What are social norms of behavior? Correct behavior in the company of business people

Regulatory regulation of social relations in the modern period is carried out with the help of a rather complex and diverse set of social norms. Social norms are determined by the level of development of society - and the scope of their action is social relations. Determining the proper or possible behavior of a person, they are created by groups of people.

Consequently, social norms are the rules governing the behavior of people and the activities of the organizations they create in relationships with each other. Social norms are characterized by the fact that they are:

Rules of behavior for people, indicating what their actions should be;

General rules of conduct (as opposed to individual rules);

Not only general, but also mandatory rules of behavior of people in society, which are provided for this by coercive measures.

Thanks to these properties, social norms are capable of exerting a regulatory influence on social relations and the consciousness of their participants.

The variety of types of social norms is explained by the complexity of the system of social relations, as well as the multiplicity of subjects that carry out the normative regulation of social relations.

All social norms operating in modern society are divided according to two main criteria:

The method of their formation (creation);

Method of provision (security, protection).

In accordance with these criteria, there are the following types social norms:

Rules of law- rules of conduct that are established and protected by the state. The distinctive features of law as a social regulator are its formal nature, i.e. its external expression in official legal sources (laws, international conventions, court decisions, etc.), systematicity or clear interconnection of legal norms, generally binding regulations, provision of state coercion in the event of an encroachment on the rule of law.

Moral standards(morality, ethics) - rules of behavior that are established in society in accordance with people’s ideas about good and evil, justice and injustice, duty, honor, dignity and are protected from violation by the force of public opinion or internal conviction.

Norms of customs- these are rules of behavior that have developed in society as a result of repeated repetition over a historically long period of time and have become a habit of people; they are protected from violation by the natural internal needs of people and the force of public opinion.

Norms of public organizations(corporate norms) - rules of behavior that are established by public organizations themselves and are protected by measures of social influence provided for by the charters of these organizations.

Religious norms- rules of behavior that are established by various faiths, are used in the performance of religious rites and are protected by measures of social influence provided for by the canons of these religions.

Social norms can also be divided according to content. On this basis, economic, political, environmental, labor, family standards, etc. are distinguished. Social norms in their totality are called the rules of human society.

The most important regulators of human behavior have always been customs, law and morality. As you know, the most ancient rules of human behavior were customs. Custom is closest to instinct, because people perform it without thinking about why it is needed - it’s just been the way it has been for centuries. Custom united and streamlined the primitive community of people, but where they did not overcome its dominance, the development of society froze at a dead point, because customs stifled creative imagination and the desire for the new and unusual.

The younger sister of custom was another system of rules of behavior - morality. Moral rules arise as spontaneously as customs, but they differ from custom in that they have an ideological basis. A person does not simply mechanically repeat what has been done before him from time immemorial, but makes a choice: he must act as morality prescribes to him. What is a person guided by when justifying his choice? Conscience, which gives rise to a sense of duty. The meaning of moral duty is that one person recognizes himself in another, sympathizes with the other.

Although morality, like custom, oriented a person towards the observance of collective interests, towards collective actions, it appeared important step forward compared to custom in the formation of the individual principle in people as natural beings. Morality is a system of principles of a person’s deeply personal attitude to the world from the point of view of what is proper. Morality is, first of all, a life guideline that expresses a person’s desire for self-improvement. Its main function is to affirm the truly human in man. If the mechanical repetition of customs is still close to instinct, then conscience, duty, and a sense of responsibility inherent in morality are absolutely alien to the natural world, they are the fruits of man’s “second nature” - culture.

It is with the cultural development of society that people gradually begin to form their own, individual needs and interests (economic, political, social). And in connection with the protection of identity, individual person and his personal interests, a third system of rules of behavior arose - law. The formation of this system is closely related to the emergence of inequality within the community of people that followed neolithic revolution(transition from an appropriating economy to a producing one). Inequality developed in two directions: inequality in prestige, and, consequently, in influence and power, and inequality in property. Naturally, the owners of these values (prestige or property) have a need to protect them from the encroachments of others, as well as the need to streamline new social relations so that everyone “knows their place” in accordance with personal capabilities.

Thus, law initially arises to express people’s claims to certain goods as a permission exercised by an individual in order to satisfy his own needs through forceful influence on other individuals. But this method of protection was not reliable enough. In addition, using force, you can not so much protect your own as appropriate the rights of others. This led to disorder that threatened the death of society. Therefore, arose in society new organization, designed to streamline relations between people, is the state, and the instrument of the state has become the law - an act issued by the state and mandatory for execution under pain of physical coercion. The law (and other official sources) enshrined rights recognized by society (claims for social benefits). Consequently, law can be characterized as a set of rules of conduct that define the boundaries of freedom and equality of people in the implementation and protection of their interests, which are enshrined by the state in official sources and the implementation of which is ensured by the coercive force of the state.

Currently, legal and moral norms occupy a dominant, dominant position in the system of regulatory regulation. This is not in last resort due to the fact that both have the most extensive scope of action - potentially they cover the entire society. In this regard, the scope of morality and law largely overlaps. At the same time, they are independent elements of the normative system, the unity, relationships and interaction of which deserve special attention.

The unity of legal norms and moral norms is based on the commonality of socio-economic interests, the culture of society, and people’s commitment to the ideals of freedom and justice. The unity between law and morality is expressed in the following:

In the system of social norms, they are the most universal, extending to the entire society;

The norms of morality and law have a single object of regulation - social relations;

Like legal norms, moral norms come from society;

Rules of law and rules of morality have a similar structure;

Rules of law and moral norms emerged from the fused (syncretistic) customs of primitive society during its decomposition.

Law and morality serve a common goal - the coordination of the interests of the individual and society, the development and spiritual elevation of man, the protection of his rights and freedoms, the maintenance of public order and harmony. Morality and law act as a measure of an individual’s personal freedom, set the boundaries of permitted and possible behavior in the situation they regulate, and promote a balance of interests and needs. They are fundamental general historical values, they are part of the content of the culture of the people and society, and show the level of social progress of civilization.

At the same time, legal norms and moral norms still differ from each other in the following ways:

By origin.

Moral norms are formed in society on the basis of ideas about good and evil, honor, conscience, and justice. They acquire mandatory significance as they are realized and recognized by the majority of members of society. The rules of law established by the state, after entering into force, immediately become mandatory for all persons within the scope of their action.

According to the form of expression.

Moral standards are not enshrined in special acts. They are contained in the minds of people, exist and act as a set of unwritten rules in the form of teachings and parables. Recent attempts to impose on society the commandments clearly formulated by higher party authorities in the form of the Moral Code of the Builder of Communism (“Man is man’s friend, comrade and brother”) can hardly be regarded as a successful experiment. In turn, legal norms in modern conditions most often receive written expression in official government acts (laws, decrees, regulations, court decisions, etc.), which increases their authority and gives their requirements clarity and certainty.

According to the mechanism of action. Law can only regulate the actions of people, i.e. only those actions (or inactions) that are perceived and recognized by the acting subject himself as social acts, as manifestations of the subject that express his attitude towards other people. Legal norms cannot directly interfere with the world of thoughts and feelings. Legal significance has only that behavior of a person or a group that is expressed externally, in the external physical environment - in the form of body movements, actions, operations, activities performed in objective reality.

