The problem of moral choice (based on the works of the war period)
How it was! Coincidentally-
War, trouble, dream and youth!
And it all sunk into me
And only then I woke up in me!
(David Samoilov)
The world of literature is a complex, wonderful world, and at the same time, very contradictory. Especially at the turn of the century, where the newly pouring in, the new is faced with what sometimes sees or becomes exemplary, classic. Or one formation is replaced by another: views, ideology, sometimes even morality change, foundations are crumbling (which happened at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries). Everything changes. And today, on the threshold of the 21st century, we feel it ourselves. Only one thing remains unchanged: memory. We should be grateful to those writers who left behind a once recognized and sometimes unrecognized work. These works make us think about the meaning of life, return to that time, look at it through the eyes of writers of different currents, compare conflicting points of view. These works - living memory about those artists who did not remain ordinary contemplators of what was happening. “As much memory in a person, as much person in him,” writes V. Rasputin. And may our grateful memory be our caring attitude to their creations.
We have survived a terrible war, perhaps the most terrible and difficult in terms of its victims and destruction in the history of mankind. The war, which brought behind it millions of innocent lives of mothers and children who tried to somehow resist this wedge of fascism, which goes deeper and deeper into the consciousness of every person on the planet. But after more than half a century, we are beginning to forget the horror and the fear that our fathers and grandfathers experienced while defending the Motherland. We are no longer surprised by the slightly disguised swastika of Hitler's Nazism. It is strange why the country and the people, which stopped fascism, it would seem once and for all, now get people like Ilyukhin and Barkashov. Why, hiding behind the holy ideals of the unity and well-being of mother Russia, are they at the same time walking around with Nazi swastikas on their sleeves and images of Hitler on their chest.
And again, Russia is faced with a choice - a choice so complex and ambiguous that it makes us think about the meaning of worldly life and the purpose of our existence on this planet.
In this work, I tried, as they say, to delve into the very essence of these two words - choice and morality. What do they mean for each of us and how we will behave in a situation pushing us to an immoral crime, pushing us to commit a crime against ourselves, against the established opinion about the purity of the human soul and about morality, against the laws of God.
The choice is nothing more than a variant of the further path of human development. The only difference is that the choice differs from fortune that the choice is a deliberate, conscious and thoughtful human behavior, directed or better to say proceeding from human needs and the main sense of self-preservation.
What are good and beautiful, in my opinion, writers of the war period, if only because they are a mirror of the human soul. They, as it were, approaching the person, turn at a certain angle, thereby showing the person's soul from all sides. Vyacheslav Kondratyev, in my opinion, is no exception.
The stories and stories of Kondratyev take us to Far East (heroes served as an urgent in the army, the war caught them there), and in the wary - harsh, but calm Moscow 1942. But in the center of Kondratyev's artistic universe, that Ovsyannikovskoe field - in craters from mines, shells and bombs, with uncleaned corpses, with helmets lying around, with a tank knocked out in one of the first battles.
Ovsyannikovskoe field is not remarkable in any way. The field is like a field. But for the heroes of Kondratyev, all the main things in their life take place here, and many are not destined to cross it, they will remain here forever. And those who are lucky, who will return from here alive, will remember it forever in all the details. - every hollow, every hillock, every path. For those who are fighting here, even the smallest is full of considerable importance: huts, and small trenches, and the last pinch of terry, and felt boots that cannot be dried in any way, and a half-pot of liquid millet porridge a day for two. All this made up the life of a soldier at the forefront, that's what it was made of, what it was filled with. Even death was commonplace here, although the hope did not fade away that it was unlikely to get out of here alive and not crippled.
