Over time, I begin to understand that sometimes a person is a problem. Collection of ideal social studies essays

Over time, I begin to understand that before
Sometimes only a person’s conscience, his inner voice, can reach him; it is much more effective than the endless calls and demands of teachers, educators, even parents. An act done entirely according to conscience is a free act. I ask myself: why was this very conscience imposed on a person, because no one bothers to brush it aside, what is the use of it if it does not bring any benefits, if it does not give a person any career or material advantages? Why does it exist, conscience, which gnaws and torments, from which sometimes you cannot get rid of it, you cannot give up? Where did she come from? In fact, throughout life we ​​become convinced that it comes from the depths of the soul and is never false. She's not wrong. An act of conscience is not devalued and does not lead to disappointment. When I say “an act of conscience,” an amazing example comes to mind that impressed me for a long time. On July 28, 1958, Mikhail Mikhailovich Zoshchenko died. The party leadership did not allow him to be buried on the Literary Bridge; apparently, the high-ranking officials considered him unworthy. They always know better. And they weren’t allowed nearby. Finally they ordered (!) to bury him in Sestroretsk, where he sometimes lived in the country. A civil funeral service was held in the writer’s house. Alexander Prokofiev, the first secretary of the Writers' Union, was entrusted to conduct it. They were obliged to keep it brief, not allowing any politics, strictly adhering to the regulations, not allowing any attacks, they brought in a lot of police and workers of the Big House. Everyone who wanted to enter the House could not get into it; people filled the stairs leading to the hall. A large crowd remained on the streets. They were not allowed to radio. The floor was given to Vassarion Sayanov, Mikhail Slonimsky, his friend from the time of the “Seration Brothers”. The ceremony was ending when suddenly, having pushed everyone aside, Leonid Borisov broke through to the coffin. He was already an elderly writer, the author of the famous book about Alexander Greene “The Wizard from Gel-Gyu”, a man who had never spoken at any meetings, and should be considered quite well-intentioned. This is probably why Alexander Prokofiev did not stop him, especially since the funeral service went well, no one said a word about the persecution of Zoshchenko, about the resolution of the Central Committee, as if there was no tragedy in his life, there was a prosperous life for the author of popular stories. “Misha, dear,” Borisov shouted, “forgive us fools, we didn’t protect you, we handed you over to the murderers, we are to blame, we are to blame!” His hysterical thin voice rose, pierced everyone, rolled down, people conveyed his words to each other, the crowd on the street shook up. Alexander Prokofiev did not dare to break the ritual. Sobbing, Leonid Borisov walked away. I was returning home with Alexei Panteleev, he said: “Thank God, at least someone got sick, a person was found who saved our honor, but we, we…” What was that? Borisov was not going to speak, but something broke through, and he could no longer cope with himself, it was a feeling, unreasoning, subconscious, unable to choose. It was conscience, conscience rebelled! Many people today try to justify dishonesty: “There’s nothing you can do, that’s our society.” One can, of course, assume that our society inherited Soviet morality, when no one repented, participating in repressions, when informers and informers were encouraged. But what does conscience have to do with it? It belongs to the personality, it belongs to the soul, the one and only, the one that judges us. Please write an Essay!

(1) Over time, I begin to understand that sometimes we can only reach a person’s conscience - his inner voice, which is much more effective than the endless calls and demands of teachers, educators, even parents.

(2) An act committed entirely according to conscience is a free act.

(3) I ask myself: why was this very conscience imposed on a person, because no one bothers to brush it aside, what is the use of it if it does not bring any benefits, if it does not give a person any career or material advantages. (4) Why does it exist, conscience, which gnaws and torments, from which sometimes you cannot get rid of it, you cannot give up? (5)Where did it come from? (6) In fact, throughout life we ​​become convinced that it comes from the depths of the soul and is never false. (7) She is not mistaken. (8) An act of conscience is not devalued and does not lead to disappointment.

(9) When I say “an act of conscience,” an amazing example comes to mind that impressed me for a long time.

(10) On July 28, 1958, Mikhail Mikhailovich Zoshchenko died. (11) The party leadership did not allow him to be buried on the Literary Bridge; apparently, the high-ranking officials considered him unworthy. (12) They always know better. (13) And they didn’t allow it nearby. (14) Finally they ordered (!) to bury him in Sestroretsk, where he sometimes lived in the country.

(15) A civil memorial service was held in the Writer’s House. (16) Alexander Prokofiev, the first secretary of the Writers' Union, was entrusted to conduct it. (17) They were obliged to conduct it briefly, not allowing any politics, strictly adhering to the regulations, not allowing any attacks, they brought in a lot of police and workers of the Big House. (18) Everyone who wanted to enter the House could not get into it; people filled the stairs leading to the hall. (19) A large crowd remained on the street. (20) They were not allowed to radio it. (21) The floor was given to Vissarion Sayanov, Mikhail Slonimsky, his friend from the times of the Serapion Brothers.

