Comments on: Ethics And Morality

By: 2010 in review | Don't Be So Serious

2010 in review | Don't Be So Serious — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 00:30:37 +0000

[...] Ethics And Morality April 2008 4 comments [...]

By: Moon Quinto

Moon Quinto — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 10:50:31 +0000

Hello Great Job. I think you made some great points in your points and I am goign to do some follow up research topic related and learn more.

By: Tony

Tony — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:45:32 +0000

Fabian, I’m certainly not smart enough to engage in any deep-mind debate about all this. One aspect of this ethics/morality question I find interesting is the coincidence of many familiar and easily identified morality elements that seemed to have arisen independently in a variety of largely uncorrupted (by civilization) and ancient primitive societies. More interestingly, a few of these moralities have no obvious survival value to tribe or individual. It would be interesting to learn the true extent of coincident and divergent morality among largely untainted human groups (if it is still possible), although alongside that there will inevitably be moralities, or at least mores, that clash horribly with those of other groups, and with ours. Sorry to be so airy-fairy and long-winded, but as I say, active braincells are in short supply here nowadays. I think it possible religions and God-cultures may have arisen as something convenient, and unifying, to hang strands of evolving morality (oe rules), on, rather than the other way around. This may not be a new idea, although I have never heard it expressed. In other words, all varieties of Gods are a just human construct, or at least the construct of one-time priests, shamans and wise men, intended to authorise and to solidify a desirable moral code, and to discourage argument. This is God made in our image rather than vice versa.
If there is a tribe somewhere without any Gods, this could be because of a nil or very low key moral code, thus Gods are unnecessary. This as an alternative to their having no morals because they recognise no God.
If I am all at sea just zap this message.
Regards.

By: fschonholz

fschonholz — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 04:14:41 +0000

Fair enough. I did not suggest, however, that there is a UNIVERSAL TRUTH and in THE TRUTH. But I do suggests that there is a universal commonality in certain areas. In the case of Mathematics for example. Whether you use the symbols we know or other symbols, the concepts remain the same. Furthermore, I think that this idea extends to other subjects that enjoy the same possibility of abstraction. Ethics, as I discussed, is universal. The concept of killing an individual exists across the Universe, while Morality, also as I discussed, is not universal and dependent on local sensitivities.

The question of truth, and again not as in THE TRUTH, is more about placement. Is truth about Morality or about Ethics? If it is about Ethics, still does not need to be universal but then it needs to be elaborated as a concept which may collide with THE TRUTH. And as a concept, then its universality has to do more with its existence and provability.

Business Fairness?? it rings just as poorly as Business Morality

By: Mike Polek

Mike Polek — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 05:24:18 +0000

Personally, I like the m-w.com definitions.

moral: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior
ethical: conforming to accepted standards of conduct

They are treated as synonyms with nuance:
ethical may suggest the involvement of more difficult or subtle questions of rightness, fairness, or equity

Both deal with the notion of right/wrong in theory and practice. Ethics shows up as a business course because of the “fairness” aspect, I think.

In any case, the notion of right/wrong…. the “mores” of society… are largely custom. And people adopt personal morals/ethics or codes of conduct. Either can be studied in the abstract… using logic and mental exercise to extrapolate the behavior. But it really gets dicey when one takes a step back and realizes that the behavior itself may not be moral or immoral, but rather the motivation behind it can be influential. I.e. can you do the right thing for the wrong reason, or the wrong thing for the right reason, etc.

Truth is a separate discussion, depending on your context. If you’re in the world of logic, it’s an abstraction, but easy to discuss. If you’re talking about some “universal truth” … well… I don’t know of any. And I don’t know of anyone who
claims to have any. Truth as I experience it is largely relative and personal.

Your mileage my vary.

–Mike