Composition on the theme "Man of Honor". What act can be called dishonest essay Definition: what is honor

Final essay on the topic: “What qualities should a man of honor have? "

What qualities should a man of honor have? Of course, he must be decent, honest, true to his word. And he also needs to have the courage to defend his honor in difficult situations. He must have the strength of mind to face danger with dignity, perhaps even death. A man of honor is characterized by altruism, readiness, if necessary, to sacrifice himself in the name of higher values. Such a person is ready to stand up not only for himself, but also for others. Let's illustrate the above with examples.

Here is Sotnikov, the hero of the story of the same name by V. Bykov. Having been captured, he courageously endures torture, but does not tell his enemies anything. Knowing that he will be executed in the morning, he prepares to face death with dignity. The writer focuses our attention on the thoughts of the hero: “Sotnikov easily and simply, as something elementary and completely logical in his position, now made the last decision: to take everything upon himself. Tomorrow he will tell the investigator that he went to reconnaissance, had a mission, wounded a policeman in a shootout, that he is a commander of the Red Army and an opponent of fascism, let them shoot him. The rest are not here." It is indicative that before death a partisan thinks not about himself, but about the salvation of others. And although his attempt did not lead to success, he fulfilled his duty to the end. The hero courageously meets death, not for a minute does the thought come to him to beg the enemy for mercy, to become a traitor. We see that the hero has such qualities as fidelity to duty and the Fatherland, courage, readiness to sacrifice oneself. This hero can rightly be called a man of honor.

Such is Pyotr Grinev, the hero of A.S. Pushkin's novel The Captain's Daughter. The author tells about the capture of the Belogorsk fortress by Pugachev. The officers had to either swear allegiance to Pugachev, recognizing him as sovereign, or end their lives on the gallows. The author shows what choice his hero made: Pyotr Grinev showed courage, he was ready to die, but not to dishonor the honor of the uniform. He found the courage to tell Pugachev to his face that he could not recognize him as sovereign, refused to change the military oath: “No,” I answered with firmness. - I am a natural nobleman; I swore allegiance to the empress: I can’t serve you.” With all frankness, Grinev answered Pugachev that he might fight against him, fulfilling his officer's duty: “You know, it’s not my will: they tell me to go against you - I’ll go, there’s nothing to do. What will it be like if I refuse service when my service is needed? The hero understands that honesty can cost him his life, but a sense of duty and honor prevails in him over fear. It was the sincerity and courage, honesty and directness of the hero that helped him get out of a difficult situation with dignity. His words so impressed Pugachev that he saved Grinev's life and let him go.

We know that in another situation, Grinev was ready to sacrifice his life, defending the honor of another person - Masha Mironova. He fought in a duel with Shvabrin, defending the honor of Masha Mironova. Shvabrin, being rejected, in a conversation with Grinev allowed himself to offend the girl with vile allusions. Grinev could not bear this. As a decent man, he went out to fight and was ready to die, but to defend the good name of the girl.

We see that Pushkin's hero is characterized by the best human qualities: courage and courage, fidelity to duty and honesty, directness, readiness to stand up for others. He is a fine example of a man of honor.

Summing up what has been said, I would like to express the hope that there will be as many such people as possible.

Final essay on the topic: “How can you get out of a difficult situation with honor? "

Life often puts us in difficult conditions, and it is very important to be able to get out of a difficult situation, retaining our dignity, without tarnishing honor. How to do it? It seems that there cannot be a ready-made recipe for all occasions. The main thing is to always remember what is most important. And the most important thing is fidelity to duty and given word, decency, self-esteem and respect for other people, honesty and directness. The moral compass will always point you in the right direction.