(22) The ceremony was ending when suddenly, having pushed everyone aside, Leonid Borisov broke through to the coffin. (23) This was already an elderly writer, the author of the famous book about Alexander Greene “The Wizard from Gel-Gyu”, a man who never spoke at any meetings and can be considered quite well-intentioned. (24) This is probably why Alexander Prokofiev did not stop him, especially since the funeral service went well, no one said a word about the persecution of Zoshchenko, about the resolution of the Central Committee, as if there was no tragedy in his life, there was a prosperous life for the author of popular stories.

(25) “Misha, dear,” Borisov shouted, “forgive us fools, we didn’t protect you, we handed you over to the murderers, we are to blame, we are to blame!”

(27) Alexander Prokofiev did not dare to break the ritual. (28) Sobbing, Leonid Borisov walked away.

(29) I was returning home with Alexei Ivanovich Panteleev, he said: “Thank God, at least someone got sick, a person was found who saved our honor, but we, we...”

(30) What was that? (31) Borisov was not going to speak, but something broke through, and he could no longer cope with himself, it was a feeling, unreasoning, subconscious, unable to choose. (32) It was conscience, conscience rebelled!

(33) Today many people try to justify dishonesty: “There’s nothing you can do, that’s our society.” (34) One can, of course, assume that our society inherited Soviet morality, when no one repented, participating in repressions, when informers and informers were encouraged.

(35) But what does conscience have to do with it? (36) It refers to the personality, it belongs to the soul, the one and only, the one that judges us.

(According to D. Granin*)

Show full text

Composition

What is conscience? What role does it play in our lives? D.A. thinks about these and other questions. Granin, touching upon in the text the problem of the influence of conscience on human life.

To attract readers' attention to this topic, the writer tells an episode from the life of the main character. When he attended the funeral of M. I. Zoshchenko, none of the people there, including himself, dared to tell the truth about the difficult fate of the writer. However, there was one honest man - L. Borisov, in whom “his conscience rebelled.” He alone was not afraid to speak out about the persecution of the writer by the Central Committee and ask forgiveness from the deceased. “Borisov was not going to speak, but something broke through, and he could no longer cope with himself,” says the main character about the impulse of the writer’s soul. One cannot help but admire the courage of Borisov’s action. The narrator is convinced that “...an act of conscience is not devalued and does not lead to disappointment...”, which is why no one condemned L. Borisov. People understood that this man saved their honor. It is admirable that the writer at that moment did not think about possible negative consequences for himself, he acted as his heart dictated.

Over time, I begin to understand that sometimes only conscience can reach a person...

In this text, Granin raises the problem of conscience.

Conscience is one of the eternal concepts in people's lives. It's worth thinking about what it means. I think that conscience is honesty, decency, attention to others. Living according to conscience means not committing vile acts, not stepping over others to please your own whims. This is probably not all that can be said about conscience. Talking about it, the author asks the question: why does a person need conscience, why does it exist? And he concludes that conscience “comes from the depths of the soul and is never false,” that it does not make mistakes. Granin, citing as an example one of the actions of conscience, talks about the writer Leonid Borisov, who alone at the civil memorial service for M. Zoshchenko called himself and others to blame for his death. As Alexander Prokofiev said, he saved their honor. The author emphasizes that it was the conscience of those who could not or did not want to protect Zoshchenko when he was persecuted in the media that rebelled. Also in this text, Granin says that nothing can justify lack of conscience, that conscience belongs to the individual, “belongs to the soul, the one and only...”.

The author’s position is as follows: he believes that “only conscience, his inner voice, can reach a person; it is much more effective than the endless calls and demands of teachers, educators, even parents.” One cannot but agree with this. Only conscience evaluates our actions, thoughts, and feelings.

The problem of conscience is touched upon in many works of fiction.

Let us turn to M. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”. The theme of conscience, human responsibility for oneself, for others, for society, for the world as a whole runs through the entire work. “Everyone will be given according to his faith,” these are the words of one of the central characters of the novel, Woland. “By faith,” that is, by conscience. Let us remember Pontius Pilate, who went against his conscience when he agreed to the death sentence of Yeshua. The procurator is severely punished for his cowardice: for about two thousand years he has been sitting in a stone chair and dreams of only one thing - to walk along the lunar road with the prisoner Ga-Notsri and talk with him. The author wants to say that this is exactly how Pontius Pilate was punished because he once became cowardly and did not act according to his conscience.