“Only insofar as I manifest myself, insofar as I enter the realm of reality, do I enter the realm subject to the legislator. Apart from my actions,” Marx wrote, “I do not exist at all for the law, I am not at all its object.” Therefore, a person cannot be held legally responsible for base feelings and dirty thoughts if they were not objectified externally in one or another publicly accessible form, but morality clearly condemns both. Morality makes demands not only on the nobility of actions, but also on the purity of thoughts and feelings. The action of moral norms is carried out through the formation of internal attitudes, motives of behavior, values and aspirations, principles of behavior, and in a certain sense does not imply the presence of certain pre-established external regulation mechanisms. As is known, the main internal mechanism of moral self-regulation is conscience, and the informal, external mechanism is customs and traditions as the centuries-old collective wisdom of the people.

According to the method of protection against violations.

Moral norms and legal norms in the overwhelming majority of cases are observed voluntarily on the basis of people's natural understanding of the justice of their instructions. The implementation of both norms is ensured by internal conviction, as well as by means of public opinion. Society itself, its civil institutions, and collectives decide on the forms of response to individuals who do not comply with moral prohibitions. At the same time, moral influence can be no less effective than legal influence, and sometimes even more effective. “Evil tongues are worse than a gun!” – Molchalin exclaimed in Griboedov’s famous play. Such methods of protection are quite sufficient for moral standards. To ensure legal norms, measures of state coercion are also used. Illegal actions entail a reaction from the state, i.e. special legal responsibility, the procedure for imposing it is strictly regulated by law and is procedural in nature. The person is punished on behalf of the state. And although in every special case The interests of individual “private” individuals may be directly violated; the state cannot entrust the application of legal liability measures to the offender to these “private” individuals. The offender openly opposed his will to the general will embodied by the state in the rules of law, and his conviction and punishment should be not only personal, but also of a state nature. The state, even in the offender, must see “a person, a living piece of society in which the blood of his heart beats, a soldier who must defend his homeland, ... a member of the community performing public functions, the head of a family whose existence is sacred, and, finally, most importantly, a citizen states. The state cannot lightly remove one of its members from all these functions, for the state cuts off its living parts from itself whenever it makes a criminal out of a citizen.”

The consequences of immoral, immoral behavior can also be severe and irreparable. However, violation moral standards, generally does not entail intervention government agencies. Morally, a person can be extremely negative personality, but he is not subject to legal liability if he does not commit any illegal acts. Responsibility for violation of moral norms is of a different nature and does not have a strictly regulated form and implementation procedure. Morality has a traditional and fairly limited system of sanctions. Punishment is expressed in the fact that the offender is subjected to moral condemnation or even coercion; measures of social and individual influence are applied to him (remark, demand for an apology, termination of friendly and other relationships, etc.). This is a responsibility to the surrounding people, teams, family and society, and not to the state.

According to the level of detail.

Moral norms appear in the form of the most general rules of behavior (be kind, fair, honest, do not envy, etc.). Moral requirements are categorical and know no exceptions: “thou shalt not kill,” “thou shalt not lie.” Legal norms are detailed rules of conduct compared to moral norms. They establish clearly defined legal rights and obligations of participants in public relations. By giving a specific formula for lawful behavior, the law strives to outline in detail all the options for prohibitions. For example, the commandment “thou shalt not kill” in criminal law is represented by a whole list of elements: simple murder; murder of a newborn child by a mother; murder committed in a state of passion; murder committed when exceeding the limits of necessary defense or exceeding the measures necessary to apprehend the person who committed the crime; and even causing death by negligence. In addition, as we see, the law considers it legitimate (subject to the conditions established by law) to cause death in a state of necessary defense, or when detaining a criminal.

By scope.

Moral standards cover almost all areas of human relationships, including the legal sphere. The law affects only the most important areas public life, regulating only social relations controlled by the state. As already noted, morality is designed to influence the inner world of a person, to form a spiritual personality, but law is not capable of invading the sphere of feelings and emotions, the deep inner world of the individual. However, the scope of morality is not unlimited. Most legal procedural and procedural issues (the sequence of stages of the lawmaking process, the procedure for conducting a court hearing, inspection of the site during a traffic accident) are ethically neutral and, because of this, cannot be regulated by morality.

We must not forget that in each country, as a general rule, one single and only system of law is officially recognized, to which the entire population of that country must obey. Moral requirements do not constitute such a single and unique system. Morality can be differentiated in accordance with class, national, religious, professional or other divisions of society: the dominant morality is corporate, the morality of the ruling elite and the governed. Group “morality”, especially of the criminalized and marginalized parts of society, often diverges from the legal provisions common to all citizens, which is why vivid examples can be found in considerable quantities in the life of modern Russian society. However, their replication through the media without due emphasis on the negativity and extreme pathology of such phenomena is already leading to the spread of such subcultures separate groups to the entire society (for example, in the language of everyday communication).

Differences in moral principles and moral attitudes exist not only between certain social groups (one can point to the peculiarities of the professional ethics of doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc.), but also between people of the same social group. Suffice it to recall the individual code of morality of one of the heroes of L.N.’s novels. Tolstoy - Vronsky: “Vronsky’s life was especially happy because he had a set of rules that undoubtedly defined everything that should and should not be done... These rules undoubtedly determined that the sharper must be paid, but the tailor does not need to; that men don’t have to lie, but women can; that you can’t deceive anyone, but you can deceive your husband; that one cannot forgive insults and one can insult, etc.” It is clear that such “individual” legal norms cannot exist.

According to the operating principle. It has long been noted in the legal literature that the rule of law is based on formal equality between those people to whom it applies. Law in this sense is the application of equal scope to different people. For example, in modern society there are principles of universal and equal suffrage, according to which all voters have one vote, although some are educated and some are not, some are well versed in political problems and some are worse, etc. . But law cannot act otherwise, because it protects and expresses the interest of everyone - in in this case– voter, and the interests of all voters are equal. Morality does not recognize this equality. According to its canons, to whom more is given, more is required.

The differences between law and morality serve as the basis for their interaction and cooperation. They serve high goals - the ideals of goodness and justice, the achievement of harmony and prosperity, the development of the individual and society, and the provision and maintenance of public order. The implementation of legal norms and their execution are largely determined by the extent to which they comply with moral standards. For legal norms to be effective, they at least must not contradict the moral values of society. In some cases, law helps rid society of outdated moral norms. For example, it was through law that the process of overcoming blood feud, one of the postulates of morality of past times, took place. At the same time, a number of legal norms (in particular, criminal norms) directly enshrine moral norms in law, supporting them with legal sanctions.

In this regard, it cannot be categorically stated that the law is enforced only by coercive methods. After all, most citizens comply with legal norms voluntarily, and not under pain of punishment. Of course, the implementation of the law is a complex process in which methods of persuasion, prevention, and education are used in order to induce subjects to obey the law. Research by psychologists has shown that factors such as trust, honesty, truthfulness and a sense of belonging are much more important than coercion in ensuring compliance with rules. As noted by G.J. Berman, it is precisely when the law is trusted and coercive sanctions are not required that it becomes effective: whoever rules the law has no need to be present everywhere with his police apparatus. Today this has been proven to the contrary by the fact that in our cities that section of the law whose sanctions are most severe, namely the criminal law, has turned out to be powerless and cannot create fear where it has failed to create respect by other means. Today everyone knows that no amount of force that the police can use can stop urban crime. Ultimately, crime is restrained by the tradition of law-abiding, and it, in turn, is based on the deep conviction that law is not only an institution of secular politics, but also relates to the highest goal and meaning of our lives. Being in close contact, law and morality, as a rule, support each other in regulating social relations, positively influencing the individual, in forming a proper moral and legal culture among citizens, and in preventing a number of crimes. Crimes such as gambling, prostitution or drug addiction generally do not involve a conscious desire to cause harm, but are referred to as “victimless crimes.” In this case, it is not enough to abolish the usual criminal sanctions associated with imprisonment or fines, thereby freeing up a lot of time and energy of the police, courts and penitentiary authorities. Here it is more appropriate to create new legal procedures, both within the criminal courts themselves and outside them: new public services such as liturgies - to make decisions (as long as the behavior of such persons is antisocial), including the participation in them of psychologists, social workers, clergy, and also family members, friends, neighbors - before, during and after the hearing. Most offenders are not sick people, and we must approach these cases more humanely and creatively, condemning not people, but their behavior and the specific conditions that give rise to this behavior.