Now, from a distance of peacetime, it may seem that some of Kondratyev's details are not so essential - you can do without them: the date that marks the pack of concentrate, cakes made of rotten, sour potatoes. But this is all true, it was so. Is it possible, turning away from dirt, blood, suffering, to appreciate the courage of a soldier, to really understand what the war cost the people? It is here that the hero's moral choice begins - between spoiled food, between corpses, between fear. A piece of war-torn land, a handful of people - the most common, but at the same time, in their own way, isolated on the entire planet. These people were able to withstand, they were able to carry through the whole war a human being and a human soul, which had never been tainted in this mess of a dirty war. In a small space, Kondratyev fully depicted the life of the people. In the small world of the Ovsyannikovsky field, the essential features and laws of the big world are revealed, the fate of the people at the time of great historical upheavals appears. In the small, he invariably shows through the big. The same date on a pack of concentrate, indicating that it was not from stock, but immediately, without delay or delay, got to the front, without further ado indicates the extreme limit of the tension of the forces of the whole country.
Frontline life - a reality of a special kind: meetings here are fleeting - at any moment, an order or a bullet could part for a long time, often forever. But under fire in a few days and hours, and sometimes in just one act, the character of a person manifested itself with such an exhaustive completeness, with such utmost clarity and certainty that sometimes, under normal conditions, it is unattainable even with many years of friendly relations.
Imagine that the war had spared both Sasha and that badly wounded soldier from the “dads” whom the hero, himself wounded, bandaged and to whom, having reached the sanitary platoon, he led the orderlies. Would Sashka remember this incident? Most likely, not, for him there is nothing special about him, he did what he took for granted, without giving it any meaning. But that wounded soldier, whom Sasha saved his life, will probably never forget him. What if he doesn't know anything about Sasha, not even his name. The act itself revealed to him the most important thing in Sasha. And if their acquaintance had continued, it would not have added so much to what he learned about Sasha in those few minutes when a shell fragment knocked him down, and he lay in the grove, bleeding. And no event can characterize a person's morality - than this one. And Sasha gave preference to the right choice - the choice of human conscience and human mercy.
They often say, referring to the fate of a person, - river of life. At the front, its course became catastrophically rapid, it dragged a person with it imperiously and carries him from one bloody whirlpool to another. How little he had left for free choice! But when he chooses, he puts his own life or the lives of his subordinates at stake every time. The price of choice here is always life, although usually you have to choose things that seem to be everyday - position with a wider view, cover on the battlefield.
Kondratyev tries to convey this unstoppable movement of the stream of life that subjugates man; sometimes the hero comes to the fore - Sashka. And although he tries to use all the opportunities that arise for choice, he does not miss situations, the outcome of which may depend on his ingenuity, endurance, he is - still at the mercy of this indomitable stream of military reality - while he is alive and well, he will go on the attack again, press himself into the ground under fire, eat something, sleep wherever he has to ...
The story "Sashka" was immediately noticed and appreciated. Readers and critics, showing a rare unanimity this time, have identified her as one of the greatest successes of our military literature... This story, which formed the name of Vyacheslav Kondratyev, and now reminds us of the horrors of that war.
But Kondratyev was not alone, the problems of moral choice fell on the shoulders of other writers of that time. Yuri Bondarev wrote a lot about the war, "Hot Snow" occupies a special place, opening up new approaches to solving the moral and psychological problems posed in his first stories - "The battalions ask for fire" and "The last volleys." These three books about the war are holistic and the developing world, which reached the fullest and most imaginative power in Hot Snow. ”The first stories, independent in all respects, were at the same time a kind of preparation for a novel, perhaps not yet conceived, but living in the depths of the writer's memory.
The events of the novel "Hot Snow" unfold near Stalingrad, south of the blocked soviet troops 6th Army of General Paulus, in the cold December 1942, when one of our armies withstood a blow in the Volga steppe tank divisions Field Marshal Manstein, who sought to break through the corridor to Paulus's army and withdraw it from the encirclement. The outcome of the battle on the Volga and maybe even the timing of the end of the war itself largely depended on the success or failure of this operation. The duration of the novel is limited to only a few days, during which the heroes of Yuri Bondarev selflessly defend a tiny patch of land from German tanks. Thus showing the top of human heroism and the boundlessness of Russian patriotism.
