There is a difference between ethics and morality - perhaps more correctly many differences. Lawyers can behave ethically whilst being immoral. Like Francis though, I tend to use the words interchangeably. Chris has given the three-tier definition I'm familiar with from basic class. Everyone on this thread so far has done something I regard as profoundly ethical and moral - admitted being wrong. Craig might regret asking people to take on the burden of defining - some just love that and I doubt any of us want to sit through anyone holding forth on modern deontic ethics - but I'm in a mean mood so everyone - ears back, eyes open, brains looking out of the window!
On 29 Jan, 23:10, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess it doesn't really matter what words we use, as long as we all > agree that that is what meant when speak to one another. If we choose > to use the word in a different way, then the burden is the one > deviating from the normal use of the word to explain what he means > thereby. So, for the time being, since Chris was the first define the > word in such specificity, I say we adopt Chris' for now. If someone > disagrees with Chris' definition, then they have the burden of > defining the word themselves. Otherwise, we will assume they mean > what Chris means. > > On Jan 29, 3:17 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I was taught that dialectically, there are three levels of authority: > > Legal, by which the governing body of a nation establishes a canon of law > > Ethical, which represents an established system, either internal or > > external, of acceptable versus unacceptable behaviours within specific > > paradigms > > Moral, by which the general concepts of good or bad are established, > > primarily from an emotional perspective. > > > This seems to differ greatly from your pespective. What are your thoughts on > > this viewpoint? > > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM, frantheman > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > I don't think so, Chris. Personally, I tend to use both terms > > > synonymously. Ethics may, perhaps, have a slightly more philosophical > > > flavour. > > > > Francis > > > > On 29 Jan., 21:19, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Aren't we conflating two separate issues when we use the words ethics > > > > and > > > > morals interchangeably? > > > > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 3:04 PM, ornamentalmind < > > > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > In a different thread, fran suggested an exploration of morality in > > > > > the context of economics and society. Rather than rephrase him, here > > > > > are his words: > > > > > > "…Most importantly, for me at least, many contributions (including > > > > > your > > > > > own appeal to charity) seem to point to some kind of primacy of the > > > > > "ethical" in the organisation of human societies, be it within a > > > > > "capitalist" or a "socialist" framework. This point came home to me > > > > > after reading the thought-provoking article by Howard A. Doughty (and > > > > > doesn't he live up to his name! :-)) in the link provided by Don. Of > > > > > course, this insight raises many more questions: how do we achieve > > > > > more consciousness of the primacy of moral values in society/markets/ > > > > > public life, how do we educate for real morality in society, and, > > > > > most > > > > > fundamtentally, what do we really mean by morality and what systems > > > > > of > > > > > morality can we propose for our complex, splintered, internetworked, > > > > > interdependent, open/closed contemporary societies? > > > > > What a wriggling can of worms! Back to Plato, Aristotle and all the > > > > > others ... ;-)" – fran > > > > > > I agreed and wish to explore the area…what we mean by morality, how to > > > > > educate for it etc. My responding post: > > > > > > "Fran, I find that you have pointed to the heart of the matter… > > > > > ethics. > > > > > As far as I see it, if different people have different ethics, it is > > > > > probable they will espouse differing economic and/or social systems > > > > > based upon their personal point of view. This seems so obvious. > > > > > Many here have studied the subject, formally and informally. And, of > > > > > course, each person has an opinion. For me, some sort of empathetical > > > > > or at least sympathetic analysis of how differing ethoses function > > > > > would be appreciated. And, yes, even in this simple request, my > > > > > personal ethos/morality shines through. > > > > > I have a few ideas on how to progress, however I'll wait and see if > > > > > those better versed in the topic can guide us towards a more fruitful > > > > > discussion. " – orn > > > > > > So, since the other topic continues to appear to include > > > > > contradictions to this notion, I'm starting a new one to address it > > > > > for those who wish to explore rather than reject. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