So, in the process of carrying out their functions, law and morality must help each other in achieving common goals, using their own methods for this. And the task is to make such interaction as flexible and deep as possible. This is especially important in those relationships where there are lines between what is legally punishable and what is socially condemned, where legal and moral criteria are closely intertwined. Moral and legal criteria are basic concepts– good, evil, honor, dignity, duty, etc., as well as the principles of justice, humanism, respect, openness, formal equality, etc.

This complex interdependence of law and morality is expressed in the fact that these fundamental principles are still common, universal for the entire normative and regulatory system of society. However, it is in law that justice as a formal expression of equality in freedom characterizes mainly external commitment to morality, connection with it only through a regulatory form, and not internal content. V.S. shares approximately the same opinion. Nersesyants: “... justice is included in the concept of law... law is by definition fair, and justice is an internal property and quality of law, a legal category and characteristic, not extra-legal... only law and fair. After all, justice is actually fair because it embodies and expresses universally valid correctness, and this in its rationalized form means universal legality, i.e. the essence and beginning of law, the meaning of the legal principle of universal equality and freedom. Both in meaning and etymology (iustitia) goes back to law (ius), denotes the presence in social world legal principle and expresses its correctness, imperativeness and necessity.”

Law and morality fruitfully “cooperate” in the field of administration of justice, the activities of law enforcement agencies and justice. This may be expressed in various forms: when resolving specific cases, analyzing all kinds of life situations, illegal actions, as well as the personality of the offender. Often the law cannot qualify this or that act as an offense (crime) without corresponding moral criteria (such an act is evil), since otherwise it is impossible to correctly determine the signs and degree of responsibility for such, for example, acts as “hooliganism”, “insult”, “ slander", "humiliation of honor and dignity", evaluative concepts“cynicism”, “special cruelty”, “self-interest”, “base motives”, “personal hostility”, “moral harm”, etc., which act as motives and elements of many offenses.

Close interaction norms of law and morality does not mean that this process is smooth, smooth and conflict-free. Sharp contradictions, collisions, and discrepancies can quite often arise between them. Moral and legal requirements do not always agree in everything, and often directly contradict each other. For example, in Rus' mutual assistance was widely known when catching a criminal at the scene of a crime, a thief during a theft, or an adulterer in the arms of another man's wife. Punishment followed immediately and did not entail consequences - blood feud, since it was considered as a matter of course (committed according to conscience, according to custom). Even in the Soviet period, polygamy was condemned both by morality and was prosecuted by the Criminal Code (punishable by imprisonment). Meanwhile, the modern Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is simply silent regarding such acts, i.e. completely neutral, and in the moral sphere this offense refers to very serious immoral behavior that destroys family union as the basis for the moral socialization of the individual and the foundations of society.

The reasons for the emerging contradictions between law and morality lie in their specificity, in the fact that they have different methods of regulation, different approaches, criteria for assessing the behavior of subjects. What matters is the inadequacy of their reflection of real social processes, the interests of various social strata, groups, classes. The discrepancy between law and morality is caused by complexity and inconsistency, the imbalance of the social life, the endless variety of life situations arising in it, the emergence of new trends in social development, the unequal level of moral and legal development of people’s consciousness, the variability of social and natural conditions etc.

Morality by its nature is more conservative than law; it inevitably lags behind the flow of life, from the trends in economic, scientific, technical and political development of society, and, accordingly, from the novelties of legislators who seek to reflect them in normative legal acts. Morality has been formed over centuries, and the content of legal norms has changed to one degree or another with each new political system. And now the law is more flexible, dynamic, active and flexible in responding to ongoing changes (problems of gender reassignment, homosexuality, euthanasia and abortion, changing the sex of a child in the early stages of pregnancy at the request of parents, etc.). Law, with its irrepressible temperament and youth, novelty and revolutionary nature, formality and utilitarianism, seems to push morality in its development towards changes that correspond to the modern level of development of society.

Conflict situations can also arise between the norms of law and morality, which are negative not only for the individual, but also for the entire society as a whole. Much of what is permitted by law may be prohibited by moral norms, and vice versa, what law prohibits is permitted by morality. For example, the norms of Russian legislation (Law of 1992 “On Transplantation of Human Organs and (or) Tissues”) establish the presumption of “individual consent to transplantation.” Meanwhile, a number of citizens, due to various moral and religious beliefs, are categorically against their deceased relative being a donor, however, the rules of law require transplantation to save the lives of other people, if the deceased did not express his or her desire during life. in the prescribed form their reluctance to be the subject of transplantation. The problem of euthanasia is equally acute. Some believe that a doctor’s moral duty is to humanely end suffering, while others believe that it is immoral for others to interfere in matters of life and death. There are supporters and opponents of euthanasia both in countries where it is officially permitted (law permits, but morality condemns), and in countries where it is officially prohibited (law prohibits, but morality permits).

Also ambiguously assessed by law and morality, for example, cloning (repeating the genotype from stem cells) of animals and humans, multiple marriages and divorce by the same person. Meanwhile, it is obvious that another more acute problem arises here - moral goals and guidelines for science itself, scientific activity And scientific experiment. Can science, moving along the path of progress and evolution, even for the most noble purposes of enlightenment and knowledge of scientific truth, violate moral imperatives?

The consequences of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the creation in 1953 of A.D. Sakharov's hydrogen bomb, capable of destroying all life within a radius of several tens of kilometers, was supposed to sober up humanity and put an end to this issue for all science. And the point here is not in immoral and unprincipled politicians who can use it for their own selfish interests, but in science itself, which, deifying itself, has become detached (partly through the fault of the state) from society, its moral and spiritual environment, its vital interests. . It cannot be outside of moral principles, but, on the contrary, must observe, affirm and even fight for them together with the active part of society, indicating the direction of balanced, and not pathological progress of civilization. And, unfortunately, the law, being at the forefront of social changes, does not cope with the difficult task of containing spiritual and moral pathologies in all spheres of society, and sometimes it itself strengthens them.

Thus, the specific weight, the scope of action of one or another regulator in different historical eras either expanded or narrowed. In the current conditions of crisis in Russian society and the entire civilization, the contradictions between law and morality have become extremely aggravated. The threshold of moral demands placed on individuals and society has sharply dropped. The legalization of many dubious forms of enrichment, the unbridled pursuit of profit and the pleasure of undeveloped souls have greatly undermined the moral foundations of society.

Social and spiritual values have changed. The morality of the undeveloped majority of society has become more tolerant and lenient towards all sorts of cunning and illegal actions. As a result of the massive criminalization of society, the law does not effectively carry out its regulatory and protective functions, and sometimes simply “does not notice” many dangerous antisocial phenomena.

It should be noted that the optimal combination of ethical and legal has always been an intractable problem for all legal systems. And, as experience shows, ideal harmony cannot be achieved here - contradictions inevitably persist, new ones arise, and old ones get worse. They can be reduced, weakened and smoothed to some extent, but not completely removed.

