ISSN 0798 1015

Vol. 38 (Nº 40) Año 2017. Pág. 12

Spiritual and Moral Education of the Rising Generation by means of Arts and Humanities Education

Educación espiritual y moral de la generación naciente por medio de la educación en Artes y Humanidades

Yulia V. GANICHEVA 1; Anna A. DAVIDOVA 2; Alexander V. SMIRNOV 3; Natalia S. YUSHCHENKO 4; Anna I. SHCHERBAKOVA 5

Received: 25/07/2017 • Approved: 02/08/2017

Content

1. Introduction

2. Methods and Methodology

3. Results

4. Discussion

5. Conclusions

References

1. Introduction

To address the problems of the ethical and moral education of the rising generation, firstly, it is necessary to approach the basic concepts of “ethics” and “morality” in modern ethics, as well as their differences and interrelationship.

The term “ethics” comes from the Greek word “ethos”. “Initially, ethos was understood as the habitual place of cohabitation, a house, a human dwelling, an animal den, a bird’s nest. Later it was predominantly used to denote the stable nature of a phenomenon, or a custom. Aristotle formed the adjective “ethical” from the word “ethos” in order to denote a special class of human qualities called ethical virtues. The ethical virtues are properties of a character, temperament of a person, which are also called spiritual qualities. On the one hand, such qualities differ from “affect” properties of the body and, on the other hand, they should be distinguished from the dianoetic virtues as properties of the mind. For example, fear is a natural affect, memory is a property of the mind, and moderation, courage, generosity are the properties of the character. Aristotle introduced the term “ethics” to refer to the totality of ethical virtues, which are viewed as a special subject area of ​​knowledge and for the delineation of knowledge itself as a special science (Huseynov, 2002, p. 9).

Consequently, in the interpretation of ancient thinkers, ethics study such qualities of a person that are necessary for him for his stable existence and the stability of character traits. It is critical to pay attention to the fact that initially it was assumed that “ethos” should describe the habitat of a person, an animal, a bird, etc. And in this respect you can find a deep meaning - this or that human being’s embeddedness in society, the feeling of a “small Motherland”, which is one of the essential manifestations of the moral principle in man. And this is exactly what is given to a person from birth, as a socio-cultural context of his existence. The concept of “my home” includes not only the home, but also the surrounding environment.

Note also that the “ethical” by Aristotle relates to one’s typical traits, i.e. with those personal qualities that distinguish one person from another. It is not accidental that a person who seldom shows his own individual traits in a situation of social pressure is often called “lacking in character.” In the ethical context, the latter becomes synonymous to immorality.

2. Methods and Methodology

Now we proceed to the analysis of morality and its synonyms. One of the most popular synonyms of morality is “referent”. Of much importance is the derivation “to refer to” derived from the root. If we follow the logic of this meaning of the word, then it turns out that the referent is the one who refers to something that he chooses on his own, which does not always coincide with the interests of others. But let's not rush to conclusions.

Let us turn to the origin of another concept, which is also a key to ethics – “morality”. This concept, as is known, was introduced by Cicero in Latin (“moralis” i.e. “moral”), stemming from the word “mor” (mores - plural), which became synonymous with the concept of “morality.” Until now, in the modern literature on ethics, one often sees the use of the words “morality” and “ethics” as a designation of the same phenomenon. For example, in one of the most authoritative ethics textbooks, we find the following definition: “Ethics primarily means the corresponding branch of knowledge, science, and “morality” is the subject it studies” (Huseynov, 2002, p. 10).

And further, “in the framework of the academic discipline” ethics “will be referred to science, the field of knowledge, the intellectual tradition, and “ethical” or “moral”, using these words as synonyms, is what is studied by ethics, its subject” (Huseynov, 2002, p. 11).

But, in our opinion, it is no accident that Cicero introduced the concept of the moral from the concept of “plural number” (see above). Morality is the product of the community, society, social group, etc., and accordingly, presupposes the existence of appropriate group and collective moral norms to which a member of a given community, group must submit.

One could also reconcile with the identification of the concepts “ethics” and “morality”, if not for one important circumstance. One of the most acute problems of the formation of an ethical and moral culture is the widespread gap between the individual morality of a man and the social morality, which may even be dominant. Evidently, one can speak of the existence of immoral morality, when the personality is suppressed, its individual conscience and society becomes criminal (for example, forcing the political regime to conform to Nazism for conformism). But we can talk about immoral morality (for example, the morality of criminal elements, living not according to the laws of morality and law, but according to one’s own only due and possible reason).