Let us turn to the novel by A.S. Pushkin "The Captain's Daughter". The author tells about the capture of the Belogorsk fortress by Pugachev. The officers had to either swear allegiance to Pugachev, recognizing him as sovereign, or end their lives on the gallows. The author shows what choice his hero made: Pyotr Grinev showed courage, he was ready to die, but not to dishonor the honor of the uniform. He found the courage to tell Pugachev to his face that he could not recognize him as sovereign, refused to change the military oath: “No,” I answered with firmness. - I am a natural nobleman; I swore allegiance to the empress: I can’t serve you.” With all frankness, Grinev answered Pugachev that he might fight against him, fulfilling his officer's duty: “You know, it’s not my will: they tell me to go against you - I’ll go, there’s nothing to do. What will it be like if I refuse service when my service is needed? The hero understands that honesty can cost him his life, but a sense of duty and honor prevails in him over fear. It was the sincerity and courage, honesty and directness of the hero that helped him get out of a difficult situation with dignity. His words so impressed Pugachev that he saved Grinev's life and let him go.

Another example is the story of M.A. Sholokhov "The Fate of Man". The main character, Andrei Sokolov, was captured. For carelessly spoken words, they were going to shoot him. He could beg for mercy, humiliate himself before his enemies. Perhaps a weak-minded person would have done just that. But the hero was ready to defend the honor of a soldier in the face of death. On the offer of the commandant Müller to drink for the victory of German weapons, he refused. Sokolov behaved confidently and calmly, refused snacks, despite the fact that he was hungry. He explained his behavior this way: “I wanted to show them, the damned, that although I’m dying of hunger, I’m not going to choke on their handouts, that I have my own, Russian dignity and pride and that they didn’t turn me into cattle, like didn't try." Sokolov's act aroused respect for him even from the enemy. The German commandant recognized the moral victory of the Soviet soldier and saved his life. We see that self-esteem, courage, and directness helped this hero to get out of a difficult situation with honor.

Thus, we can conclude: in difficult circumstances, one should remember about moral guidelines. It is they who will indicate the way out of their darkness to the light.

Final essay on the topic: “When does the choice arise between honor and dishonor? "

When does a choice arise between honor and dishonor? In my opinion, a person can face such a choice under a variety of circumstances. For example, in wartime, a soldier comes face to face with death. He can die with dignity, remaining faithful to his duty and not tarnishing military honor. At the same time, he may try to save his life by embarking on the path of betrayal.

Let us turn to the story of V. Bykov "Sotnikov". We see two partisans captured by the police. One of them, Sotnikov, behaves courageously, endures severe torture, but does not tell the enemy anything. He retains self-respect and, before execution, accepts death with honor. His comrade, Rybak, is trying to escape at all costs. He despised the honor and duty of the defender of the Fatherland and went over to the side of the enemy, became a policeman and even participated in the execution of Sotnikov, personally knocking out a stand from under his feet. We see that it is in the face of mortal danger that the true qualities of people are manifested. Honor here is loyalty to duty, and dishonor is a synonym for cowardice and betrayal.

The choice between honor and dishonor arises not only in times of war. The need to pass the test of moral strength may be before everyone, even a child. To preserve honor means to try to protect one's dignity and pride, to know dishonor means to endure humiliation and bullying, being afraid to fight back.

V. Aksyonov tells about this in the story “Breakfasts of the forty-third year”. The narrator was regularly the victim of stronger classmates who regularly took away from him not only breakfasts, but also any other things they liked: “He took her from me. He took everything - everything that was of interest to Him. And not only for me, but for the whole class.” The hero was not just sorry for the lost, the constant humiliation, the awareness of his own weakness, was unbearable. He decided to stand up for himself, to resist. And although physically he could not defeat the three overage hooligans, but the moral victory was on his side. An attempt to defend not only his breakfast, but also his honor, to overcome his fear became an important milestone in his growing up, the formation of his personality. The writer brings us to the conclusion: one must be able to defend one's honor.

Summing up what has been said, I would like to express the hope that, faced with a choice between honor and dishonor, we will remember honor and dignity, we will be able to overcome spiritual weakness, we will not allow ourselves to fall morally.

Final essay on the topic: “What can lead a person to a dishonorable act? "

What can lead a person to act dishonestly? It seems that the answers to this complex question may be different. In my opinion, one of the reasons for a dishonorable act can be selfishness, when a person puts his own interests and desires in the first place and is not ready to give them up. His "I" is more important than generally accepted moral principles. Let's look at a few examples.

