can be presented not only as their obvious manifestations, but also as their symbioses. Topics related to good and evil are always relevant, despite the time, because they belong to the rank of “eternal” topics and problems.

Ideas about good and evil may also differ among different characters. The hero of each work carries his own ideology, he has his own concepts of good and evil, morality and ethics, cynicism and mercy.

Thus, we can come to the conclusion that good and evil are quite subjective concepts that, in their essence, are religious and philosophical. Good and evil can be presented differently in different works. Also, this idea may depend on the author’s concept of good and evil. Characters in one work can also contain different ideas, and mixed concepts about what is good and where evil lies.

The meaning of good and evil in Russian literature

We have figured out what good and evil are and what their characteristic features are. What significance does such a religious and philosophical theme as the theme of good and evil have in Russian literature? Let's start with the fact that almost all works contain the theme of good and evil. What significance does this topic have in Russian literature? Naturally, big.

Firstly, such works raise not only the theme of good or evil, but also other important philosophical problems arising from these themes. Thus, the whole world can be considered as a collection of good and evil deeds in various proportions, which implies the importance and significance of such topics.

Secondly, such works are timeless, always relevant for different generations, since in them one can find answers to many questions of interest from a religious, philosophical and social point of view.

Thirdly, these works glorify the best qualities of the human soul: kindness, honor, friendliness, love, tenderness, sympathy, etc. They also reflect the most noble qualities that contribute to a high moral and moral perception of the work. Thus, works containing the theme of good and evil are the most common and carry deep moral overtones.

Fourthly, often works containing the theme of evil and cruelty are satirical or ironic. They ridicule the vices of man and society, creating a separate atmosphere for the work.

Fifthly, they are of enormous importance for all literature as a whole, often determining the direction and development of various literary movements and genres. Such works “set the tone” for all literature and are the founders of certain trends and genres.

Note 2

So, we found out that works of Russian literature with “eternal” themes of good and evil carry deep moral overtones, glorifying the best qualities of the human soul and ridiculing and denouncing the worst.

Thus, we can come to the conclusion that works of Russian literature containing themes of “good” and “evil” are “eternal” and do not lose their relevance, and are also of great importance in Russian literature as a whole.

Thanks to good and evil, Russian literature stood out even more among others, since the above-mentioned themes in it were, in part, of a social nature. All this, of course, played a huge role in the formation of Russian literature as a phenomenon, as well as determining the direction of its further development.

Thus, from all of the above we can conclude that Russian literature owes a lot to this topic; that good and evil had a significant influence on the formation of its styles and genres.