THE JUSTIFICATION OF MORALITY AND MORAL PHILOSOPHY

In December 2024, the All-Russian Conference “University Philosophy in Russia” dedicated to the 270th anniversary of the founding of Moscow State University was held. In the course of our presentation, representatives of the editorial board of the Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University asked us to present the main provisions of scientific research on the justification of morality. In the philosophical discourse summarized the results of our research published in recent works. The article raises the question of who can speak on behalf of morality. It is shown that many authoritative moral philosophers believed and believe that no one has such a right. However, we know that the church, great writers, famous scientists and many others have tried to speak on behalf of morality. For many centuries, moral preach was considered a completely normal and quite acceptable way of spreading moral truths. However, here the question of freedom of moral choice arises. If someone endowed with public authority offers me moral truths, then I seem to have no choice but to accept them. In my opinion, the problem is solved by the procedure of substantiating morality, which can have both the character of a theoretical procedure presented at the level of the work of certain social structures, for example, university departments, and a personal character. It is the presentation of the moral procedure at the personal level that allows us to understand that the freedom of moral choice is always preserved, despite the existence of authoritative sources that make moral demands on us. The article demonstrates the expectations of the individual in relation to the justification of morality, it is shown that even at the personal level such a procedure is not carried out without theoretical knowledge. Consequently, knowledge of morality as a set of theories, presented already in terms of ethical understanding of moral issues, is necessary for a person to understand the foundations of his existence. We demonstrate the advantages and limitations of the absolutist and utilitarian approaches to morality, show how personal interest can be presented in morality and how this is related to freedom of moral choice.