Not a single society has reached the heights of morality, since morality is not an absolute constant, but a relative one. This is an endless search for ideal and harmony, balance and conformity, adequacy and proportionality, justice and expediency, humanism and retribution. This is a movement towards development, improvement and self-improvement, infinity and progress.

1.2 Social norms and legal norms

The most important means of organizing social relations are social norms: legal norms, moral norms, norms of public organizations, norms of traditions, customs and rituals. These norms ensure the most appropriate and harmonious functioning of society in accordance with the needs of its development.

Social norms- these are the rules governing the behavior of people and the activities of organizations in their relationships.

As noted earlier, the need for social norms arose at the earliest stages of development human society due to the need to regulate people's behavior general rules. With the help of social norms, the most appropriate interaction between people is achieved, tasks that are beyond the power of an individual are solved. Social norms are characterized by a number of features:

- are the rules of human behavior. They indicate what human actions should or can be in the opinion of certain groups of people, various organizations or the state. These are patterns according to which people conform their behavior;

– these are rules of conduct of a general nature (as opposed to individual rules). The general nature of a social norm is expressed in the fact that its requirements apply not to a specific person, but to many people. Due to this property, the prescription of the norm must be fulfilled every time by everyone who finds itself within the scope of its action;

- these are not only general, but also mandatory rules of behavior for people in society. Not only legal, but also all other social norms are binding for those to whom they apply. In necessary cases, the obligatory nature of social norms is ensured by coercion. Therefore, depending on the nature of the violation, state or public measures may be applied to persons who violate the requirements of social norms. If a person has committed a violation legal norm, then measures of state coercion are applied to him. Violation of the requirements of a moral norm (immoral act) may entail the use of measures of social influence: public condemnation, censure and other measures.

Thanks to these characteristics, social norms become an important regulator of social relations. They actively influence people’s behavior and determine its direction in various life situations.

The division of social norms is carried out not only by the method of establishing them and protecting them from violations, but also by content. On this basis, political, technical, labor, family norms, cultural norms, religious norms and others are distinguished.

All social norms in their totality and interrelation are called the rules of human society.

All social norms operating in modern society, are divided on two grounds:

– by the method of their establishment (creation);

– by means of protecting their claims from violations.

Based on this, the following are identified: types of social norms:

1) norms of morality (morality) - rules of behavior that are established in society in accordance with people’s moral ideas about good and evil, justice and injustice, duty, honor, dignity and are protected by the power of public opinion or internal conviction;

2) the norms of public organizations are rules of behavior that are established by public organizations themselves and are protected through measures of social influence provided for by the charters of these organizations;

3) norms of customs are rules of behavior that have developed in a certain social environment and, as a result of their repeated repetition, have become the habit of people. The peculiarity of these norms of behavior is that they are fulfilled due to habit, which has become a natural human need;

4) norms-traditions act in the form of the most generalized and stable rules of behavior that arise in connection with the maintenance of time-tested progressive foundations of a certain sphere of human activity (for example, family, professional, military, national and other traditions);

5) norms-rituals are a type of social norms that determine the rules of behavior of people when performing rituals and are protected by measures of moral influence. Ritual norms are widely used during national holidays, weddings, and official meetings of government and public figures. The peculiarity of the implementation of ritual norms is their colorfulness and theatricality;

6) rules of law - rules of conduct that are established and protected by the state.

It was noted earlier that from a formal point of view, law is a system of norms that emanate from the state. In other words, law consists of legal norms. A legal norm is the primary cell of law.

Rule of law is an example (model) of a typical social relationship that is established by the state. It determines the boundaries of possible or proper behavior of people, the measure of their internal and external freedom in specific relationships. The rule of law provides for the freedom of participants in regulated social relations in a twofold sense:

– as the ability of the subject’s will to consciously choose one or another behavior option ( inner freedom);

– as an opportunity to act outside, to pursue and realize certain goals in the outside world (external freedom);

– what are the characteristic features of a legal norm?

A rule of law is established or sanctioned by the state. This is a model of behavior that is enshrined in official government acts.

The rule of law has grant-binding nature. On the one hand, it provides freedom of action aimed at satisfying the legal rights of the subject. What is property rights? This is the freedom of the owner to fully own and dispose of the thing belonging to him. What about the creditor's right? This is his freedom to demand that the debtor repay the debt. On the other hand, a rule of law obliges to do or not to do certain actions, thus limiting the freedom of individuals. This substantive side of the legal norm is as significant as the freedom of action provided. In fact, if we imagine that a person’s freedom is not limited in any way, then in this order of things there can be no talk of law at all. If every person were given mandatory freedom to dispose of someone else's life, then this would mean that no one has the right to life; if there is no rule limiting the freedom of appropriation of someone else's thing, then no one will have the right of ownership.

Thus, the rule of law combines the provision and at the same time restriction of external freedom of persons in their mutual relations. The provisional-binding nature of the legal norm makes it possible to satisfy the legitimate interests of authorized entities through the actions of obligated persons.

The implementation of legal norms, in necessary cases, is ensured by measures of state coercion. Violation of the boundaries of freedom of permitted and necessary behavior entails the application of legal liability measures to the offenders by the competent government bodies. The protective nature of the legal norm makes it possible to reliably protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens of the state.

Thanks to the above characteristics (properties), the rules of law act as a state regulator of typical social relations (for example, subordination relations in the army, purchase and sale relations when making property transactions). This expresses the social role of legal norms.

From the book International Law in judicial practice Russia: criminal proceedings author Zimnenko Bogdan

Customary norms of international law The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has repeatedly drawn attention to the fact that non-compliance with the norms of international law in criminal proceedings is grounds for the repeal of the relevant judicial acts. Military Court

From the book Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Text with changes and additions as of October 1, 2009. author author unknown

From the book Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Text with changes and additions as of September 10, 2010. author Team of authors

Article 10. Labor legislation, other acts containing norms of labor law, and norms of international law Generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation

From the book Criminal Executive Law: Lecture Notes author Olshevskaya Natalya

Norms of criminal-executive law A norm of criminal-executive law is a variant (limit) of the proper behavior of participants in legal relations arising regarding and in the process of executing punishment and applying corrective measures to convicts. Norm

From the book Encyclopedia of Lawyer author author unknown

From the book Theory of State and Law author Morozova Lyudmila Alexandrovna

11.2 Social and technical norms The norms in force in society are usually divided into two large groups: social and technical. Social norms are certain patterns, standards, models of behavior of participants in social communication. Sometimes in legal

From the book Origin of State and Law author Kashanina Tatyana Vasilievna

Chapter 13 NORMS OF LAW 13.1 Concept and characteristics of a rule of law As already indicated, a rule of law is the most important part social norms. She is a particle of law, its initial element, fundamental concept legal system because everything legal concepts, designs, everything

From the book Theory of State and Law: Lecture Notes author Shevchuk Denis Alexandrovich

Chapter 6. Social norms of primitive society 6.1. Self-regulation as a sign of humanity One of the questions that has haunted the minds of scientists for many, many centuries is the question: how does a person differ from an animal? It must be said that despite the many

From the book Jurisprudence author Mardaliev R. T.