The above ethics textbook also mentions a significant distinction between ethical values and virtuosity by Hegel, “by virtuosity we mean the subjective aspect of the corresponding deeds, and under moral – the actions themselves in their objectively unfolded fullness: virtuosity is how actions of the individual are seen in their subjective assessments, intentions, feelings of guilt, and moral is what human actions really are in the real experience of the family, the people, the state. It can also highlight the cultural and linguistic tradition that interprets virtuosity as a set of high moral principles, and moral as the mundane, historically variable norms of behavior. In this case, for example, the commandments of God are called virtuous, and the school teacher's instructions are moral” (Huseynov, 2002, p. 10).

In the above definitions, a special interest in the theory and practice of spiritual and moral education is the attribution of morality as a stable basis on which one or another moral institution, subjected to one or another conjuncture, changing public demands, can be built.

It is also important to note that moral assessments, according to Hegel, are the result of a subjective attitude, self-analysis, or analysis of the person “from the outside”, where in one way or another the voice of “public opinion” is present. The sphere of the moral, this is the true essence of a man, manifested primarily in his thoughts and feelings. In this distinction, in mediated form, one of the main problems of spiritual and moral education is reflected in the formation of the need to “be” (a stable moral principle in a man), and not “to seem” (ostentatious morality) as a bearer of certain moral norms.

At the same time, of course, one should not think that morality is simply outwardly beautiful and socially acceptable manifestations of the individual, sometimes covering up its immoral attitudes. As a true substance morality cannot exist without true morality as the foundation of the morality of the individual, so also morality cannot fully develop without its connection with morality, which is estimated by modern ethics as a kind of project, task in relation to what a full-fledged person should become. Accordingly, morality has two forms: “a) as a characteristic of the personality, a set of moral qualities, virtues, for example, truthfulness, honesty, kindness, b) as a characteristic of relations between people, a set of moral norms (requirements, commandments, rules), for example, “do not tell a lie,” “do not steal,” “do not kill” (Huseynov, 2002, p. 12).

In the above definitions, a special interest in the theory and practice of spiritual and moral education is the attribution of morality as a stable basis on which one or another moral system is built, subjected to the conjuncture, changing public demands, etc.

Moral norms are not just a regulator of the moral development of the individual, but also the provision of additional opportunities for such development. It is this vital aspect of morality that is not sufficiently understood in modern practice of spiritual and moral education. For example, in order to acquire the appropriate performing knowledge and skills, one desire is not enough (the “desire” of the musician), certain efforts are needed as manifestations of the corresponding personal qualities (will, diligence, perseverance, purposefulness, etc.) in accordance with the requirements for a future musician. The latter means that these personal qualities must meet certain moral requirements, the main one of which is the desire to deliver the good by their art to the surrounding people under the laws of “good and beauty.” Satisfying this seemingly external demand, the student becomes a true musician, because his dominant motivation is not the desire for immediate success, admiring himself, but a love for music itself, which makes him a real creator in the field of art. But if the student is guided purely by selfish motives (for example, to become famous) as the main ones, then he will never become a real musician (at best it will be a king for an hour); music will not become part of his way of life, life calling, etc. His musical abilities will be largely blocked by selfishness and self-admiration. In this connection, one cannot help recalling Stanislavsky's famous testament, “Love art in yourself, not yourself in art.” Failure to fulfill this testament turns into acting falsity and lack of creative growth. Consequently, the moral requirement actually becomes one of the most important conditions for the acquisition of creative freedom and full self-realization of the individual in performing activities (Berdyaev, 1994; Vygotsky, 1986).

At the same time, world ethical thought produced a common basic requirement for morality, which is the main condition for the moral development of the moral qualities of the individual. This is the “golden rule of morality”, which in a generalized form sounds like this, “Do not do to another what you do not want to be done to you.” This rule was somehow formulated in a variety of ancient cultures, i.e. ancient Chinese (Confucius), ancient Indian (Buddha), ancient Greek (seven sages). In a positive form, it was supplemented in the Sermon on the Mount of Jesus (Matthew, Luke). Along with the negation of doing evil to the neighbor, it is suggested that one should do good to others. In a positive form, it looks symmetrical with respect to the “golden rule of morality” formulated earlier, “Do to another what you want to be done to you.”

This addition is important and has a universal character. I. Kant, as you know, went further, creating his famous categorical imperative, based on the notion of “goodwill.” A truly ethical and accordingly moral philosopher considered this attitude to others, when the desire to do good is not bound to one or another reason, but is an organic need for doing good for the sake of good, as some natural emotional impulse. This is how a person, according to I. Kant, finds complete freedom, voluntariness (good will) in their actions and deeds. This demand of the philosopher has not lost its importance for the modern spiritual and moral education (the issues of moral education are devoted in the studies by O.Dolzhenko (Dolzhenko, 1995), E. Selezneva (Selezneva, 2009), A. Kamenets, I. Urmina ( Kamenets, Urmina, 2011). For example, the analysis of the practice of widespread volunteering is not always based on the idea of ​​volunteerism, but rather is very often accompanied by career considerations, the receipt of direct or hidden benefits, which largely discredit the movement itself (see more details - Orlova et al., 2010).