So, in the “Song about Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, a young guardsman and a daring merchant Kalashnikov” M.Yu. Lermontov tells about Kiribeevich, guardsman of Tsar Ivan the Terrible. He liked Alena Dmitrievna, the wife of the merchant Kalashnikov. Knowing that she was a married woman, Kiribeevich still allowed himself to solicit her love, moreover, in public. He did not think about the disgrace he would bring to a decent woman and her entire family. For him, above honor was passion, the desire to possess the object of his love. His selfish aspirations eventually led to tragedy: not only the oprichnik himself died, but also the merchant Kalashnikov, Alena Dmitrievna became a widow, and her children became orphans. We see that it is selfishness that makes a person neglect moral principles and leads him to a dishonorable act.

Let's turn to another example. In the work of V. Bykov "Sotnikov" the behavior of the partisan Rybak, who was captured, is described. Sitting in the basement, he only thought about saving his own life. When the police offered him to become one of them, he was not offended, not indignant, on the contrary, he “felt sharply and joyfully - he would live! There was an opportunity to live - this is the main thing. Everything else - later. An inner voice told Rybak that he had embarked on the path of dishonor. And then he tried to find a compromise with his conscience: “He went to this game to win his life - is this not enough for the most, even desperate, game? And there it will be visible, if only they would not be killed, tortured during interrogations. The writer shows the successive stages of Rybak's moral decline. So he agreed to go over to the side of the enemy and at the same time continued to convince himself that "there is no great fault for him." In his opinion, “he had more opportunities and cheated in order to survive. But he is not a traitor…” And so Rybak took part in the execution of Sotnikov. Bykov emphasizes that Rybak tried to find an excuse even for this terrible act: “What does he have to do with it? Is it him? He just pulled out this stump. And then by order of the police. We see that a person became a traitor to the Motherland, the executioner of his comrade for one reason: he put his own life above duty and honor. In other words, cowardice and selfishness push a person to the most terrible deeds.

In conclusion, I would like to express the hope that in a situation where our selfish motives are on one side of the scale, and moral principles, duty, and honor are on the other, we will be able to make the right choice and not commit dishonorable acts.

Final essay on the topic: “What act can be called dishonorable?”

What act is dishonorable? In my opinion, this can be called an act of a person who behaves vilely, tries to discredit someone, slander him. An example is an episode from the work of A.S. Pushkin "The Captain's Daughter", which tells about the conversation between Shvabrin and Grinev about Masha Mironova. Shvabrin, having received a refusal from Masha Mironova, in retaliation slanders her, allows himself insulting allusions to her. He argues that it is not necessary to seek Masha’s favor with verses, hints at her accessibility: “... if you want Masha Mironova to come to you at dusk, then instead of gentle rhymes, give her a pair of earrings ...

Why do you have such an opinion about her? I asked, holding back my indignation with difficulty.
“Because,” he answered with an infernal grin, “I know from experience her temper and custom.”

Shvabrin, without hesitation, is ready to tarnish the honor of the girl just because she did not reciprocate. Such an act is, without a doubt, dishonorable.

Sometimes it happens that a physically strong person uses his superiority, humiliating and offending the weaker ones. For example, in A. Likhanov's story "Clean Stones", a character named Savvatei keeps the whole school in fear. He takes pleasure in humiliating small children who cannot stand up for themselves. The hooligan regularly robs the students, mocks them: “Sometimes he snatched a textbook or notebook out of his bag instead of a bun and threw it into a snowdrift or took it for himself, so that, after stepping back a few steps, he threw it under his feet and wiped his felt boots on them.” His favorite technique was to run a "dirty, sweaty paw" across the victim's face. He constantly humiliates even his "sixes": "Savvatey looked angrily at the guy, took him by the nose and pulled him hard", he "stood next to Sasha, leaning on his head." Encroaching on the honor and dignity of other people, he himself becomes the personification of dishonor.

Summing up what has been said, I would like to express the hope that people will avoid dishonorable acts, adhering to high moral principles.

Final essay on the topic: “Do you agree with the Latin proverb: “It is better to die with honor than to live in dishonor”?”

Do you agree with the Latin proverb: “It is better to die with honor than to live in dishonor”? Reflecting on this issue, one can come to the conclusion: honor is above everything, even life. It is better to die with honor than to live in dishonor, for the one who gave his life in the name of high moral values ​​will always be worthy of respect, and the one who chose the path of dishonor will be doomed to the contempt of others and will not be able to live peacefully and happily. Let's take a literary example.