Chapter 19. Norms of law § 1. The concept of a legal norm, its characteristics In modern legal literature, a norm of law is understood as a generally binding, formally defined rule of behavior, established and ensured by society and the state, enshrined and

From the book Alternative to Conscription: Those Who Make a Choice [2nd edition, expanded] author Levinson Lev Semenovich

1.10. Rules of law The concept of a rule of law and its sources (forms of expression) A rule of law is a generally binding, formally defined rule of behavior, established and enforced by the state and aimed at regulating social relations by defining rights

From the book Jurisprudence. Crib author Afonina Alla Vladimirovna

The structure of a rule of law The structure of a rule of law is its semantic construction. Rules of law are stated in different languages and using different figures of speech, but in any case the formula (structure of the norm) can be traced: “If..., then..., otherwise...” Elements of the structure of norms

From the book Problems of the Theory of State and Law: Textbook. author Dmitriev Yuri Albertovich

NORMS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948 (extracts) Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and must act in accordance with

From the author's book

15. Structure of a rule of law A rule of law consists of three elements: 1. Hypothesis – contains the conditions under which this norm subject to application, as well as a list of persons in respect of whom it applies. Using a hypothesis, an abstract

From the author's book

§ 1.2. Social power and social norms under the tribal system Common ownership of products of production and social unity within tribal community gave rise to corresponding forms of organizing public power and managing the affairs of the community. In the implementation

From the author's book

Chapter 2. Rules of law A rule of law is a generally binding, formally defined rule of behavior, established or sanctioned by the state and aimed at regulating social relations. Violation of legal norms causes enforcement action to be taken

From the author's book

§ 3.1. Social and technical norms People in modern civilized society are guided by many different norms and rules in their daily lives and activities. Norm (lat.) is a rule, an exact prescription. Being a certain sample, standard, model

Unfortunately, we are not always taught this at school. But many people are interested in the rules of behavior among friends and in the company of unfamiliar people. How to make a culture of etiquette a part of your life and become a welcome member of any company?

Norms and rules of behavior in society apply to all forms of human interaction with the outside world. Well-mannered behavior implies that a person reacts correctly to any events and does not respond with outbursts of anger to negativity.

The formation of personality begins in childhood, so most of the responsibility for upbringing lies with the parents. It is adults who must instill in the child love for loved ones, respect for others and, naturally, the rules of good manners. And you need to do this not only with words, but also with your own example.

The next stage of personality development is self-education. Persistent and purposeful movement along this path builds character, allows you to consciously develop the most valuable human qualities and learn the rules of behavior accepted in society. There should be no excuses here, because today there are all the necessary resources for self-education - a wide network of libraries, theaters, television, the Internet. The main thing is not to absorb the entire flow of information, but to learn to select the most valuable grains of truth.

To develop a culture of behavior, focus on aesthetic self-education. It develops a sense of beauty, teaches you to correctly understand and perceive the beauty of nature and art, and enjoy communication in a positive way. But it’s worth making a reservation: simply knowing and applying the rules of behavior accepted in our society is not enough. Lies and pretense are unacceptable here - in the heart of a truly educated person there is only place for natural politeness, sensitivity and tact.

Listen first, then speak. Do not interrupt your interlocutor - you will have time to express your point of view later.

Basic norms and rules of behavior in society

Kindness and consideration for others are the most important rules of social behavior. But the list of good manners is quite extensive. Let's consider the main ones:

Think not about yourself, but about others. People around us prioritize sensitivity over selfishness.
Show hospitality and friendliness. If you invite guests, treat them as your closest people.
Be polite in your interactions. Always say greetings and farewells, thank for gifts and services provided not only in word, but also in deed. A letter of gratitude, although it seems like a relic of the past, will be appropriate and pleasant for the recipient.
Avoid bragging. Let others judge you by your actions.
Listen first, then speak. Do not interrupt your interlocutor - you will have time to express your point of view later.
Don't point and stare at people piercing gaze. This confuses them, especially disabled people.
Don't violate someone else's personal space - for example, don't get too close to people you don't know and don't wear stuffy perfume. Never smoke in public without asking permission from your interlocutors, especially in the presence of non-smokers - no one likes it.
Avoid criticism and complaints. A person with good manners tries not to offend people with negative statements and does not complain about fate.
Stay calm in all situations. Anger not only leads to unnecessary conflicts with others, but also brings dissonance into your own inner world. Control your speech so as not to raise your voice, even if you start to get nervous.
Be punctual. Being late shows that you don't know how to plan your day and don't value other people's time.
Keep your word. An unfulfilled promise can lead to real tragedy in the life of the person you hope for.
Repay your debts on time. Failure to comply with this rule often becomes the reason not only for the cessation of friendship and good relationships, but also for serious enmity.

In business, it is not enough to just be a well-mannered person, but by following the rules of business etiquette, you will achieve success much faster.

Correct behavior in the company of business people

In the business environment, as well as in social life, there is a certain etiquette. It largely repeats the basic rules of behavior of people in society, but it also has its own nuances. Knowing the rules of business etiquette, you will receive recognition in the world of successful people, you will be able to quickly build a career or promote your own company to a leading position in the market. Of course, in business it is not enough to just be a well-mannered person, but by following the rules of business etiquette, you will achieve success much faster.

Punctuality. One of the fundamental tenets of the business world is “time is money.” You can negotiate brilliantly, present presentations charismatically, manage staff professionally, but... “stealing” someone else’s time by being constantly late negates the entire effect of your positive qualities. An unpunctual person does not inspire trust and respect and is unlikely to find permanent partners among successful large companies. Correct Behavior in a society of business people requires clear planning of the working day and complete control over the course of events.
Dress code. Appearance is a person’s calling card, which tells more about his character and inner world than any words. A provocative appearance shows protest against the laws and foundations of society, and this is not accepted in the business world. But a strict business suit, neat hairstyle and harmoniously selected accessories indicate that a person is ready to obey universal rules and work in a single team.
Grammatically correct speech. Mumbling under your breath or using slang words will ruin even the most correct appearance. If you do not have the innate gift of expressing thoughts clearly, work in this direction. Speech to the point, without unnecessary lyrical digressions, will help you find a common language with colleagues and clients and will be a good help for moving up the career ladder.
Maintaining trade secrets. In life they don’t like talkers and gossips, and in the business world they don’t like disloyal employees. Disclosure of company secrets can not only cause dismissal, but also cause difficulties with subsequent employment - the spy immediately ends up on the secret “black list” of unreliable employees.

Respect. A professional must show courtesy to his partners, clients and colleagues. The ability to listen to other people's arguments without argument or criticism and to discuss disagreements in a constructive and positive way is an invaluable quality of a business person.
Mutual assistance. You need to help your colleagues in word and deed, especially those who have recently worked with you. In most cases, good comes back to us a hundredfold.
Responsibility. Everyone knows that at work you need to work. However, many employees waste work time chatting and personal matters. This is direct irresponsibility in relation to the common cause. It’s not so bad if it only affects the idlers themselves. But the failure of an important project can leave the company without profit and employees without wages.
Telephone etiquette. Business conversations over the phone require special approach, because at a distance it is impossible to establish visual and emotional contact with the interlocutor. To leave a positive opinion about yourself, do not interrupt your interlocutor, speak clearly and clearly, ask questions only to the point. If we talk about telephone etiquette within the company, then try to avoid personal calls during working hours - they distract the attention of other employees and position you as a frivolous talkative person.

It is perhaps impossible to list all the rules and norms of human behavior in society and at work. To be considered a well-mannered person, do not forget the basics of etiquette and show people the same attitude that you want for yourself.

Every day we are among people, performing some actions in accordance with this or that situation. We have to communicate with each other using generally accepted norms. Collectively, all this is our behavior. Let's try to understand deeper,

Behavior as a moral category

Behavior is a set of human actions that an individual performs over a long period of time under given conditions. These are all actions, not individual ones. Regardless of whether actions are performed consciously or unintentionally, they are subject to moral evaluation. It is worth noting that behavior can reflect both the actions of one person and an entire team. In this case, the influence is exerted both by personal character traits and the specificity of interpersonal relationships. Through his behavior, a person reflects his attitude towards society, towards specific people, and towards the objects around him.

