“Justification of Good” or “benefit of evil”: V. Solovyov and K. Lorenz about the natural Foundations of Morality

Based on the introductory sections of the treatise “The Justification of Goodˮ and some paragraphs of the book “The So-called evil: The Natural History of Aggressionˮ a comparative analysis of V. Solovyov's ethical and philosophical concept of the natural foundations of morality and K. Lorenz's natural scientific hypothesis about the evolutionary benefits of aggression is carried out. It is shown, that despite all the differences in the form and content of the two theories being compared both of them proceed from the principle of interconnectedness of the transition from biological forms of behavior to social relations. For Solovyov the natural roots of the three foundations of morality as such a connecting link. Lorenz has an ambivalence of aggression, which can manifest itself in different ways in intraspecific and group selection. At the same time, the fundamental differences between the theories under consideration in the issues of the origin and essence of the natural foundations of morality are noted. Despite the additional introduction of such a specifically sensual form as conscience, Solovyov's conception of the natural foundations of the non-natural idea of goodness looks like a pantheistic concession to theism. Lorenz having identified the positive role of aggression in intraspecific selection finds the origins of behavior similar to morality in communities of living beings. It is precisely such proto-moral behaviors that do not completely eliminate, but weaken and inhibit innate aggression. The general conclusions of the article note Vladimir Solovyov's contribution to the formation of the modern picture of the world, and also state the different understanding of the dual nature of man by the Russian philosopher and the Austrian scientist with the general similarity of the thesis of his creation and progressive incompleteness.