In "Hot Snow" the image of the people who have embarked on a war appears before us in a plenitude of expression unprecedented before in Yuri Bondarev, in the richness and variety of characters, and at the same time in integrity. This image is not limited to the figures of young lieutenants - commanders of artillery platoons, nor to the colorful figures of those who are traditionally considered to be people from the people, such as the slightly cowardly Chibisov, the calm and experienced gunner Yevstigneev, or the straightforward and rough riding Rubin; nor senior officers, such as the division commander, Colonel Deev, or the army commander, General Bessonov. Only collectively understood and accepted emotionally as something single, with all the difference in ranks and titles, they constitute the image of a fighting people. The strength and novelty of the novel lies in the fact that this unity was achieved, as it were, by itself, captured without any special efforts by the author - by living, moving life. The image of the people, as the result of the entire book, perhaps most of all nourishes the epic, novel beginning of the story.
The death of heroes on the eve of victory, the criminal inevitability of death contains a high tragedy and evokes a protest against the cruelty of the war and the forces that unleashed it. The heroes of "Hot Snow" die - the medical instructor of the battery Zoya Elagina, the shy sled Sergunenkov, a member of the Military Council Vesnin, Kasymov and many others are dying ... And the war is to blame for all these deaths. Let the heartlessness of Lieutenant Drozdovsky be to blame for the death of Sergunenkov, let the blame for the death of Zoya fall partly on him, but no matter how great Drozdovsky's guilt is, they are primarily victims of the war. A war that only by its very essence kills everything moral, peaceful and main task for any person in this war to break down, not to succumb to this horror and chaos of destruction, no matter how difficult it is.
The novel expresses the understanding of death - as a violation of the highest justice and harmony. Let us recall how Kuznetsov looks at the murdered Kasymov: “now there was a shell box under Kasymov's head, and his youthful, beardless face, recently alive, swarthy, which had become death-white, thinned by the eerie beauty of death, was staring in amazement with wet cherry half-open eyes at his chest , on the torn to shreds, excised quilted jacket, as if after death did not comprehend how it killed him and why he could not get up to the sight. ”In this blind squint, Kasymov had a quiet curiosity about his life not lived on this earth and at the same time the quiet mystery of death, into which the red-hot pain of the shards knocked him over as he tried to rise to the sight. "
Probably the most mysterious of the world of human relations in the novel is the love that arises between Kuznetsov and Zoya. War, its cruelty and blood, its timing, overturning the usual ideas about time - it was she who contributed to such a rapid development of this love. After all, this feeling developed in those short periods of march and battle, when there is no time for reflection and analysis of your feelings. And it all begins with Kuznetsov's quiet, incomprehensible jealousy of the relationship between Zoya and Drozdovsky. And soon - so little time passes - Kuznetsov is already bitterly mourning the deceased Zoya, and it was from these lines that the title of the novel was taken, when Kuznetsov wiped his face wet with tears, "the snow on the sleeve of the quilted jacket was hot from his tears."
Having been deceived at first in Lieutenant Drozdovsky, then the best cadet, Zoya throughout the entire novel reveals to us as a moral person, wholehearted, ready for self-sacrifice, capable of embracing with her heart the pain and suffering of many. Zoe's personality is recognized in a tense, as if electrified space, which almost inevitably appears in the trench with the appearance
women. She goes through many trials, as it were, from annoying interest to rude rejection. But her kindness, her patience and compassion are enough for everyone, she is truly a sister to the soldiers.
The image of Zoe somehow imperceptibly filled the atmosphere of the book, its main events, its harsh, cruel reality with a feminine principle, affection and tenderness.