The concept of a line of conduct

Behavior concept includes the determination of a line of behavior, which implies the presence of a certain systematicity and consistency in the repeated actions of an individual or the characteristics of the actions of a group of individuals over a long period of time. Behavior is perhaps the only indicator that objectively characterizes moral qualities and driving motives personality.

The concept of rules of behavior, etiquette

Etiquette is a set of norms and rules that regulate a person’s relationships with others. This is an integral part of public culture (culture of behavior). It is expressed in a complex system of relationships between people. This includes concepts such as:

polite, courteous and protective treatment of the fair sex;
a sense of respect and deep respect for the older generation;
correct forms of everyday communication with others;
norms and rules of dialogue;
being at the dinner table;
dealing with guests;
fulfillment of the requirements for a person’s clothing (dress code).

All these laws of decency embody general ideas about human dignity, simple requirements of convenience and ease in human relationships. In general, they coincide with the general requirements of politeness. However, there are also strictly established ethical standards that are immutable.

Respectful treatment of students to teachers.
- Maintaining subordination in relation of subordinates to their management.
- Standards of conduct in public places, during seminars and conferences.

Psychology as the science of behavior

Psychology is a science that studies the characteristics of human behavior and motivations. This area of knowledge studies how mental and behavioral processes proceed, specific personality traits, mechanisms that exist in a person’s mind and explain the deep subjective reasons for certain of his actions. She also considers the distinctive character traits of a person, taking into account those essential factors that determine them (stereotypes, habits, inclinations, feelings, needs), which can be partly innate and partly acquired, brought up in the appropriate social conditions. Thus, the science of psychology helps us understand, since it reveals its mental nature and the moral conditions of its formation.

Behavior as a reflection of a person’s actions

Depending on the nature of a person’s actions, different ones can be defined.

A person may try to attract the attention of others through his actions. This behavior is called demonstrative.
If a person undertakes any obligations and fulfills them in good faith, then his behavior is called responsible.
Behavior that determines the actions of a person aimed at the benefit of others, and for which he does not require any reward, is called helping.
There is also internal behavior, which is characterized by the fact that a person decides for himself what to believe in and what to value.

There are others, more complex ones.

Deviant behavior. It represents a negative deviation from norms and patterns of behavior. As a rule, it entails the application of various types of punishment to the offender.
If a person demonstrates complete indifference to his surroundings, a reluctance to make decisions on his own, and mindlessly follows those around him in his actions, then his behavior is considered conformist.

Characteristics of behavior

An individual's behavior can be characterized by various categories.

Innate behavior is usually instincts.
Acquired behavior is the actions a person performs in accordance with his upbringing.
Intentional behavior is actions carried out by a person consciously.
Unintentional behavior is actions performed spontaneously.
Behavior can also be conscious or unconscious.

Code of Conduct

The norms of human behavior in society are given close attention. A norm is a primitive form of a requirement regarding morality. On the one hand, this is a form of relationship, and on the other, a specific form of consciousness and thinking of the individual. The norm of behavior is constantly reproduced similar actions of many people, obligatory for each person individually. Society needs people to act in given situations according to a certain scenario, which is designed to maintain social balance. The binding force of norms of behavior for each individual person is based on examples from society, mentors and the immediate environment. In addition, habit plays an important role, as does collective or individual coercion. At the same time, norms of behavior must be based on general, abstract ideas about morality (the definition of good, evil, and so on). One of the tasks of properly educating a person in society is to ensure that the simplest norms of behavior become an internal need of a person, take the form of a habit and are carried out without external and internal coercion.

Raising the younger generation

One of the most important moments in raising the younger generation is. The purpose of such conversations should be to expand the knowledge of schoolchildren about the culture of behavior, to explain to them moral meaning this concept, as well as instilling in them the skills of correct behavior in society. First of all, the teacher must explain to students that it is inextricably linked with the people around them, that how the teenager behaves depends on how easy and pleasant it will be for these people to live next to him. Teachers should also cultivate positive character traits in children using the examples of books by various writers and poets. The following rules also need to be explained to students:

how to behave at school;
how to behave on the street;
how to behave in a company;
how to behave in city transport;
how to behave when visiting.

It is important to pay special attention, especially in high school, to this issue, both in the company of classmates, as well as in the company of boys outside of school.

Public opinion as a reaction to human behavior

Public opinion is a mechanism through which society regulates the behavior of each individual. Any form of social discipline, including traditions and customs, falls under this category, because for society it is something like legal norms of behavior that the vast majority of people follow. Moreover, such traditions form public opinion, which acts as a powerful mechanism for regulating behavior and human relationships in different areas of life. From an ethical point of view, the determining point in regulating an individual’s behavior is not his personal discretion, but public opinion, which is based on certain generally accepted moral principles and criteria. It must be recognized that an individual has the right to independently decide how to behave in a given situation, despite the fact that the formation of self-awareness is greatly influenced by the norms accepted in society, as well as collective opinion. Under the influence of approval or censure, a person’s character can change dramatically.

Human behavior assessment

When considering the issue, we must not forget about such a concept as assessing the behavior of an individual. This assessment consists of society’s approval or condemnation of a specific act, as well as the behavior of the individual as a whole. People can express their positive or negative attitude towards the subject being evaluated in the form of praise or blame, agreement or criticism, manifestations of sympathy or hostility, that is, through various external actions and emotions. In contrast to requirements expressed in the form of norms, which prescribe in the form of general rules how a person should act in a given situation, assessment compares these requirements with those specific phenomena and events that already take place in reality, establishing their compliance or non-compliance existing norms of behavior.

Golden rule of behavior

In addition to what we all know generally accepted, there is Golden Rule. It originated in ancient times, when the first essential requirements for human morality were formed. Its essence is to treat others in the way you would like to see this attitude towards yourself. Similar ideas were found in such ancient works as the teachings of Confucius, the Bible, Homer's Iliad, and so on. It is worth noting that this is one of the few beliefs that has survived to this day almost unchanged and has not lost its relevance. The positive moral significance of the golden rule is determined by the fact that it practically orients the individual towards the development of an important element in the mechanism of moral behavior - the ability to put oneself in the place of others and emotionally experience their condition. In modern morality, the golden rule of behavior is an elementary universal prerequisite for relationships between people, expressing a continuity with the moral experience of the past.

etiquette, norms of behavior, human interaction, competent socio-cultural space

Annotation:

One of the basic principles of life in a modern secular society is maintaining normal relationships between people and striving to avoid conflicts. In turn, respect and attention can only be earned by maintaining politeness and restraint. But in life you often have to deal with rudeness, harshness, and disrespect for another person. The reason for this is that very often the basics of etiquette culture are ignored, which is part of the general secular culture, the foundations of which are attention and respect for others.

Article text:

Throughout his life, a person is in a sociocultural space where rules of behavior play one of the main roles. These rules are called etiquette.

Etiquette (French - etiquette) is a set of rules of behavior accepted in society, establishing the order of secular behavior that allows people to special effort use ready-made forms of decent behavior and generally accepted politeness for cultural communication among themselves at various levels of the structure of society, in the light, while in the process of communication it is worthwhile to take into account the interests of others in their behavior.

The word etiquette itself has been used since the time of Louis XIV, at whose receptions guests were given cards listing the rules of behavior required of them. These cards are “labels” and give the etiquette its name. In French this word has two meanings: a label and a set of rules, a conventional order of behavior.