In V. Rasputin’s story “Farewell to Matera,” the image of an old woman, Daria, is created. She lived her life according to her conscience: she worked honestly, raised children, helped people, took care of her home, her native land. One cannot help but recall the episode in which the author talks about how Daria said goodbye to her home. She put it away as if for a holiday, and then went far, far away so as not to see how her native nest would burn. The writer named the island on which people lived for centuries. This name is consonant with others, such as mother, mother earth, motherland. And all these words relate to Daria. She lived by faith, by conscience, and, probably, it is precisely such people who are our national wealth.

In conclusion, I would like to say that conscience is a compass that shows a person the path in life, and it is important not to deviate from the right road, so as not to regret it in old age.

Conscience. What does this concept mean in human life? In one of the explanatory dictionaries, this term is explained as follows: “Conscience is the ability of an individual to independently formulate his own moral duties and exercise moral self-control, demand that he fulfill them and evaluate the actions he commits.” The accuracy and correctness of this quote is undeniable, since conscience is the most important component of each character. It is by conscience that a person performs all actions, and by conscience he judges the actions of other people. The problem of the role of conscience in our lives is raised by the Russian writer and public figure - Daniil Aleksandrovich Granin. He cites as an example an incident at the funeral of M.M. Zoshchenko, when all those who came were silent about the fact that the writer was being persecuted, about the multiple tragedies of his life. And only Leonid Borisov, shouting angrily, asked for forgiveness from the deceased. This case shows that people were forced to behave according to the “rules” established by the party leadership. The author’s position is clear to me; Daniil Aleksandrovich is convinced that a person must act according to his conscience. After all, conscience is an inner voice, true and fair, therefore actions according to conscience are correct and honest actions.

I agree with the author’s opinion and share his indignation at what happened in the proposed passage. In the Soviet Union, the party leadership dictated to people how they should live, there could be no talk about their opinions and actions according to their conscience, and people obeyed because they had no choice. Leonid Borisov acted according to his conscience, because he considered himself guilty before M.M. Zoshchenko, and remaining silent would have been the worst thing for him; the burden of what he had done would not have left him for a long time. The problem of conscience is well covered in literature. Thus, in his novel “Crime and Punishment” F.M. Dostoevsky, using the example of the heroes Luzhin and Svidrigailov, shows that selfish motives for the sake of career and wealth - that is, actions not according to conscience - lead to loss of moral qualities and bitterness. Also, in V. Rasputin’s story “Live and Remember,” the thought of conscience runs through the entire work as a red thread.

Andrei, a man who went with the flow, did what he was told: first he got married, then he went to serve. It spoke of a feeling of resentment towards those who did not give him leave after discharge. He himself thinks that the right decision has been made when he decides to go home. It turns out that conscience is not a certain series of signs by which everyone needs to live. Conscience is an internal feeling of each of us, it is with it that we decide what to do, with its help we evaluate actions and make decisions. Conscience is necessary for each of us. After all, if people forget about conscience, then society will degrade.

Conscience is the basis of morality.

70 years ago, in the fall of 1941, the siege of Leningrad began. In his “Siege Book,” created together with Ales Adamovich, Daniil Granin noted that then, in conditions of severe hunger and cold, people “did not become dehumanized.” And it seemed like a miracle.

The book was written 30 years ago, in 1981. What about today? Why in our peaceful capitalist times do people increasingly behave inhumanely? The 92-year-old patriarch of Russian literature, front-line soldier and elder of the St. Petersburg intelligentsia answered “AiF” to this and other questions.

Soul profit

“AiF”: - Daniil Alexandrovich, you have emphasized more than once: despite all the horrors of the blockade and even cases of cannibalism, the residents of Leningrad still performed feats of love for their neighbors. Why has Russia become “dehumanized” today? Why did we become different?

D.G.:- Yes, it can be called a miracle: during the blockade, those who saved others were saved. A person who is extremely exhausted by hunger cannot be judged by ordinary standards. He has a sick, altered psyche. Nevertheless, Leningraders really performed feats of love: when they died, they gave their bread to others. Or, losing their last strength, they raised strangers who had fallen and were freezing on the street. This was their heroism, an example of self-sacrifice and humanity. I am not a siege survivor, but I have been to besieged St. Petersburg. I saw it all. However, today “heroism” is different - the cult of the ruble, profit. There is such an old and precise Russian word. This ideology teaches not how to help, but how to deceive or take away.

“AiF”: - What does ideology have to do with it? Is it possible to impose morality on the people, to introduce it by decree from above? Maybe people need this, we ourselves want to get rich?

D.G.:- Morality in society depends on the policies of the authorities. Now it is focused on profit. Profits in the hospital, at school, in court. Wherever you turn, the ruble reigns everywhere. And this is against the backdrop of a huge, painful difference between the poor and the rich. Under this regime, it is impossible to remain an honest person: he is pushed out of life, especially at the top. The system rejects the very concept of honesty. How is it: everyone takes bribes, but he refuses! Everyone steals, doesn’t he?!

