Consolidation and Polarization of Students’ Ethical Representations (On the Example of the InLiberty Summer School “Return of Ethics”)

 
PIIS023620070012397-3-1
DOI10.31857/S023620070012397-3
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Affiliation: National Research University “Higher School of Economics”
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Affiliation: National Research University “Higher School of Economics”
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameChelovek
EditionVolume 31 Issue №5
Pages180-193
Abstract

The article provides a critical review of “Return of Ethics”— online student summer school by educational project InLiberty, which took place from July 5 to 10, 2020. It was focused on the key problems of our times through the prism of ethical concepts and categories. On the base of the survey which consisted of ten practical moral dilemmas we examine the consensus and polarization of students’ ethical views and the evolution of moral views throughout the school. The obtained empirical data allow us to demonstrate changes in the ethical perceptions of school participants before and after the school. However, the impact of the “school factor” on ethical views is heterogeneous and not one-dimensional. Ethical views are inconsistent, students can adhere to different ethical concepts simultaneously depending on the moral dilemma they considered. It also turned out that a significant number of students changed their assessment of the same ethical cases. Relative consolidation of ethical concepts was recorded in six cases, and polarization — in four. Also, the number of students who were not ready to make ethical judgments decreased. Students revealed strong interest in ethics. Together with their aspiration to find moral decisions to the dilemmas of social life, it is extremely important circumstance, that deserves the attention of ethicists, since the work of such schools allows us to clarify our theoretical vision of morality and pay attention to the practical aspects of the application of ethical theories.

Keywordsethics, morality, utilitarianism, deontology, technology, values, human nature
Received09.12.2020
Publication date09.12.2020
Number of characters27837
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 698

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Dyuportej Zh. Lyubov' po algoritmu. M.: Individuum, 2020.

2. Kehllakhan Dzh. Ot «prikladnoj» ehtiki k prakticheskoj: prepodavanie ehtiki v prakticheskom aspekte // Ehticheskaya mysl'. 2009. Vyp. 9. S. 193–207.

3. Miroshnichenko M.D. Ot glaza lyagushki k chelovecheskomu soznaniyu: transformatsii neokiberneticheskogo proekta v teorii autopoehzisa // Filosofskij zhurnal. 2020. T. 13. № 2. S. 126–143.

4. Ross L., Nisbett R. Chelovek i situatsiya. Perspektivy sotsial'noj psikhologii. M.: Aspekt Press, 1999.

5. Chasovskikh G.A. Gomologiya ponyatiya spravedlivosti u cheloveka i drugikh primatov // Sotsiologiya vlasti. 2019. T. 31. № 3. S. 100–118.

6. Badiou A., Truong N. In Praise of Love. Serpent's Tail, 2012.

7. Greene J.D. Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them. Penguin Press, 2013.

8. Hauser M. Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. Ecco: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006.

9. Welzel C. Freedom Rising/ Human Empowerment and the Quest for Emancipation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up