Understanding etiquette as a system of established mutual expectations, approved “models” and rules of social communication between people, it should be recognized, however, that real standards of behavior and ideas about “how one should act” change significantly over time. What was previously considered indecent may become generally accepted, and vice versa. Behavior that is unacceptable in one place and under some circumstances may be appropriate in another place and under other circumstances.

Of course, different peoples make their own amendments and additions to etiquette, due to the specifics of the historical development of their culture. Therefore, etiquette also reflects a specific system of national signs-symbols of communication, positive traditions, customs, rites, and rituals that correspond to the historically determined conditions of life and the moral and aesthetic needs of people.

It is not possible to consider all aspects of etiquette, since etiquette passes through all spheres of a person’s public and personal life. In turn, we will focus on its most important norms such as tact, politeness, and sensitivity. Let's touch on such a concept as “inequality”. Let's analyze the levels of behavior, internal and external culture of a person. Let's highlight the rules of telephone communication. The last position was not chosen by chance, since the telephone currently occupies a leading place in communication, sometimes replacing interpersonal and sometimes even intergroup communication.

In this regard, one of the most necessary norms and foundations of etiquette is politeness, which is manifested in many specific rules of behavior: in greeting, in addressing a person, in the ability to remember his name and patronymic, important dates his life. True politeness is certainly benevolent, since it is one of the manifestations of sincere, disinterested benevolence towards the people with whom one has to communicate.

Other important human qualities The rules of etiquette are based on tact and sensitivity. They imply attention, deep respect for those with whom we communicate, the desire and ability to understand them, to feel what can give them pleasure, joy, or, conversely, cause irritation, annoyance, and resentment. Tactfulness and sensitivity are manifested in a sense of proportion that should be observed in conversation, in personal and work relationships, in the ability to sense the boundary beyond which words and actions can cause a person undeserved offense, grief, and pain.

In addition to the basic principles of etiquette: politeness, tact, modesty, there are also general rules of social behavior. These include, for example, the “inequality” of people in the field of etiquette, expressed, in particular, in the form of advantages that have:

women before men,
elders before younger ones,
the sick before the healthy,
boss before subordinates.

The norms of etiquette - in contrast to the norms of morality - are conditional; they have the character of an unwritten agreement about what is generally accepted in people's behavior and what is not. The conventions of etiquette in each specific case can be explained. Aimed at uniting people, it offers generally accepted forms, stereotypes of behavior, symbols of the manifestation of thoughts and feelings that make it easier for people to understand each other.

At the same time, etiquette can also be considered as an aesthetic form of manifestation of moral, secular culture, since it is at the same time directly related to morality, to the moral character of a person and to the aesthetic aspects of his behavior. Beautiful manners, beautiful behavior, beautiful gestures, poses, facial expressions, smile, look, i.e. what speaks about a person, his feelings and thoughts without words; speech addressed to elders, peers, younger ones at meeting and farewell, in anger and joy; the manner of moving, eating, wearing clothes and jewelry, celebrating sad and joyful events, receiving guests - to all these types of communication a person must give not only a moral, but also an aesthetic character.

In any case, etiquette is an integral fragmentary part of the structure of the sociocultural matrix and represents a significant part of modern secular behavior, although, of course, not all human behavior in general. In fact, it implies only generally accepted rules and manners of human behavior in society in designated places, where one can observe outside actions of individuals, in which they manifest themselves like a peculiar, pre-learned game of intelligence.

Based on the current lifestyle modern man, his social connections and activities, it is not difficult to list all those conventions of secular behavior that are initially associated with generally accepted etiquette and determine its corresponding ethical and aesthetic norms. All of them must be studied and repeated, and be well known to all citizens of the country. These norms apply to almost all aspects of life and everyday life, as well as areas social activities a person, determining his behavior in the family, at a party, at school, at work, in public places, on the roads, when he is a pedestrian and when he is a driver, in hotels, in parks, on the beach, on an airplane, at the airport, in a public toilet , etc. and so on.

It should be borne in mind that in most public places, citizens only need a simple knowledge of good manners and the ability to behave with restraint, culture and politeness, without attracting the attention of other people and thereby not interfering with their presence in your company.

At the same time, there are also public places where knowledge of etiquette alone is not enough for citizens. There, to one degree or another, other basic fragments of the sociocultural matrix that we discussed above (ethical, aesthetic, civil, value, environmental, etc.) must be used, as well as the ability to feel the system of balancing interests and, above all, have the ability to take into account the interests of others , put them above your own.

For this purpose, more serious norms and laws of behavior are applied, arising from the rights, responsibilities and interests of citizens, civil servants, and entrepreneurs. Without knowledge of the relevant fragments of the sociocultural matrix, individuals cannot be named, status certified or admitted to the corresponding cells of social activity or government positions. And the higher the social place of an individual’s activity in the structure of social relations, the greater the demands, in addition to knowledge of etiquette, should be placed on his behavior, the more his behavior should be determined by the responsibilities of this individual to other members of society, society in understanding their specific interests, the interests of society as a whole – national interests.

Based on this, it can be argued that the culture of human behavior consists of two parts: internal and external.

Internal culture is the knowledge, skills, feelings and abilities that underlie the fundamental fragments of a person’s individual sociocultural matrix, acquired through his upbringing, education, development of consciousness and intellect, professional training, signs of good results of which should be his virtue, knowledge of the interests of others, hard work and high morality.

External culture is a lifestyle and behavior patterns that manifest themselves in everyday life and in social activities during direct contacts and communication with other people and with environmental objects. External culture, as a rule, is a direct product of a person’s internal culture and is closely related to it, although there are some nuances.

Thus, individual manifestations of external culture may not reflect the internal culture of an individual or even contradict it. This happens in cases of painful manifestations of the psyche, as well as in cases of behavioral “mimicry”, when an ill-mannered individual tries to pass himself off as a well-bred one. However, with longer observation of him, these contradictions are easily detected. Therefore, a truly cultured and efficient person can only be such thanks to his diligent upbringing. And, on the contrary, external manifestations of an individual’s bad manners indicate his internal emptiness, and therefore immorality, the complete absence of elementary internal culture.

External culture is not always completely dependent on internal culture and sometimes for some time can hide the lack of the latter. Good knowledge of the rules of etiquette and their observance can mitigate the lack of high internal culture, developed consciousness and intelligence, although not for long.

External culture is called differently: a culture of behavior, etiquette, good manners, good manners, good manners, culture... This suggests that, depending on the specific task, people focus on one aspect of external culture: most often either knowledge of the rules of behavior and their observance, or the degree of taste, tact, skill in mastering external culture.

External culture consists of two “parts”: that which comes from the elements of public sociocultural matrices (various instructions, regulations, generally accepted rules, decency, etiquette) and that which comes from the education and enlightenment of a secular person (manners, delicacy, tact, taste , sense of humor, conscientiousness, etc.).

There are rules of behavior different levels and contents:
1) the level of universal rules adopted in modern secular society, incl. among well-bred people - the intelligentsia;
2) the level of national rules or rules adopted in a given country;
3) the level of rules adopted in a given area (village, city, region);
4) the level of rules adopted in one or another non-secular social stratum (among ordinary people, among adherents of one or another religious denomination or sect, among corrupt high-ranking officials, among the elite, among oligarchs and other individuals with extremely high incomes, etc. .).
5) the level of secular rules adopted in a particular professional community or public organization (medical workers, lawyers, police officers, military, among actors, civil servants, members of a particular party...)
6) the level of secular rules adopted in a particular institution (educational, medical, government, commercial...)