So you say: you cannot impose... But no one imposed greed and cynicism on us. Oligarchs, recalling privatization, say: “We found ourselves in the right place at the right time, and therefore we were lucky.” But I couldn’t. And the vast majority of our people too. Only a very few made it. Is this their merit? Is it the result of their hard work or the fact that they invented something useful for everyone? No. This is dexterity, rapacity, shamelessness, non-compliance with moral rules and commandments... You cannot break the chain of times. There is a continuity of life. And we have already violated it twice: in 1917 we broke with Tsarist Russia, and in the dashing 90s - with Soviet life, in which there was a lot of bad, but also a lot of good.

This was a mistake by both the authorities and the people, who were seduced by the mirage of profit. Remember vouchers? Two Volgas for each? It was a demonic, devilish temptation.

God's Spy

“AiF”: - You once said that the Gulag mutilated everyone: both those who were victims and those who became judges, executioners or overseers. But everyone decided for themselves who they should be. As now - whether to be at the right time in the right place. It's about moral choice. The situation is the same.

D.G.:- No, I don’t think it’s the same. Here's an example. In Soviet times, a very encouraging climate was created in science - scientists were paid well, they could normally defend their dissertations. What about today? You can buy a dissertation, just like a diploma. For example, a doctor's diploma - along with the Hippocratic Oath. Russia has become a country of purchased diplomas.

Take a young man. He thinks: why bother in classrooms and take exams when there is a rich dad and mom? This idea was instilled in him by the parents themselves, sincerely wishing the best for their child. They have already made a choice for him... The life circumstances a person finds himself in often decide everything. We give in to temptation.

“AiF”: - But what about conscience, which you said is a gift from God, and which probably exists in everyone? Maybe it's not for everyone? Or did we somehow miraculously get rid of this gift?

D.G.:- There have always been those who made a deal with their conscience. There was always Judas. But there are more counterexamples. While working on The Siege Book, Adamovich and I were deeply shocked by the diary of a schoolboy who was tormented by his conscience in terrible conditions of hunger. Every day he was faced with an unbearable problem - how to bring a ration of bread home to his mother and sister and resist eating at least an additional amount? Both hunger and conscience gnawed at him. There was a deadly, irreconcilable struggle - which is stronger. Hunger grows, conscience fails, and so on day after day. Often hunger won, and everything happened again. I think that conscience is an innate thing. This is what is invested in us. By whom? For what? After all, conscience is not beneficial to a person. It doesn't generate income. She bothers us. Perhaps she really is a representative of God, his surveillance and spy, the voice of God in the mind of man, a gift from above, which can grow or die? Everyone has it. But the hardships of life for some drown it out, while others remain faithful to it.

There are very few such people now, as well as examples of a decent life. In Russia there have always been saints whom the people loved. And there was a reason: they suffered and sacrificed themselves for him. But with the departure of Sakharov and Likhachev, the saints in Rus' disappeared into oblivion. Today there is no one to love: these idols have been thrown down, the pedestals stand empty. It's hard to live among empty pedestals! I would like to have an example, to see that yes, you can preserve the person within you. Although your neighbor has a villa, and you, perhaps, live modestly, as Academician Sakharov did, for example. I was at his house in Moscow: a tiny apartment in a Khrushchev block. But he could have lived differently. But he didn’t, and not because he was an ascetic. He believed that a scientist is characterized by modesty. That is, he was himself.

“AiF”: - Your phrase: “Only man has a conscience. It cannot be demanded from the people, from the state.” And why?

D.G.:- Because it's personal. Conscience cannot be collective. She is a property of my soul. Just like talent. Talent is not common.

“AiF”: - Speaking about Victory, you noted: “We had a thirst for justice then. So strong that it crushed everything." Why is this thirst not visible among the people now?

D.G.:- There is a thirst. But how exactly to satisfy it? Revolution and blood again? This is impossible. This means we need to remake life peacefully. How? One thing is clear: with such blatant inequality, the country will not last long. We live on two pipes: oil and gas. The rest is unrealistic promises.

“AiF”: - You said that honest people are pushed out of life. But the majority, perhaps even today, would like to act according to their conscience. How can they survive among empty pedestals?

D.G.:- Where did you get the idea that the majority still live honestly? Now it's very difficult. Moreover, people do not die from lack of conscience. No one forces you to be merciful. You can pass by, and nothing will happen to you for it.

You must have willpower and courage if you want to remain a decent person. Not everyone has these qualities. But even if someone does not live according to conscience - takes bribes, steals - I cannot consider him a complete person. I personally feel sorry for people. Especially young people, who are not to blame for finding themselves in emptiness. We can blame circumstances that force us to go against our soul.