NationStates Jolt Archive

Morals

[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin mōrālis, from mōs, mōr-, custom.]


We seem to be having 2 different threads about morals, with folks happily bashing away at each other.

Perhaps we should re-start by wondering what morals actually are.

This key question - what do we mean by this word - is easily forgotten.

Try googling for morals and see what you get, just for a laugh.

And for less than a laugh - try defining what you mean yourself when you use the word: morals.

Personal note: when I use the word morals, all I mean is 'what is customary, what my ancestors used to do'.

I use it to mean a small sweet pastrey, usually covered in a cinnamon glaze.

Well. The distinction between morals and ethics has been weakened in today's society. When I talk abut morals I mean 'The right way to act; the standards that if you follow will make you a good person'.

If morals mean 'What our ancestors did', then I put forth that immorality is more ethical than morality. Slavery, colonialism, the Opium War, the Native American genocide. Give our ancestors nukes and half the world goes up in flames.

To me what is moral is to...do what makes the most people happy and prosperous, without doing it at the expense of anyone else's life and prosperity. And to let other people live their life the way they prefer, so long as they're not stopping anybody else from doing so.

I'm wondering how you derived that... but... it's a start.
(er, that was about Keruvalia..*chomps on a bit of sweet pastry* )

What benefits me the most, while limiting any harm to others.

I'm wondering how you derived that... but... it's a start.
(er, that was about Keruvalia..*chomps on a bit of sweet pastry* )

Dunno ... it's what my grandfather always told me ... need some milk with that?

Incidently, I see morals like I see tradition. It's something we do over and over again and usually don't know why.

I always thought that morals were a method of behavior that was less clinical than ethics. Basically,
1. Morals: Enforced by society, followed on a very personal level.
2. Ethics: Rules enforced by an artificial organization (like corporat...no, like gov...no, like...clubs! Yes, that's it, social clubs).

For example, although I have no moral qualms about posting these awesome emoticons entirely randomly in my response, the nationstates forum ethic code is probably against it (damn fascists). :headbang: :sniper: :mp5: :gundge: :upyours:

(I'm afraid I'm lactose-intolerant, so please hold the milk.)

OK... we seem to be arriving at the conclusion that ethics and morals are not exactly the same cup of tea, which is quite a promising start imho.

Morals are the standards by which we individually approve and disapprove of:
a) ourselves;
b) other people;
c) actions made by people.

No set of moral values has to encompass all three of these items, some only evaluate others and their actions; some evaluate the characters of people not their actions; and some evaluate only the actions and not the characters. Nevertheless to be a moral value, the object of apraisal has to be one of the three. We do not talk, or think for that matter, of the bullet that murders a person as being evil. Morality is intrinsically connected to our judgement that the agent had the 'choice' to act, however this may be constructed.

Somebody was going to wind up posting a dictionary definition of "morals" and "ethics" in this thread... oh well, I guess that "somebody" is going to be me. ;)

Morals - principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct
Ethics - 1. A system of moral principles; 2. the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.; 3. moral principles, as of an individual

Incidently, I see morals like I see tradition. It's something we do over and over again and usually don't know why.
That would mean that morals = tradition, which is not the case.

To me, morality is some overarching philosophy that guides your actions and political positions.

That would mean that morals = tradition, which is not the case.

Nah ... you can spank a child or spank a hooker, but that doesn't mean child = hooker ... well ... most of the time, anyway. Morals and tradition are often treated the same. That's what I meant.

I use it to mean a small sweet pastrey, usually covered in a cinnamon glaze.
No point spamming here, its been done.

"Moral" (verb) describes right behaviors, specifically those that are done utilizing a sense of what is right in contrast to what is wrong (or acts that take place in a context of right and wrong if viewed objectively). "Immoral" (verb), then, describes the wrong behaviors, those that stand in contrast to the right.

"Morality" (noun) is right thinking. It is what drives moral acts.

"Morals" (noun) are just statements about right acts, or that teach right acts. They are the "shoulds" and "should nots". These statements we have defined for ourselves, as individuals and as groups, so we can be in the right. They are not in themselves what "right" is.

Which perhaps leads us to the next question:

What constitutes 'right'?

Which perhaps leads us to the next question:

What constitutes 'right'?
I have thought about that a lot, and have no universal answer. I used to loosely define 'good' as what is beneficial to life, life-forms, and the quality of life. In the same way 'good' relates to 'life', I think that 'right' relates to 'order'. My dictionary lists several defintions of 'right'; unfortunately the one applicable to this discussion relates the defintion directly back to morals, which is circular. However, there is one definition that stands out, from the Old English, and that is, "to make orderly or correct." That strikes a chord. Right is that which promotes order, which means that it makes sense logically (and the emotions fall into line with that, as we are satifisfied by what is orderly).

When the soldier has to shoot another man in battle, it makes sense to him and to us, for whatever reasons, and that is what puts it in the right.

Let's try to end this once and for all

Morals:
What is right
and what is wrong

But who is to decide what is right or wrong
Simple answer, everyone. Morals are not written in stone in every persons brain. For some it is moral to do as much as possible for their own profit. For others it might be to help as much people as possible.

"Good" and "bad" are defined for each persons himself. As one's dead might be good for one, it might be bad for another.

Which perhaps leads us to the next question:

What constitutes 'right'?And here I thought that when we debated in one of the various libertarian threads that you knew that already. ;)

And here I thought that when we debated in one of the various libertarian threads that you knew that already. ;)


Only in a subjective sense. What's right for me is unlikely to be right for you.

And the whole thing gets even worse whenever you are dealing with cultures that do not accept the duality of Right vz Wrong, but instead recognise a scalar array of bad and worse.

Only in a subjective sense. What's right for me is unlikely to be right for you.I can agree with that.

And the whole thing gets even worse whenever you are dealing with cultures that do not accept the duality of Right vz Wrong, but instead recognise a scalar array of bad and worse.Lol. How pessimistic of them. I'd hate to live in such a society.

Morals

[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin mōrālis, from mōs, mōr-, custom.]


We seem to be having 2 different threads about morals, with folks happily bashing away at each other.

Perhaps we should re-start by wondering what morals actually are.

This key question - what do we mean by this word - is easily forgotten.

Try googling for morals and see what you get, just for a laugh.

And for less than a laugh - try defining what you mean yourself when you use the word: morals.

Personal note: when I use the word morals, all I mean is 'what is customary, what my ancestors used to do'.

Morality: A code of conduct requiring or prohibiting certain actions
Ethics: A set of reasoned principles to determine whether a moral code accords with right action.
Right: That which is in accord with best living.

'Morals' refer to my partition of actions into 'right' and 'wrong', which is generally equivalent to 'what I want to happen' and 'what I want not to happen'. I usually avoid the term as superfluous.

I can agree with that.

Lol. How pessimistic of them. I'd hate to live in such a society.


I'm off for supper. But I promise I will get back to you on that. Not chickening out.

I'm not expressing any great urge to live in such a society - but the fact remains that the duality of Good vz Evil ( that most of us here in the West share ) is really somewhat the opinion of a smallish minority, from a global perspective.

The "norm" based on years of discovered utility or universilism.