Evidently, non-indifference to the problems and disadvantages of others becomes the decisive condition for the person to acquire moral consciousness. Note that the attitude to “non-interference” forms in a person indifference or, more precisely, apathy and non-participation as a norm of social existence.

It is noteworthy that the creator of ethics, Aristotle, associated ethical and moral qualities primarily with spiritual qualities, i.e. ability to experience moral feelings. These qualities, in his opinion, should be firstly studied by ethics. Mental abilities of a man are studied by dianetics. Evidently, that for the modern spiritual and moral education, it is important to form a corresponding “culture of feelings”, where a special role belongs to the ability to compassion, empathy, the desire to participate in solving problems of others.

3. Results

The paradox of moral behavior, considered in the article, makes it possible to make an extremely important conclusion for the practice of spiritual and moral education. Although it sounds trivial, but it is enough to consider the very phrase “spiritual and moral.” True morality and ethics are formed on the basis of the moral development of the personality in combination with spiritual self-improvement, which presupposes the presence of the main accent in the spiritual and moral education on the inner world of the individual (his thoughts, feelings, inclinations, intentions), but not on the “right behavior” training.

The latter must be secondary, result from the influence on the worldview of a person and the world-feeling of objects of spiritual and moral value (Hegel, 2000). This does not mean underestimation of the corresponding “behavioral workshop.” Specially organized behavioral activity should be manifested insofar as it contributes to the improvement of internal personal qualities, without which any spiritual and moral sense is lost to the mastery of certain “external skills” (behavioral, performing, communicative, etc.) (Yudin, 1999).

In the existing studies of morality and ethics, special attention is paid to the importance of the individual responsibility of the individual for his actions and their consequences for others as an indicator of the level of his spiritual and moral development (Kamenets, 2014). This imperative can be regarded as the main guide of the spiritual and moral education of modern rising generation. In this regard, it is appropriate to provide young people with knowledge of situations of interaction with the society on the basis of the above-mentioned famous “golden rule of morality.”

The real social experience of young people, the experience which contributes to the formation of spiritual and moral values, is formed through the practice of social behavior that brings out the features of “one's own”, “habitual” way of life and features of “borderline” social behavior affecting another social reality in interaction process. It is in this symbiosis of social attitudes, behavioral patterns, that the space of ethical and morally learned by young people rules are born.

4. Discussion

For deeper understanding of basic characteristics of ethics and morality, as well as their interrelations, it makes sense to examine in more detail some of the provisions of Aristotle as the founder of ethics. The philosopher described his basic ideas about ethics in the work “Ethics of Nicomak” (Aristotle, 2010).

Already at the very beginning of his work Aristotle connects the acquisition of virtue with human happiness, “Happiness is a certain quality of the soul’s activity according to virtue ... For happiness, the main thing is activity according to virtue, and the opposite activities are for the opposite of happiness" (Aristotle, 2010: 56-57). In this case, according to Aristotle, if mental virtues develop through education, the moral (ethical) virtues are formed by a habit (ethics). In this judgment, a whole program of the possible formation of the spiritual and moral culture of the individual is laid. Expressed in modern language, the basis for the moral development of the individual should be a specially organized “behavioral training”, forming certain habitual stereotypes of behavioral reactions to the social environment. In the field of education, this means not just getting some knowledge of ethical or moral norms; the acquisition of knowledge, crafts and skills in one or another activity, but also the creation of conditions for the realization of these skills, knowledge and crafts in the work of public service, in everyday life, as well as in relationships with others.

It is through a specially organized socially significant activity that the moral development of the personality is carried out, since, according to Aristotle, “none of the moral virtues is born to us by nature, for everything natural cannot be trained ... to anything whatsoever new. For example, a stone that naturally falls downward, cannot be taught to climb up, although you try to teach it to jump by throwing it up a thousand times ....” And one more idea, “virtues exist in us not by nature and not contrary to nature. We naturally acquire them, and thanks to the training ... we are improving in them” (Aristotle, 2010: 64).

According to the philosopher, the spiritual and moral development should be contributed to by legislators, who promote the spread of virtue in society. And it is this that distinguishes a good state system from a bad one. This judgment of Aristotle is especially relevant today, because the widespread separation of legislative and legal practice from morality leads to legal action according to the well-known saying “it depends what lawyer is looking at it”. Hopes for a rule of law state in isolation from moral norms often lead to immoral results through legislation or using “holes” in this legislation. Aristotle directly connects acquired virtues with the acquisition of pleasure, beautiful, useful things which help avoid suffering, shameful and harmful events. To achieve this result, frequent repetition of “just and prudent actions” is necessary (Aristotle, 2010: 69).