So, in the story of V. Bykov "Sotnikov" it is said about two partisans who were taken prisoner. One of them, Sotnikov, courageously withstood torture, but did not tell his enemies anything. Knowing that he would be executed the next morning, he prepared to face death with dignity. The writer focuses our attention on the thoughts of the hero: “Sotnikov easily and simply, as something elementary and completely logical in his position, now made the last decision: to take everything upon himself. Tomorrow he will tell the investigator that he went to reconnaissance, had a mission, wounded a policeman in a shootout, that he is a commander of the Red Army and an opponent of fascism, let them shoot him. The rest are not here." It is significant that before his death, the partisan thought not about himself, but about the salvation of others. And although his attempt did not lead to success, he fulfilled his duty to the end. The hero chose to die with honor, but not to become a traitor. His act is an example of courage and true heroism.

Comrade Sotnikova, Rybak, behaved quite differently. The fear of death took over all his feelings. Sitting in the basement, he only thought about saving his own life. When the police offered him to become one of them, he was not offended, not indignant, on the contrary, he “felt sharply and joyfully - he would live! There was an opportunity to live - this is the main thing. Everything else - later. Of course, he did not want to become a traitor: “He had no intention of giving them partisan secrets, much less joining the police, although he understood that it would not be easy to evade her.” He hoped that "he would get out and then he would certainly pay off these bastards ...". An inner voice told Rybak that he had embarked on the path of dishonor. And then Rybak tried to find a compromise with his conscience: “He went to this game in order to win his life - is this not enough for the most, even desperate, game? And there it will be visible, if only they would not be killed, tortured during interrogations. If only to break out of this cage, and he will not allow himself anything bad. Is he his enemy? Faced with a choice, he was not ready to sacrifice his life for the sake of honor.

The writer shows the successive stages of Rybak's moral decline. So he agreed to go over to the side of the enemy and at the same time continued to convince himself that "there is no great fault for him." In his opinion, “he had more opportunities and cheated in order to survive. But he is not a traitor. In any case, he was not going to become a German servant. He kept waiting to seize the opportunity, maybe now, maybe a little later, and only they would see him. »

And so Rybak took part in the execution of Sotnikov. Bykov emphasizes that Rybak tried to find an excuse even for this terrible act: “What does he have to do with it? Is it him? He just pulled out this stump. And then by order of the police. And only walking in the ranks of policemen, Rybak finally realized: "There was no longer any way to escape from this ranks." V. Bykov emphasizes that the path of dishonor chosen by Rybak is a path to nowhere. There is no future for this man.

Summing up what has been said, I would like to express the hope that we, faced with a difficult choice, will not forget about the highest values: honor, duty, courage.

Honor has always been an integral part of a decent person. Let us recall the times of the Russian Empire, when for the slightest word, which purely theoretically could overshadow the honor of a man, his opponent faced a deadly duel, from which only one could emerge victorious. And immediately Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin comes to mind. The great Russian writer, being very offended by Dantes, challenged him to a duel in order to defend his honor before society. But, alas, we all know the end of the story - Pushkin was wounded and soon he tragically died in his bed from a severe bullet wound. And if the situation had developed differently, how many wonderful works the writer would have left for posterity and how many joyful events would have happened in his life.

It is already difficult to call a person without honor a person in the full sense of the word. Having lost this trait of his character, he forever remains a dishonorable person in the eyes of the people around him. All contacts with him are interrupted, no one will invite him to visit, in the end, he is left alone with himself. Perhaps he will be able to get out of this hole with his respectable deeds, but this does not happen often.

A man of honor is one who, without hesitation, will rush to the aid of anyone who is in trouble. A man of honor is one who will not allow himself and his loved ones to be treated badly. It is an honor to be such a person, such a person will be accepted everywhere and will be glad to see in their home. However, it should be understood that a great responsibility also falls on the shoulders of such a person. A man of honor should not for a second show weakness and cowardice. One has only to stumble, as evil tongues immediately grab him in every possible way to condemn and laugh sarcastically.

