سواد اخلاقی: معنا، مبانی و موانع

Introduction: The role and meaning of literacy in the modern world is a very complex and even amazing category because not only was it a factor in the gradual realization of the Renaissance in the past, but now, in the digital age, it has become the basis or necessity of everything, in such a way that it is almost impossible to experience a normal life without it. In parallel with the increasing changes in the world, the definition and scope of literacy is also undergoing constant change to the point where the category of literacies has practically replaced the classical concept of literacy and has added to the complexity of the issue. Computer literacy, emotional literacy, electronic literacy, Internet literacy, and moral literacy are among the most important emerging branches that have narrowed the space for the traditional understanding of the concept of literacy. The main question and issue in this article is about what moral literacy is and its role in the current world, that is, the world of two spaces. In fact, the following article wants to analyze the possibility of realizing something called moral literacy from the perspective of philosophy/philosophy of ethics. In other words, the debate is about whether moral literacy is possible and feasible, and if so, is it also desirable and desirable? Based on the answer to this question, another question is: What are the conceptual foundations of the formation of moral literacy and how does it relate to popular theories from a meta-ethical perspective? In light of these questions, it is easier to see whether moral literacy is more of a skill or information, and whether these two are more global or local.
Findings: Two main approaches can be taken regarding the content that can be transferred in the form of moral literacy: the normative approach and the skill approach. In the normative approach to the content and meaning of moral literacy, the transfer and education of two general categories of norms are discussed: global norms and local norms. But what is meant by global and local norms and how can we draw a boundary between them? There are relatively diverse ways to define and distinguish between the two. For example, through a descriptive study, we can say that universal norms are those that are common and accepted in all or most cultures or moral traditions of the world, such as fairness and truthfulness, and local norms are those that are only seen in some cultures or moral traditions, such as the religious veil common among Muslims or religious Jews. Of course, this is not the only way to distinguish between universal and local moral norms. Instead of a purely descriptive study, meta-ethical or philosophical methods can be used. For example, norms that can be proven or explained regardless of a specific religious or cultural perspective can be called universal or general moral norms, and norms that can only be understood or justified within a specific religious or cultural tradition or system can be called local or specific norms.
Discussion: It is clear that a detailed and in-depth study in this field is not the subject of this article, nor can its extensive dimensions be well handled here. Here I am only saying that when we are able to include moral norms in both global and local or general and specific formats in every reasonable and possible way, then we have removed a significant part of the obstacles to the development and teaching of moral literacy. You may ask why and how? The answer is that when we are able to level morality, then in determining the content of moral literacy we will be able to either be content with teaching global or general norms or teach the accepted and acceptable norms according to the situation (religious, cultural, geographical, etc.) of the learners. In the skills approach to the content and content of moral literacy, unlike the previous approach, the challenge of whether the teachings are global or local, general or specific is no longer a big issue. Why? Because the discussion is fundamentally about moral living skills rather than principles or norms or moral qualities. In this approach to the content of moral literacy, the methods and skills of being good are in focus, not what is good and what is bad! The nature of methods and skills is that they are largely cross-cultural and generally universal. Ethical skills and methods are mostly formal, organic, and instrumental, and lack evaluative aspects.