The main way to achieve this, according to Aristotle, is the formation of the ability to own one's passions, adhering to the manifestation of feelings, the drives of the “golden mean.” At first glance, this position of the philosopher looks excessively rational and schematic. For example, is it possible to avoid a certain passion in artistic creation? In fact, we are talking about the emotional manifestations of some people. Here it is important not only to discuss everyday feelings and emotions that are devoid of any moral content, but also an excessively sluggish emotional manifestation (for example, the need for righteous anger that does not pass into hysteria and embitterment).

In this regard, it is necessary to note the importance of self-directed skills, “the feeling of truth”, positive worldviews as a counterbalance to neurotic, naturalistic manifestations in everyday life. These manifestations appear as a result of the unbridled instinctive reactions of the unconscious, often even of animal nature (for example, in contemporary pop music). To avoid this, according to Aristotle, we need not only extremes in the manifestation of feelings, but also some passions, which are always (irrespective of the “golden mean”) are vicious. By this statement, Aristotle anticipated one of the fundamental provisions of many religious ethical systems, in which many aspects of a person's emotional life are condemned as initially destructive and immoral.

Introduced by Aristotle, the measure of the “golden mean” in the manifestation of certain personal qualities is of interest for modern practice of spiritual and moral education of the personality as a kind of indicator that fixes a person's dependence on these or other passions, drives, vices and bad habits. Through the “middle position” offered by the philosopher, one can also assess the relevance (or inappropriateness) of the proposed emotional content, especially the works of mass artistic culture, often neurotic, mentally traumatizing the viewer, the listener instead of supplying him with spiritual harmony and mental balance (Aristotle, 1987).

Those who categorically insist on the need to abandon the “golden mean” in their personal manifestations, according to Aristotle, are discovers of their own uncontrollable dependencies on the corresponding passions, “the more we are inclined to anything, the more it seems to be the opposite of the middle. For example, we are naturally more prone to pleasures by nature, and therefore we tend to lean more towards dissipation than to modesty ... And of course, we consider a sharper opposition our commitment to something... and therefore immorality. Being excess, is more sharply contrasted with prudence than with insensitivity” (Aristotle, 2010: 77-78).

Aristotle also considers the measure of human responsibility for their own actions and manifestations of feelings. To do this, he introduces the sign of voluntariness (or involuntariness) in personal manifestations: “because / moral / virtue is associated with passions - endurance and deeds, and for voluntary passions and deeds people are praised or condemned, and for involuntarily deeds people are sympathized and sometimes even felt sorry for, careful study between voluntary and involuntary is useful to lawmakers while the appointment of awards ... and punishments” (Aristotle, 2010: 81).

In fact, here Aristotle raises one of the most urgent problems, important for modern society – the problem of establishing sanity in the performance of a particular misdemeanor, asocial action, crime. The philosopher proposes to solve this problem in the following way, “It is hardly right to consider involuntarily what is committed in a rage or a drive ... Firstly, because then no other living being, not even a child, will voluntarily act. Secondly, there is a certain doubt if any act of attraction and rage is not voluntary, or whether there are any voluntary fine deeds, or any shameful not voluntary deeds. But isn’t it funny, since the reason for the deed is one? And it must be ridiculous to say that what one should want is involuntarily, because to be angry at something and to feel the desire to experience something, say, health or knowledge, means a voluntary deed. It is believed that involuntary brings suffering, and voluntary brings pleasure. What is the difference between involuntary, or well-calculated voluntary deeds... when it comes to a fit of rage ... or committed misdeeds? After all, on the one hand, both should be avoided, and, on the other, passions, outside reasoning, are no less characteristic of man than reasonable calculation. So, deeds, committed, either in a fit of fury or attraction, are typical of a person, and therefore such deeds are ridiculous to consider non-voluntary” (Aristotle, 2010: 85).

Without going into the purely legal subtleties of the measures of human responsibility for misdeeds, committed under the influence of certain mental states, let us note the importance of conceptualizing from the moral point of view the appropriate idea of “internal readiness” for this or that activity on an individual-personal level. The very moment of the birth of crimes and immoral acts in the inner world of a person is profoundly revealed in religious, philosophical and fiction literature. Next, we will consider this aspect of morality and ethics in more detail. Now let us note the importance of studying the works of fiction in this aspect for the formation of the spiritual and moral culture of the individual (Kagan, 1972; Kamenets, 2011-1; Kamenets, 2011-2; Propp, 2008-1; Propp, 2008-2).