Speaking about the external manifestations of ethical or aesthetic fragments of the sociocultural matrix of individuals, it should be noted that here, too, one can observe a wide variety of types of behavior: delicacy and rudeness, good and bad manners, and good and bad taste.

In situations where a person does not know certain rules of behavior accepted in a given society, but he has certain upbringing skills and knowledge of the basics of etiquette, he can to some extent compensate for his ignorance with instinct, intuition, based on innate or acquired delicacy, tact, taste.

Between the rules and internal regulators behavior there are very complex relationships. They are opposites - internal and external, typical and individual, although at the same time they can “work” in the same direction. Normal relationships between people are generally a delicate matter that easily breaks if people treat each other rudely, especially now in an age of constant stress and increased mental stress.

The ability to listen to your interlocutor is an indispensable requirement speech etiquette. This, of course, does not mean that you need to sit silently. But it is tactless to interrupt another. When talking together, you also need to be able to listen. It happens that you have to remain silent when you feel that your words can inflame passions. You should not start a heated argument in defense of your opinion. Such arguments spoil the mood of those present.

If a person wants to improve, to be better, to be worthy of love, kindness, wants to be respected, then he must take care of himself, his words and actions, cleanse himself, and not give himself peace in this. After all, it is known that good manners is an external expression of the inner delicacy of the soul, which consists in general benevolence and attention to all people.

Politeness does not necessarily mean truly treating a person with respect, just as rudeness does not necessarily mean truly treating a person with disrespect. A person can be rude due to the fact that he moved in a rude environment and did not see other patterns of behavior.

Thus, politeness is a moral quality that characterizes the behavior of a person for whom respect for people has become an everyday norm of behavior and a habitual way of treating others.

An important aspect of etiquette is the concept of good manners, which requires study and practice; it must, so to speak, become second nature to us. True, much that is called good form and refined taste is innate delicacy, and therefore the statement is true that a person can assimilate and learn everything, but not delicacy. But delicacy is not everything, and innate taste requires improvement. Good examples and your own efforts contribute to this.

In addition, in etiquette there is such a thing as decency. This is the least noticeable of all etiquette concepts, but the most revered.

So, only those who embarrass the least number of people have good manners. After all, every person, as a rule, lives in society, i.e. among other people. Therefore, his every action, every desire, every statement is reflected on these people. For this reason, there must be a boundary between what he wants to say or do, and what is possible, what will be pleasant or unpleasant to others. In this regard, he needs to make a self-assessment every time to see if any of his statements or actions will cause harm, or cause inconvenience or trouble. Every time he must act in such a way that the people around him feel good.

The basics of etiquette, known to everyone since childhood, are three magic words: please, thank you, excuse me (sorry).

Every request must be accompanied by the word “please”.

For any service or help you need to thank, say “thank you.”

For any trouble caused to another, you need to apologize or ask for forgiveness.

You need to learn to say these magic words without thinking, automatically. The absence of these words in appropriate situations or their non-automatic, unnatural use means either impoliteness, rudeness, or an announcement and demonstration of hostility.

There are no “little things” in etiquette; more precisely, it all consists of “little things” strung on a single core of politeness and attention to people. Etiquette begins with a certain order and rules of greetings, addresses, introductions and acquaintances.

Considering the “inequality” in etiquette, it should be borne in mind that the young are obliged to greet the elders first, those entering - those present, those who are late - those waiting, etc. At official receptions, the hostess and host are greeted first, followed by the ladies, first the older ones, then the younger ones, then the older and senior men, and then the rest of the guests. The lady of the house must shake hands with all invited guests.

It should be remembered that the handshake that is customary here and in the West when meeting and introducing a man and a woman in Muslim countries is completely inappropriate: Islam does not accept even simple contact between people of different sexes who are not related by blood. It is not customary for the peoples of Southeast Asia to shake hands either.

Demeanor is of great importance when greeting. You should look directly at the person you are greeting with a smile. When addressing a stranger, unfamiliar person or official, you should always say “You”. The form of address “you” expresses a closer relationship with a person. When addressed as “you,” many formalities that indicate an external, detached form of politeness disappear.

Dating etiquette rules are no less complex. The first step to making connections is introduction. When introducing yourself or introducing someone, you usually give your last name, first name, patronymic, and sometimes your position or title. If you are visiting an institution or official on official or personal business, then before you begin business conversation, you should introduce yourself and, if available, present your “business card.” An introduction is also necessary if you are addressing a stranger on any issue.

An integral attribute of modern etiquette is the ethics of telephone conversations. Its most important points include the following:
1) You should always introduce yourself when you call if you are unfamiliar or unfamiliar with the recipient or if you rarely call this recipient. It should also be taken into account that telephone communication may be poor, i.e. your voice is barely audible or distorted, and therefore even a good friend may not immediately understand who he is talking to.
2) You almost always need to ask whether a person is busy or not and how much time he has for a telephone conversation. The behavior of a caller who immediately begins to conduct this conversation without the necessary clarification of the boundaries of the conversation is unceremonious.
3) If you get a call and you are very busy and cannot talk, then, as a rule, the burden of calling back is not on the person who called, but on you. There may be two exceptions here:
- if the caller does not have a telephone;
- if for some reason it is difficult to call the person who called you. It is impolite to force the caller to call you back again because you are busy. When you do this, you involuntarily make it clear that you value and respect him less than yourself.
4) When they call on the phone and ask not you, but another person, it is impolite to ask “who is this?” or “Who’s speaking?” Firstly, it is indecent to answer a question with a question. Secondly, with your question you can put the one asking in an awkward position. The questioner is not always inclined to introduce himself to a stranger who picks up the phone. His right is to remain incognito to outsiders. Asking “who speaks?” willingly or unwillingly “gets into the soul” of the caller. On the other hand, asking “who is speaking?” voluntarily or involuntarily, it “gets into the soul” of the person who is being called directly, since the addressee may also want to keep the secret of his relationship with the caller. (Parents sometimes do this in their desire to control every step of their adult children, thereby limiting their right to personal life. Excessive control and excessive guardianship on the part of parents lead to the fact that adult children either remain infantile, dependent, or are alienated from their parents.) In If the addressee is absent, you need to ask not “who is speaking?”, but “what should I convey to the addressee?”
5) In a telephone conversation, business or telegraphic style should prevail, with rare exceptions. Talking around the bush is inappropriate. If possible, you should immediately formulate the questions for which you are calling, and do not hesitate to ask the interlocutor about the same if he is “carried away” by the conversation on unrelated topics. You need to tactfully ask your interlocutor to move on to the subject of the telephone conversation, without rudely interrupting his speech. In principle, non-business conversations on the phone are also acceptable, but only after it becomes clear that both parties have the desire and time to conduct such conversations.
6) It must be borne in mind that telephone communication is not as complete as face-to-face communication. Therefore, the requirements for conversation in general are more stringent, i.e. you need to behave more carefully, prudently. A word spoken over the phone and a word spoken face to face can be evaluated differently and even in opposite ways.

In a telephone conversation, you need to speak less emotionally, joke more carefully, and try to avoid harsh words and expressions.

Two more etiquette concepts that cannot be ignored are commitment and precision. An unobligatory person is very inconvenient for others, although he can be nice, courteous, etc. You cannot rely on such a person, you cannot count on him. Let him not be offended if they stop respecting him and avoid communicating with him. “Precision is the courtesy of kings,” says the saying. He is not a king who is not obligated, who behaves carelessly in relation to his own obligation.

→