Nowadays, young people often began to forget about this concept. The morals and norms of morality are not at all the same as they used to be. The concept of honor is different for everyone. There has to be a balance in everything in life. You can not use only emotions, you must respect people and their reasoning. But, at the same time, you also need to be able to defend your positions, defend principles and aspirations.

A man of honor will never deviate from his moral principles for the sake of wealth and fame. This is an unshakable person with a clear and built life position. Such a person is always ready to answer for his words and finish any work begun to the very end.

Being a man of honor is difficult, but each of us should strive for this in order to be an example for our children and loved ones.

Essay 2

A man of honor is one who acts from high ideals. As a rule, honor is considered the prerogative of military people and the aristocracy, for whom it was always especially significant not to lose their own dignity. However, these estates do not have any monopoly on honor and dignity, these qualities are available to everyone, but it is incredibly difficult to have and keep them, sometimes more difficult than earning and maintaining wealth.

Honor is an understanding of the world and an attitude towards it according to noble views. The word honor is connected with the word honesty, that is, the absence of lies, the expression of truth. Perhaps, in the Russian language, regarding the word honor, one should even use not the word truth, but talk about truth.

After all, we can often hear: “everyone has his own truth”, “I have my own truth, you have your own” or “let everyone remain with their own”. Of course, there is no one's truth, either both, or one of them lies. However, dishonest people can afford such expressions, they consider pluralism of opinions possible only in order to protect themselves from censure, they allow others, including false views, to exist only to have the opportunity to make their own mistakes with impunity or even deliberate lying and dishonorable behavior.

Of course, a man of honor will never pervert and twist about his own and other people's views in this way. Dishonor in many ways means confusion, a person who is mired in his own lies, delusions, or simply seeking his own benefit. In turn, honesty is the ultimate clarity.

Much is clear and understandable to a man of honor, since he adheres to the truth and all his actions and views are consistent with the truth. That is why he cannot act falsely, that is why, to some extent, he has no choice, but always chooses an act of honor. At the same time, such behavior is not always beneficial for him or brings honor, if he sees wrong actions behind him, then he himself seeks to blame himself and will never lie about himself in order to avoid some kind of trouble.

Such behavior may seem difficult or even unreasonable for ordinary dishonest people. However, after all, such people may live in comfort, but they will never know how to act in honor.

The most beloved and long-awaited time for everyone is spring. At this time, everything around seems to come to life after a long winter hibernation. The sun appears more often, and the sun's rays shine brighter.

Honor. So much in this word! Honor is a manifestation of such qualities as nobility, dignity, decency. Also, this concept means the preservation of a good name, reputation, both one's own and others'. It is not for nothing that several centuries ago duels were in the order of things, even if most often they were not approved or even prohibited by the authorities. The duelists defended both their own honor and the dignity of, for example, their lovers. In addition, honor is manifested along with love for the Motherland and the people. People respect those who courageously and heroically defended their Fatherland. Thus, this word has many definitions. But who can be called a man of honor?

“Take care of the dress again, and honor from a young age,” this proverb is uttered as an instruction by the father of the protagonist in the novel by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin “The Captain's Daughter”.

Pyotr Grinev follows this mandate. He loses money to Zurin and repays the debt, despite Savelich's protests and his statements about the possibility of getting out of the payment. Later, Grinev takes an oath and remains faithful to her even at the moment when he can lose his life. The hero does not try to deceive others and save himself. In addition, Pyotr Andreevich goes to a duel to defend the honor of Masha Mironova. But Shvabrin acts differently: he insults his “beloved” and all the inhabitants of the fortress in general, goes to the side of the enemy in order to survive, tries to slander Grinev. Thus, A.S. Pushkin in his work presented the readers with heroes whose behavior is a vivid example of either honor or dishonor.