Aristotle’s interpretation of the problem of influence on the measure of legal responsibility of misdemeanors committed by ignorance of the corresponding laws is also interesting. As is known, in modern law enforcement practice there is one thesis, that dominates legal practice, it is as follows, “Ignorance of the law does not absolve, the person, who committed an offense, from legal responsibility.” Aristotle gives this thesis a moral interpretation, “And for the ignorance of the laws or of something that must be known and result in punishment, as well as, in other cases when people believe that their ignorance is caused by inattention, it is important to remember that ignorance depends on the people themselves. Because it’s in their power to be attentive. One may argue that maybe a person is not able to be attentive. My answer is that people themselves are to be blamed for being inattentive like that, which is the result of their sluggish life, just as they themselves are to be blamed for being unjust or dissolving with others. Some are doing evil, others are spending time in drinking and similar activities. /one must remember that activities, associated with certain things, create people of a certain kind” (Aristotle, 2010: 9).

Thus, in the opinion of the philosopher, this or that legal incompetence is primarily connected with immoral behavior in one way or another. This approach allows us to better understand the content and meaning of the formation of a legal culture, which, along with legal education, should focus on the formation of a way of life for those who are being educated, excluding the very possibility of committing crimes. In Aristotle’s opinion, in this case, there arises a certain guarantee of adequate actions even in uncertain legal situations, “With the dangers are known in advance, the choice can be made by calculation and reasoning, but in case with sudden dangers people act, according to their foundations” (Aristotle, 2010: 10). “The foundations” are, in fact, the main sustainable components of the adopted daily lifestyle, which needs to be given special attention in the spiritual and moral education of the individual.

Summing up some of the results of the consideration of the notions of “morality” and “ethics”, one can conclude that already ancient thinkers saw their deep interconnection, which in general can be imagined as the interrelation of individual moral aspirations present in the inner world of the individual. Ancient philosophers also could see socially significant moral behavioral norms, given in the form of corresponding averaged standards as universally recognized standards of interaction between people and the world around them. Noteworthy, here inevitably arises a problem that can be expressed by a well-known question-the saying from the comedy by A.S. Griboedov “Distress from Cleverness”: “And who are they to judge us?”. In other words, who establishes generally accepted moral norms and who gave them the right to do this? So there is a well-known paradox of moral assessment.

The essence of it is that those people who are trying to give moral assessment to someone do not initially have this moral right, because they themselves cannot be absolutely impeccable morally. If they are sure of their absolute infallibility, then they cease to be self-critical and become accordingly morally questionable. Of much importance in this connection is the statement of the well-known humanist-ethic A.Shvetser, “Pure conscience is a devil’s invention”. It is also noted that “such false roles of people’s judges are often given to people who occupy higher levels in social hierarchical structures (managers in relation to their subordinates, teachers in relation to students, etc.). It is a common practice that ... those who could do the judgement, will not do this, and those who would like to make a moral judgement cannot be trusted” (Huseynov, 2002, p. 37).

The solution to this paradox lies in the plane of moral self-restriction (“doctor, cure yourself!”). This reveals the axiom of the famous Christian commandment, “By what judgment you judge, so will you be judged, and by what measure do you measure, such and you will be measured” (Gospel of Matthew 7, v. 2). Moreover, the more one is attentive to his own moral imperfections, the more opportunities he has to help others overcome the corresponding moral imperfections. In this regard, it is extremely important for the educators themselves to follow the above-mentioned commandment. The educators form the spiritual and moral culture. For educators it is important not to forget the continuation of the above-mentioned commandment which is not often given due attention. And this continuation sounds like this, “and why do you look at the mote in the eye of your brother, and do not feel the log in your eye? You say to your brother, “I'll take the mote out of your eye”, but, in your eye you do not see the log! “Hypocrite, take out the log from your eye first, and then you will see how to remove the mote out of the eye of your brother” (Gospel of Matthew 7: 3-5). Let us pay attention to the fact that the word “how” is highlighted in the Gospel. And there is a great soul-saving and spiritual-moral sense in it. Only realizing your own imperfections, you will be able to find means to help others.

Accordingly, people who do not show due respect for moral standards should be treated as people who are in catastrophe, they should not be accused. This position is widely represented in Orthodox pedagogy and the teachings of the Fathers of the Church, insisting that one must not hate the bearer of a sin, but show contempt for the sin in the person, but not the person herself. In this case, one who takes on the mission of “correcting morals” should rather take the position of a doctor who loves all his patients, fighting their diseases. In this regard, it becomes clear, at first glance, a strange testament of one of the characters in the “The Brothers Karamazov” by F.M. Dostoevsky, calling for treating all people and themselves as “sick” (i.e., somehow everybody is affected by the sin). The paradox of moral evaluation also contains the requirement to avoid constant praise of someone for edifying another. Unfortunately, many teachers and parents are guilty of doing this. Here is an unjustified division of people into “sheep” and “goats” and it continues without any hope of correcting morally imperfect people.