And concluding my essay, I would like to note that our literature has done a lot in order to awaken in people a sense of responsibility in dire, catastrophic circumstances, an understanding of what the fate of the country depends on, and no one else depends on. Patriotic War was not a "showdown" between two bloody dictators - Hitler and Stalin, as some writers inclined to invention of sensations suggest. Whatever goals Stalin pursued, the Soviet people defended their land, their freedom, their lives - the fascists encroached on it. “... Rightness was such a fence, which was inferior to any armor,” wrote Boris Pasternak at that time. And even those who did not feel the slightest sympathy for the Bolsheviks and the Soviet regime - the majority of them - took an unconditionally patriotic, defensive position after the Nazi invasion. “We know what is on the scales today, and what is happening now” - this is Anna Akhmatova, who had a very large account of the Soviet regime.
The level of truth in the literature of the war years in comparison with the second half of the thirties, the time of devastating mass repressions of spiritual numbness and darkness, official unification in art, increased sharply. The cruel, bloody war demanded spiritual liberation, was accompanied by spontaneous liberation from the Stalinist dogmas that strangled living life and art, from fear and suspicion. Lyric poetry also testifies to this. Hungry, dying out besieged Leningrad in a terrible winter of 1942, Olga Berggolts wrote:
In the mud, in the dark, in the hunger,
in sorrow,
Where death dragged itself like a shadow
on your heels
We were so happy
We breathed such stormy freedom
That the grandchildren would envy us.
Bergholz felt the happiness of freedom with such acuteness, probably also because before the war she had to taste the gendarmes of courtesy to the full. But this feeling of being acquired, expanded freedom arose in many, very many people. Remembering our front-line youth after many years, Vasily Bykov wrote that during the war we “realized our strength and understood what we ourselves were capable of. We have taught history and ourselves a great lesson in human dignity. ”
Bergholz felt the happiness of freedom with such a keenness, probably also because before the war she had to taste the "Gendarmes of courtesies" in full measure. But this feeling of being acquired, expanded freedom arose in many, very many people. Remembering our front-line youth after many years, Vasily Bykov wrote that during the war we “realized our strength and understood what we ourselves were capable of. We have taught history and ourselves a great lesson in human dignity. ”
The war subordinated everything to itself, the people did not have a more important task than to defeat the invaders. And before the literature with all the acuteness and definiteness were the tasks of image and propaganda liberation war, they served them of their own free will, out of internal need, honestly, sincerely, these tasks were not imposed from the outside - then they become destructive for creativity. The war against fascism was for the writers not material for books, but the fate of the people and their own. Their life then differed little from the life of their heroes. And they fulfilled this duty to the end.
Tutoring
Need help exploring a topic?
Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Send a request with the indication of the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
Lyudmila Nikolaevna, I will use your permission to supplement the material presented by you. I would like to propose another variant of the vision of the problem of choice according to the text of M. Jafarli. Hope it is useful to colleagues.
From the very childhood we are faced with the problem of choosing the right solution in a difficult life situation. In childhood, parents help us to do this, but as soon as we enter adult life, then they themselves must make decisions. But how to learn to do right choice? Indeed, in some situations, the lives of other people may depend on our decision. How not to make a mistake and not go astray? T. Jafarli will help us to answer these questions.
It is the problem of life choice that he raises in the text.
Using an example from the life of a simple teacher, the author shows a situation in which people's lives depend on the choice. Yuri Lelyukov closed a combat grenade with himself during the lesson, which was confused with a training one. Without hesitation, he gave his life for the sake of saving children ("... he fulfilled his highest human duty to people - he sacrificed himself to save others!")
Jafarli says that everyone has the right to choose. But the main thing is to dispose of it correctly, not to make a mistake, after which you will blame yourself.
I fully share the position of the author.
Indeed, no matter what decision we make, we are always responsible for our actions. Thus, in Tolstoy's novel War and Peace, Natasha Rostova makes a choice between true love and fleeting attraction. She chooses Anatoly Kuragin, with whom she decides to escape, but she is stopped in time. Soon Natasha will realize that she made the wrong choice, which changed both her life and the fate of Andrei Bolkonsky, who could forgive her only before his death.
