Morality vs. Ethics

[SpoofyChop]

Are they the same thing? DrCrypt says the difference is purely semantic. I say it's not.

I don't care what the dictionary says because dictionaries suck.

I want to know what the commonly held understanding is about these two things.

Here are my definitions of morality and ethics. I think these definitions describe what people generally mean when they talk about this topic.


Morals

Standards of conduct that are essentially cross-cultural and fixed. Behavior that is immoral would be immoral at almost any time and in almost every culture. Murder, rape, theft, and adultery are prime examples.



Ethics

Standards of conduct that are not cross-cultural or fixed. These standards are highly contextual and exist in the gray region between things that are clearly wrong and things that are clearly acceptable. Attorney/client relationships, physician/patient relationships, and other professional relationships are often governed by standards of ethical conduct.



Here's the key:

Immoral acts are essentially context-free. It doesn't matter whether somebody rapes the girl down the street or the prostitute in a foreign country. It's always always wrong.

Unethical acts are highly dependent on context. It is unethical for a doctor to talk about his patients to his next-door neighbor, but there is nothing wrong with a doctor talking about his patients with another doctor who is consulted about the case.

I think most people see a pretty clear difference here. Except DrCrypt apparently.

:roll:

[DrCrypt]

Wow, Spoofy. Me and my OED must have really touched a nerve if your passionate denunciation against the most common usage of the word "ethical" has to be split up into two different threads in order to contain the width and breadth of its righteous indignation and legion of rolly-eyes emoticons. But I'm going to contain my rebuttals to the original thread, thanks. Especially since your post here is pretty stoopid and is definitely trying to distort the context of our original argument. And especially especially because this is the sort of conversation that will have Koontz here within five seconds pontificating about universality in that creepy "Pedophile Criswell" voice of his.

[SpoofyChop]

Hey DrCrypt, I'm just trying to prevent hijacking of the fine Strategy guide thread.

Anyway, I'd like to see whether Apekid thinks he is immoral or merely unethical for all of his offenses against your lordship.

(Just kidding Apekid!)

:D

[Jack]

Morals are not cross-cultural; they are rather specific to cultures.

"Murder" is a broad word. Do you include the human sacrifice, capital punishment, abortion in this? Fuzzy logic applies.

As for "unethical," it would be unethical for a lawyer to introduce evidence into a trial proceeding that may have been excluded by the judge -- even if the evidence proves his client's innocents. Withholding such evidence could be considered immoral.

What a messy discussion this could be.

[Ben Sones]

"Morals" are merely core values. I have never seen a philosophical definition of the term that implies that they are cross-cultural, though certainly many moral authorities (the Catholic church, for instance) believe that their moral values are absolute. "Ethics" are usually defined as applied morals--practical rules of conduct derived from core moral values.

[SpoofyChop]

Morals are not cross-cultural

Are too!

What a messy discussion this could be.

Yeah.

[Machfive]

I believe ethics are far more infallible than morals, and hence I eschew the latter.

To me, morals imply a religious underpinning upon which the action is based, making morals the far more relative one.

It was totally moral, in Osama's eyes to crash two jets into the World Trade Centers, beacuse his twisted view of religion tells him he is doing Allah's work.

On the other hand, the killing of innocents is can only be justified in ethics when doing so is a side effect of an otherwise highly important (and ethically correct) situation.

[Jack]

Morals are not cross-cultural

Are too!

Are not!

I'll meet you by the swings at recess and we can "talk" about this.

[Case]

Are they the same thing? DrCrypt says the difference is purely semantic. I say it's not.

I don't care what the dictionary says because dictionaries suck.

I want to know what the commonly held understanding is about these two things.



You're both right. Think of a Venn diagram...

[SpoofyChop]

I agree with you Lloyd, there's defininitely an area of intersection, but the Venn diagram you're thinking of has some areas that don't overlap, DrCrypt seems to be implying complete overlap. Morality = Ethics.

[Dave Markell]

Spoofy, your definition is the exact opposite of mine. I've always read that morals are culturally specific, while ethics transcend time and place to provide universal principles. For example, female circumcision is "moral" in many cultures, but viewed with abhorence by those who place ethics above morality. In fact, the multi-cultural crowd dislikes the concept of ethics, since it mandates value judgements about the relative worth of various viewpoints.

[Miramon]

Ethics by definition are supposed to be universal rules of conduct. It is a solecism to consider them to be personal or subjective. However, you may well disagree with the idea of universal ethics, and therefore may legitimately disagree that such a concept is meaningful or valid.

A moral individual necessarily behaves ethically, assuming you agree ethics exists as such.

An individual who behaves ethically however, may or may not be moral or regard themselves as being moral; for example they may fear the consequences of unethical behavior, or they may adhere to a code of honor which requires ethical behavior that they personally would otherwise rather not conform to.

Thus morality is a relation between conscience and individual choice, but ethics has to do with actual conduct.

[Stroker Ace]

Why is no one quoting "Election" yet? Maybe Tom can help.