But in the practical work of good, the desire to help people overcome their weaknesses, difficulties, dependencies, imperfections, there is one more “underwater rock” which is designated by the well-known expression “with good intentions the road to hell is paved.” There is another paradox, called the “paradox of moral behavior.” The essence of this paradox lies in the illusion that intentions can be good, and deeds resulting from this intention turn out to be evil.

Here it makes sense to return to the distinction between the concepts of “ethics” and “morality”, considered above. If from the standpoint of generally accepted morality, i.e. external behavioral norms, a person can act flawlessly, then his inner moral attitudes (not always even conscious) can be far from flawless. This is manifested in the fact that good intentions often turn out to be evil. Here, good manifests itself without taking into account the individual characteristics of the recipients of this good. Doers of good act at their own discretion, not paying due attention to the real problems of those to whom they try to help. Thus, they only exacerbate these problems instead of resolving them.

The rising generation acquires the main moral experience in real everyday life, the impact on which by the existing educational institutions for a number of reasons is significantly weakened. Essentially, the basic moral attitudes of this age group are formed in the space of the assimilated life environment. These moral attitudes must be developed and improved through educational work.

The actualization of the process of spiritual moral education of the rising generation in its turn depends on creating conditions for the cultural and social development of the young people. It also depends on full disclosure and realization of their potential creative opportunities, as well as their social adaptation through appropriate experience of studying the spiritual and moral traditions of our society (Anufrieva et al. 2015-1).

It should also be noted that one of the urgent problems in the national education is the formation of young people's personal qualities, which correlate with the modern social practice. The aggravation of this problem is largely due to the imperfection of social practice itself, the devaluing value of the upbringing and spiritual development of youth. This is primarily the downbeat result of the fetishization of the monetarist and market domineering in the development of the society. This result contradicts the very idea of ​​spiritual and moral education as an instrument of state social and educational policy. The emphasis on the resource-based economy in the domestic policy destroys the very possibility of developing a social creative potential, where the role of arts and humanities’ education and spiritual development is great. Of much concern is the horrifying social stratification of our society, constantly reproducing among the holders of material means the lack of interest to solve the moral and spiritual problems of society.

In this situation, the national spiritual and moral education of youth with the means of artistic and humanitarian education cannot successfully develop as long as it is based on the blind and formal copying of educational models and programs, originating from foreign experience. Meanwhile, in many respects because of this copying, many arts and humanities educational disciplines, that are of great importance in the education of young people, cannot develop further as independent educational disciplines and directions of educational work. However, it is here where an important role can be played by arts and humanities subjects (primarily fiction reading), which in the context of existing training and educational programs, thanks to scientific reflection and reinterpretation of fiction reading, can become one of the most important resources of modern education of the rising generation.

It is necessary to study Russian literature as a reflection of the mentality, values ​​and ideals of the Russian people, which must set the inner logic and direction of the entire process of education. It should be taken into account that Russian literature has a pronounced anthropological, “humane” character. This is one of the reasons for its worldwide recognition. For domestic education and upbringing literary works should become one of the main sources of information about society, man and his social problems. This will significantly increase the level of content and practicality of all activities of training and educational institutions (Kamenets, 2016).

To further improve the use of arts and the humanities in educational work is necessary to explore the possibilities of convergence of knowledge and existing educational programs. In this process, a special role should belong to the study of literature as a source of social knowledge and the formation of moral standards that are relevant to educational practice (Schelling, 1999). The absorption of the works of fiction involves the synthesis of conceptual and creative thinking that is available to students, the comparison of the moral problems’ content disclosed in the literature with the real life experiences of young people.

Meanwhile, the modern domestic education and training at all age stages has a pronounced technocratic character. This is evident not only in the neglecting or underestimating the educational opportunities of aesthetic education, as well as literary and artistic knowledge, but also in the attempt to install on purely mental development or the development of the individual mental abilities at the expense of the formation of their integral outlook and “the culture of feelings” (Anufrieva et al., 2015- 2).

The lack of attention to studying Russian literature in educational and training institutions is also one of the reasons for alienation of these institutions from the preparation to the real life with a real social experience faced by today’s rising generation. Russian literature with its careful and attentive acquisition can and must become a true “book of life” for the younger generation. In this regard, it requires a special research work, followed by methodological developments to improve the content, forms and methods of teaching Russian literature in educational institutions, aimed at strengthening connections with the study of the real social reality literature, as well as the task of socialization of the younger generation. This task should be a nation-wide state-supported project with the assistance of various experts and scholars of social, arts and humanities sciences. It should also involve the rethinking of the content of all educational subjects through the use of works of Russian literature, the process of making education more attractive, accessible, informative and ideologically oriented. In addition, Russian literature can become an integrator of different educational (especially the arts and humanities) subjects in a holistic social scientific knowledge obtained by the rising generation in educational institutions.