There are situations in which a person is faced with the most difficult choice: to die but save people or vice versa. Let us recall the events of September 1, 2004. On this day, a school was seized in Beslan. The terrorists captured innocent children and were ready to kill them to achieve their goal. For three days these defenseless creatures died in agony without water and drink. The Russian group "Alpha" hastened to help Beslan. The soldiers could not come to terms with the fact that the killers encroached on the sacred. They understood that they were going to certain death, but they could not allow children who were not guilty of anything to die. The special forces did everything they could, but they did not do without casualties, although many were saved. The guys also made the right choice - they saved the children, did not allow their parents to lose the most valuable thing in life, but thereby they orphaned their own.
Thus, we see that "daily, hourly, there is a test of human endurance, ideological conviction, wisdom, the ability to navigate in the incredible bustle of days ...". We understand that not only our personal destiny, but also the lives of other people can depend on our choice.
(Grade 10).
The problem of the moral choice of modern youth.
“It seems to me curious to compare the morals of that time with ours and pay attention to the fact that strong feelings degenerated, but life became calmer and, perhaps, happier. The question remains: are we better than our ancestors, and this is not so easy, because views on the same actions have changed dramatically over time. "
Prosper Mérimée "Chronicle of the reign of Charles IX" (XIX century)
The problem of moral choice has always been relevant and rather painful for society. Our ancestors, comparing themselves with their predecessors, found that "the morals are not the same", fearing that it was they, the people of the Nth generation, who were the last carriers of moral dying truths, and the next one would abandon them. But the centuries changed, and new tribes were imbued with the same thoughts. Even now, in the 21st century, with all the progress and potential progress, society continues to return to the issue of "fading" morality, especially among young men and women.
One of the main indicators of moral principles is the voluntary entry of a person into a “close relationship”. It is this decision that is one of the most important decisions made by a person in his entire life. As a rule, a person is determined with him in his youth, if not at all in his youth. This voluntary choice is extremely important for the further development of the personality, for it is one of the key moral principles laid down or cultivated in a person or even a person in himself.
To say that the problem of this particular moral choice now stands squarely, in my opinion, it is impossible, because it has always been relevant. But, in the opinion of many, modern conditions are raising this issue more and more acutely. To a large extent, it is television and the Internet that most distort young minds, propagandizing and even agitating the emerging youth of "free morals". In this case, I will try to understand only the causes and effects, but everything should be understood in order.
Such a delicate topic existed long before the appearance of TV or Internet resources. And for each society and time, the solution to this issue was taken individually. In turn, it was adopted in accordance with various characteristics: the general development of society, the historical era, the political regime, etc. Now the problem of early adolescent maturation has been elevated to the rank of "taboo". History already has similar cases (for example, Soviet Russia, where such questions were not made public), but if we recall the free customs of France in the 16th century or even the 20th century with the "Hippie" period, promoting free love, then the assumption that the attitude to the same problem changes over time, and is also due to the norms of morality (and in some cases, the rule of law, it becomes quite obviously true.
Analyzing this issue in our century, I want to turn to two representatives of different civilizations: the US state of Mississippi (West; form of government: presidential republic) and the Kingdom of Cambodia, Ratanakiri province (Southeast Asia; constitutional monarchy).
There is an ancient tradition in Ratanakiri: fathers of families build their daughters some huts intended for them and their chosen ones (one girl has the right to have several chosen ones at the same time). The age of the girl at the time of the construction of her personal hut can be anything. During the day, only an officially engaged couple can see each other, but lovers can spend the night in this hut until morning. Young girls, or even girls, themselves decide all questions regarding their personal life.
This tradition has its own motives: firstly, Kampuchea is a poor country, women in it must have husbands who do all the hard work (agriculture is the main occupation). Secondly, families cannot support their daughters for a long time, so they try to marry girls out as early as possible.
This is how parents encourage girls to accept. independent decisions regarding their future and the choice of a spouse. According to parents, this tradition gives their daughters freedom and the ability to make wise choices so that in the future they will not have to need anything because of an unsuccessful
marriage. None of the girls experienced any coercion, claiming that such huts are a place for their free space and, in turn, for moral choice.