Recall the novel by Boris Vasiliev "I was not on the lists." The protagonist arrives at the Brest Fortress just on the eve of the war. It has not yet been added to the lists of the unit. He had the opportunity to get out of there and fight somewhere outside. But Nikolai Pluzhnikov did not do this and, moreover, became one of the last defenders of the fortress. He suffered setbacks, lost comrades, but did not give up completely. The lieutenant kills his former comrade, who voluntarily surrenders to the Germans. When the soldiers who survived in the fortress want to escape, Pluzhnikov does not leave his beloved, although he is persuaded for a long time, because Mirra is a cripple. At the end of the novel, Nikolai is left alone with the foreman. After he dies, the regimental banner passes to the hero, which he hides. In the tenth month of the war, the enemies find the lieutenant. He surrenders only when he finds out that the Nazis were defeated near Moscow. The Germans give the highest military honors to Pluzhnikov leaving the catacombs. They were amazed by his courage and patriotism. Nikolai passes away with dignity, as he is a real man of honor.

Thus, I want to conclude. To be a man of honor means to live according to the laws of conscience and justice, fulfilling one's moral and national duty.

A man of honor is one who has never done anything wrong in his life. He confidently follows the rules and morals to keep the name clean. Such people are very fond of, because they can be entrusted with any business and be absolutely calm. A man of honor is incapable of doing something terrible. He always strives to fulfill an assignment, keep a secret or become a good adviser.

It is easy for such people to live, because they always find support in society. Many are ready to help such individuals, to offer them something interesting. If only one could always choose the right actions, then there would be more people of honor. But not everyone is ready for such sacrifices, many put wealth and desires above the name. This is bad not only for the person himself, but also for those around him.

Earning such a reputation is very difficult. To do this, you need to constantly think and never act at random. Only the right decision can be logical. Only it leads to good relations and mutual assistance. A man of honor is capable of much, but he always looks at his pure name and tries to maintain it so that he never encounters distrust and contempt.

More essays:

The question of honor occupies the first place among moral symbols. You can survive the collapse of the economy, you can come to terms, although very difficult, with the collapse of the state, you can finally endure even parting with the dearest people and with the Motherland, but not a single people on earth will ever come to terms with the decay of morality. In human society, dishonorable people have always been treated with contempt. The loss of honor is the fall of moral principles, followed by inevitable punishment. Immorality destroys a person's personality, entire nations disappeared from the face of the earth as a result of the fact that their rulers forgot about moral standards. Russian writers have always addressed the issue of honor in their works. We can say that this problem was and is one of the central ones in the great Russian literature. The concept of honor is brought up in a person from childhood. On the example of A. S. Pushkin's story "The Captain's Daughter" we can trace how this happens in life and what results it leads to. The protagonist of the story, Pyotr Andreevich Grinev, received a good upbringing in childhood. He had someone to take an example from. Pushkin, through the mouth of Savelich, on the first pages of the story, introduces readers to the moral attitudes of the Grinev family: “It seems that neither father nor grandfather were drunkards; there’s nothing to say about mother ...” With these words, the old servant of his ward Pyotr Grinev, who for the first time got drunk and behaved inappropriately. The first time Pyotr Grinev acted honorably, returning the card debt, although in that situation Savelich tried to persuade him to evade the calculation. But nobility prevailed. A man of honor, in my opinion, is always kind and disinterested in dealing with others. For example, Pyotr Grinev, despite Savelich's displeasure, thanked the tramp for his service by presenting him with a hare sheepskin coat. His act in the future saved both of their lives. This episode, as it were, says that fate itself preserves a person who lives by honor. But the point is also that people remember the good, which means that a noble person has more chances for worldly happiness. Moral trials awaited Grinev in the fortress where he served. Shvabrin interferes with Grinev's love for Masha Mironova, weaves intrigues. It comes down to a duel. Shvabrin is the opposite of Grinev in everything. He is a selfish and ignoble person. Even during a duel, he did not hesitate to take advantage of a dishonorable situation to strike. Fate in the future will also present him with an account for his position in life, but completely different from Grinev. Shvabrin will join Pugachev, and he will be condemned as an officer who has violated his oath. On the example of Shvabrin, Pushkin shows that external culture has little effect on the formation of a person's character. After all, Shvabrin was even more educated than Grinev. He knew French novels and poetry well, and was an intelligent conversationalist. He even addicted Grinev to reading. Therefore, the conclusion suggests itself that the internal attitudes of a person, his concepts of good and evil, are of decisive importance.