5. Conclusions

In the light of the foregoing, it is possible to propose the following directions for the development of relevant research practices and scientific and methodological activities that foster the education of young people with the means of fiction:

- scientific and methodological developments and research, revealing the features of the mentality of the Russian people, their ethical and cultural traditions in modern conditions with the help of materials of Russian fiction literature;

- methodological developments that determine the strategic directions of development and improvement of various scientific arts and humanities subjects, based on models, ontologies, scenarios, images and generalizations of Russian fiction literature are relevant to the study of social reality;

- the research of possibilities and prospects for the interaction between Russian culture and civilization with civilizations and cultures of other countries on the basis of common humanistic values ​​embodied in the best works of Russian fiction literature;

- pedagogical and cultural studies of Russian fairy folklore, focused on the search for pedagogical technologies that contribute to the expansion of the readership in educational institutions;

- scientific and methodical publications to help social scientists, psychologists, political scientists, sociologists and other specialists in the form of methodological samples of social, psychological diagnosis and counseling based on works of Russian fiction literature;

- textbooks for teaching Russian literature in educational institutions using the achievements of sociology, psychology, ethnography, cultural studies and other humanities.

The study of the ethical and moral potential of the arts and humanities education of young people makes it possible to identify institutional and extra-institutional opportunities for the formation of a spiritual and moral culture, as well as the possibilities for their interaction in Russian society.

It is necessary to revive the principle of nurturing education, which has recently been replaced by the task of socializing the individual. Under the socialization of the individual in modern pedagogical practice, the process of adaptation to the surrounding social environment is primarily understood. This means mastering the methods and skills necessary to absorb the social roles required by society. To fully develop the personality and even its adaptability in society, this is not enough. So, the task remains to develop the creative potential of the individual, capable not only of adapting in accordance with the models of conformist behavior to the environment, but also transforming the latter “according to the laws of good and beauty.”

Formed in the educational practice, the emphasis towards mastering educational standards and the average skills of reproducing certain cultural patterns resulted in the fact that the student’s personality, his inner world, experiences, and individual interests were found to be “lost” irrespective of any socially significant activity.

Such tasks as the formation of a world outlook, the spiritual and moral development of the personality, the upbringing of certain personal qualities have disappeared from the pedagogical programs and training courses. Instead, wherever possible, the notions of “competence”, “methods and skills”, “knowledge”, relating to the future profession, performance, development of special abilities, etc., are introduced. We are not inclined to oppose the process of teaching to the processes of upbringing. It is more important to note the need for primary education tasks, which must follow learning tasks, are of much importance.

This problem goes far beyond teaching science. The change of emphasis resulted in a very definite change on the vision of a man. Instead of the domineering nowadays initial attitude toward the ideal of a personality as an individual who is an “acting”, “successful”, “enterprising” agent, it is necessary to revitalize the ideal of the person who is “thinking”, “reflexing”, “feeling”, who is able to behave in a corresponding manner. This implies the rejection of excessive enthusiasm in pedagogical technologies, methods that turn a person into a non-judgmental performer, inscribed in certain social standards. Nowadays at best a person develops an instrumental type of thinking (which includes pragmatic thinking, but not abstract) and professional skills in one or another activity without meaningful landmarks. The result is a formed conformal, faceless, uncreative, emotionally undeveloped individual with a low level of ethical and moral culture.

An appeal to works of fiction literature will be productive, if in accordance with the objectives of the course, they will result in situational analysis. The latter involves considering not only the moral qualities of certain literary characters as illustrations or instructive examples, but also the analysis of problematic situations in which these characters happen to be, the study of the causes of such situations (subjective and objective), the correlation of these situations with the professional situations of the social educator.

It is necessary to have good knowledge of the texts of literary works studying this course. Moreover, these texts should be considered by all participants of the educational process not as an optional, but as an obligatory professional reading of the literature, necessary for improving the competencies and skills of future social educators. Accordingly, works of fiction literature are considered in this case as “life textbooks”, in which the most vital ethical situations of the social teacher are typified or modeled.

In the study of literary works, interactive technologies are most preferable, for they involve the interaction of students with literary characters in a game and case-study form; drama staging fragments of literary works with their subsequent discussion; conducting theatrical discussions, debates, seminars. In this case, works of fiction literature should be considered as an occasion for a broader discussion of the current ethical problems of social teaching science, the development of independent thinking, the implementation of the research and search approaches in the teaching of this subject.