It would seem like a wild tradition of an underdeveloped country, but it is enough, in its way, reasonable. But there are pitfalls here: since the level of education in the country is low, the true reasons for this custom are not known to everyone; also, due to lack of proper knowledge, such seclusion can lead to unwanted pregnancies. In this case, young men are not forced to marry girls, this is a man's voluntary choice.
In the state of Mississippi, there is a different tradition: since 1998, there has been a kind of "chastity ball", where girls dressed in white robes take an oath to God to keep the body and mind clean until marriage. After that, the rings should be put on their ring fingers by the fathers. And until the engagement is approved by the head of the family, the rings will be located instead of the wedding rings. But if the oath is broken, then the girl must repent for her deed so that her father and God forgive her. To many observers, such a ceremony seems to be a kind of wedding of a daughter and a father. These vows are taken by American girls of the same age from Cambodia.
However, the life of the average woman in this state is a household. It is undesirable for a woman to work. Her main task is to raise children, take care of the garden and the house. The decision to take part in the ball of young girls is also most often made by men.
Despite the apparent prudence and concern about the morality of their daughters, in this case it is worth looking at this ceremony from the other side: first, the main motivation for girls is based on a strictly religious upbringing; secondly, most often girls are actively instructed about the need for this oath (but is it really impossible to be prudent without a vow?); third,
those who take a vow are not allowed to make their own moral choices, convincing their parents that it will be better; Fourth, social polls found that girls who vow to be chaste are as likely to break promises as others.
Summing up: comparing a "weak" country in which men help women to adapt to difficult conditions (of course, the effectiveness of this method is highly controversial) and one of the most developed, where women, having constitutional rights, are deprived of one of the main things - the question of personal morality, suppressed in them with early years, this begs not only the question of the topic of adolescents entering into premature intimacy or, conversely, the unnatural suppression of their physiology, but also of the true social role of women in the modern world ...
- Moral Choice Situations Reveal Human True Traits
- A brave, strong-willed person in a difficult life situation would rather choose death than a shameful life
- Moral choices are often so difficult that they can lead to dire consequences.
- Only a coward can go over to the side of someone whom he considered an enemy for a better life.
- Situations of moral choice are not always associated with a threat to human life
- By the behavior of a person in situations of moral choice, we can judge his inner qualities
- A real person, devoted to his moral principles, will not be stopped by any life circumstances
Arguments
A.S. Pushkin "The Captain's Daughter". More than once, Pyotr Grinev found himself in difficult life situations, when it was necessary to make a choice, on which his future life depended. During the capture of the Belogorsk fortress, the hero had two ways: to recognize the sovereign in Pugachev or to be executed. Despite his fear, Pyotr Grinev refused to swear allegiance to the impostor, not daring to betray his native country. This is not the only situation of moral choice in which the hero made the right decision and proved that he is a man of honor. Already under investigation, he did not mention that he was associated with Pugachev because of Masha Mironova, because he did not want trouble for his beloved. If Pyotr Grinev had told about her, the girl would probably have been involved in the investigation. He did not want this, although such information could justify him. The situations of moral choice showed the true inner qualities of Pyotr Grinev: the reader understands that he is a man of honor, devoted to the Motherland and true to his word.
A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin". The fate of Tatyana Larina is tragic. In love with Eugene Onegin, she did not see anyone as her fiancé. Tatiana has to marry Prince N., good man, whom she however dislikes. Eugene rejected her, not taking seriously the girl's declaration of love. Later, Onegin sees her at one of the social events. Tatiana Larina changes: she becomes a stately princess. Eugene Onegin writes letters to her, confesses his love, hoping that she will leave her husband. For Tatiana, this is a situation of moral choice. She is doing the right thing: keeping her honor and loyalty to her husband. Although Tatiana is still in love with Onegin, she asks to be left alone
M. Sholokhov "The Fate of Man". The tests that people went through in wartime showed the willpower and character of everyone. Andrei Sokolov showed himself as a man faithful to the military duty of a soldier. Once captured, he was not afraid to express his thoughts about the backbreaking work to which the prisoners were forced. When, due to someone's denunciation, he was summoned to Mueller, the hero refused to drink for the victory of German weapons. He was ready to endure hunger, to give up the desire to drink before death, but to preserve his honor and show the true qualities of a Russian soldier. The moral choice of Andrei Sokolov allows him to be considered a real person with great strength, who loves his country.