[SpoofyChop]

Well, that's the last time I go spouting off about how I'm sure everybody will agree with me.

:shock:

Boy was I wrong. At least it's not like you all agree with DrCrypt though.

:wink:

[nutsak]

I'm pretty sure I studied this in high school... but five years ago is such along time ago.

[Rywill]

What a useless thread this is. Everyone is just jumping in saying "I define 'moral' as X and 'ethical' as Y." "I think 'ethics' are what Spoofy calls 'morals' and 'morals' are what Spoofy calls 'ethics.'" Since I don't want to go read that gigantic strategy guide thread, is there any point to this? Is Spoofy's point that some ethical/moral/whatever choices are universal while some are culturally based? Is DrCrypt saying that all such choices are culturally based, and there's no universal right and wrong?

[Xaroc]

I'm just going on record to say this is one of the most ridiculous topics I've ever seen on these boards. This place is going to the dogs.

-- Xaroc

[Dave Markell]

I'm just going on record to say this is one of the most ridiculous topics I've ever seen on these boards. This place is going to the dogs.

-- Xaroc

Well, I'll go on record stating that I love topics like this, and think that this board is the better for them.

Nyah nyah nyah :P

[Xaroc]

I'm just going on record to say this is one of the most ridiculous topics I've ever seen on these boards. This place is going to the dogs.

-- Xaroc

Well, I'll go on record stating that I love topics like this, and think that this board is the better for them.

Nyah nyah nyah :P

I don't really mean that it was directly pasted from here (http://www.quartertothree.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5564&start=0).

-- Xaroc

[Dave Markell]

I don't really mean that it was directly pasted from here (http://www.quartertothree.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5564&start=0).

-- Xaroc

I'm not following you, Xaroc. What does a thread about losing your reflexes as you get older have to do with ethics and morality?

[DrCrypt]

Is DrCrypt saying that all such choices are culturally based, and there's no universal right and wrong?
Here's a more interesting question: am I actually saying anything at all about the difference between ethics and morals in this thread? The answer is no, because I confined it to the original thread (http://www.quartertothree.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5609), where it was actually an applied discussion about the morality of a strategy guide writer continuing to abet an industry that he feels to be delivering false information to consumers. Then Spoofy said it wasn't immoral, but at worst, unethical. I pointed out over a couple of posts that I felt ethics and morality to be integrally linked and overlap. Then Spoofy flipped out and hanged ten on a tsunami of his own indignant tears over here - only to wipe out upon the jagged rocks of an entire forum's disagreement over his stated definitions. Dudical!

Anyway, I'd just like to see whether Apekid thinks he is immoral or merely unethical for all of his offenses against your lordship.
Fine. Why don't we just both agree that he is a Nazi and leave it at that?

[Jason McCullough]

Step away from the dictionary, spoofychop.

[Brian Koontz]

The difference between morals and ethics is one of context.

In Business, for example, its a matter of ethics and not morals. You cannot make a moral business decision, but you can make an ethical one.

In serious Humanitarian concerns, its a matter of morals and not ethics. You cannot make a serious ethical human decision, but you can make a moral one.

The distinction is pretty silly and I myself merge the two concepts frequently, using them interchangeably.

[Lunch of Kong]

The difference between morals and ethics is one of context.


Holy chocolate cows, Batman. This is the first Brian Koontz post in a very long time that I can understand. And even agree with!

[quatoria]

Crypt: A tsunami? A tsunami... BOMB, perhaps?

ENEMY!

INSIDE OF ME!

[Machfive]

Crypt: A tsunami? A tsunami... BOMB, perhaps?

ENEMY!

INSIDE OF ME!

My little sister crowd surfed to Tsunami Bomb once. I think that was one of the bands she hugged at the Warp tour.

So yeah, topic at hand.

In serious Humanitarian concerns, its a matter of morals and not ethics. You cannot make a serious ethical human decision, but you can make a moral one.

I disagree heartily. I believe all concerns can be addressed via ethics, and I don't believe morality is useful in any context, because typically, morality is based on a culture/religion-specific viewpoint, which, simply put, isn't useful when we're dealing with regional and global concerns.

[SpoofyChop]

You know, if I walked up to a can that said "Worms" on the side, I wouldn't open it. What happened here was I saw the can upside-down and it looked like it said swjoM so I opened it.

I mean, who doesn't like swjoM right? Boy am I dumb.

:cry:

Anyway Crypty, any thread where you sound like a lunatic and Kootz is making sense is a bit too wierd for my tastes. Plus, I'm so flabbergasted by the variety of views here that I don't even feel like replying...I'd have to write a reply to 17 different people.

So here's all I have to say about this thread:

Suffice it to say that, while I think Dave Long is awesome, it was pretty funny when Xaroc made fun of him.

Sorry Dave.

[Toddy]

And especially especially because this is the sort of conversation that will have Koontz here within five seconds pontificating about universality in that creepy "Pedophile Criswell" voice of his.

Now there's a dead-on line. Hammer, meet nail.