The use of works of Russian fiction literature in the study of the course will be effective if students regardless of their ideological attitudes will be well acquainted with the text of the Gospel, since Russian classical literature can be truly understood and mastered provided that the Orthodox moral philosophy is known as one of its main cultural codes.

References

Aristotel, A., 2010. Etika [Ethics]. Moscow: AST: AST MOSKVA.

Anufrieva, N., E. Anufriev, I. Korsakova, A. Shcherbakova and V. Shcherbakov, 2015-1. Traditional musical folklore as a formation factor of personal integral worldview in conditions of modern metropolis. European Journal of Science and Theology, 11 (3): 97-106.

Anufrieva, N., E. Anufriev, I. Korsakova and A. Shcherbakova, 2015-2. Worldview Formation of the Teacher-musician Personality in the Higher Education System. Asian Social Science, 11 (6): 99-104

Berdiaev, N., 1994. Smysl tvorchestva. Opyt opravdaniia cheloveka [Sense of creativity. Experience in justifying a person]. Moscow: Iskusstvo.

Dolzhenko, O., 1995. Ocherki po filosofii obrazovaniia [Essays on the Philosophy of Education]. Moscow: Kompaniia Kvorum Promo-media.

Gegel, G., 2000. Fenomenologiia dukkha [Phenomenology of the spirit]. Moscow: Nauka.

Guseinov, A. and R. Apresian, 2002. Etika [Ethics]. Moscow: Gardariki.

Iskusstvo v sisteme kultury [Art in the cultural system], 1987. Leningrad: Iskusstvo.

Kagan, M., 1972. Morfologiia iskusstva [The morphology of art]. Leningrad: Iskusstvo.

Kamenets, A., 2011-1. Ispolzovanie proizvedenii russkoi khudozhestvennoi literatury v proforientirovanii podrastaiushchego pokoleniia [The use of works of Russian fiction literature in the professional orientation of the younger generation]. Moscow: RGSU.

Kamenets, A., 2014. Problemy dukhovno-nravstvennoi kultury [The problems of Spiritual and Moral Culture]. Moscow: RITM

Kamenets, A., 2016. Problemy formirovaniia dukhovno-nravstvennoi kultury v proizvedeniiakh russkoi khudozhestvennoi literatury [The problems of the formation of spiritual and moral culture in the works of Russian fiction]. Moscow: RGSU.

Kamenets, A., 2011-2. Sotsialnaia pedagogika russkogo skazochnogo folklore [Social pedagogy of Russian fairy folklore]. Moscow: RGSU.

Kamenets, A. and I. Urmina, 2011. Tekhnologii sotsialnogo vzaimodeistviia v reshenii aktualnykh problem molodezhi [Technologies of social interaction in solving actual problems of youth]. Moscow: RGSU.

Orlova, E., A. Kamenets and I. Urmina, 2010. Sotsiokulturnye problemy molodezhi [Socio-cultural problems of youth]. Moscow: RGSU.

Propp, V., 2008-1. Morfologiia skazki: istoricheskie korni volshebnoi skazki [Morphology of a fairy tale: the historic roots of a fairy tale]. Moscow: Labirint.

Propp, V., 2008-2. Poetika folklore [Poetics of folklore]. Moscow: Labirint.

Shelling, F., 1999. Filosofiia iskusstva [The philosophy of art]. Moscow: Mysl.

Selezneva, E., 2009. Problemy dukhovno-nravstvennogo vospitaniia v strategiiakh obrazovaniia ХХI veka [Problems of Ethical and Moral Education in the 21st Century Education Strategies]. Moscow: RGSU.

The Gospel according to Matthew. Date Views 20.03.2017 azbyka.ru/biblia/.

Urmina, I., 2011. Kontseptsiia zhiznennogo uspekha v molodezhnoi srede [The concept of life success in the youth environment]. Moscow: RGSU.

Vygotskii, L., 1986. Psikhologiia iskusstva [Psychology of Art]. Moscow: Iskusstvo.

Yudin, A., 1999. Russkaia narodnaia dukhovnaia kultura [Russian folk spiritual culture]. Moscow: Vyssh shk.

1. Russian State Social University, Russia, 129226, Moscow, Wilhelm Pieck, 4/1. E-mail: krutko_julia@mail.ru

2. Russian State Social University, Russia, 129226, Moscow, Wilhelm Pieck, 4/1. E-mail: adavidova70@mail.ru

3. Russian State Social University, Russia, 129226, Moscow, Wilhelm Pieck, 4/1. E-mail: abccellist@yandex.ru

4. Russian State Social University, Russia, 129226, Moscow, Wilhelm Pieck, 4/1. E-mail: n.yushenko@list.ru

5. Russian State Social University, Russia, 129226, Moscow, Wilhelm Pieck, 4/1. E-mail: anna.68@list.ru