L.N. Tolstoy "War and Peace". The situation of moral choice in which Natasha Rostova found herself is not connected with the threat to her life. When everyone was leaving Moscow besieged by the French, the Rostov family took their things away. The heroine was faced with a choice: to take away things or give carts for transporting the wounded. Natasha Rostova chose not things, but helping people. The situation of moral choice showed that material well-being is not so important for the heroine as helping those who are in trouble. We can say that Natasha Rostova is a person with high moral values.
M. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita". Everyone makes a moral choice based on their life principles, goals, attitudes and desires. The most dear person in life for Margarita was her Master. To see her beloved, she no doubt agreed to a deal with the devil. In a situation of moral choice, she preferred what was most dear to her, despite all the horror of the way to achieve her goal. Margarita was ready for anything, even for such a dishonorable act, because the meeting with the Master was vital for her.
N.V. Gogol "Taras Bulba". Sometimes only the ability to choose your own life path reveals genuine human qualities. Andriy, the youngest son of Taras Bulba, who went over to the side of the enemy because of his love for the Pole, showed his true character traits in a situation of moral choice. He betrayed his father, brother and his homeland, showing vulnerability to the power of love. A real warrior would not reckon with any enemy, but Andrii was not like that. Circumstances broke him, showed the inability of the young man to be faithful to his military duty, devoted to his native land.
V. Sanin "Seventy degrees below zero." Sinitsyn did not prepare winter fuel for Gavrilov, which endangered Gavrilov's life in severe frosts. Sinitsyn had a choice: at first he wanted to do everything to ensure the safety of the expedition, but then he was afraid of adverse consequences for his mistake and left everything as it is. The situation of moral choice showed that Sinitsyn is a cowardly person for whom the desire to remain without punishment is more important than the life of another person, depending on him.
Using the phrase "real man" in conversation, as a rule, both women and the stronger sex talk about the same type.
"Normal men", as they call themselves, behave according to ethical standards society, value marriage and their family, love loved ones, live "right." There is no clear definition of what a man should be who is an example of morality.
But usually such people have the following traits: a firm, tough character, wisdom, loyalty to their loved ones, physical strength, his, the ability to make decisions, responsibility and a worthy life companion. Today we invite you to talk about moral freedom of choice, because every man should know how to act better and more correctly in various life situations.
The problem of human moral choice
Interest in this problem is due to the fact that the situation of moral choice sooner or later rises before each person. A moral choice is a person's choice in favor of good or evil, the choice of an ethical alternative. Even Aristotle said that it should be different from desires, be known and relevant to a person, the choice must be conscious. We live in a free society, therefore it is freedom that is the determining factor in the moral position of any person. How does it manifest itself?
The concepts of "good" or "bad" are abstract for each person, despite the generally accepted norms. But in any society, a person's morality is considered through his behavior, actions, attitude to certain things, to his freedom of choice. It is in these areas that a person shows himself, manifesting himself as a creative and independent person.
Finding himself in a difficult life or in any extreme situation, a person is able to prove himself in a way that he would never have done at any other time. Or, on the contrary, his behavior will be like this 
as usual, and this will also be an indicator of his morality.
Also, a huge indicator of morality is the willpower of a person, not everyone has it. When we fight for the freedom of our own choice, we often forget that it is better not to be able to purchase anything at all, for example, if you are addicted to alcohol, buy vodka, spend all your free money on it, together with your time, opportunities and health. If a person has a strong free will, which in fact turns out to be much more expensive and more important than many factors, then he is unlikely to have a problem of moral choice.