Professional Documents
Culture Documents
html
I. Hypothesis 1: Moral issues are those which involve a difference of belief and not a matter of
preference.
A. In other words, a moral dispute would involve a factual disagreement (or a disagreement in belief)
where one or the other or neither belief is correct. It would not involve a disagreement in attitude (or a
disagreement in feeling).
If you need a clarification on this distinction together with some exercises in making the distinction go
to the varieties ofDisagreements in Attitude and Belief and the quiz on that topic.
1. On this view, an example of a moral issue would be cheating on exams or obeying the law.
2. A nonmoral issue would involve examples like eating grapefruit or listening to music, c.p.
B. Objection: Many nonmoral issues are factual. This distinction would not be sufficient distinguish
between scientific and moral beliefs.
II. Hypothesis 2: Moral issues are those which involve a specific kind of experience, i.e., a special kind of
feeling.
A. This feeling differs intuitively from other kinds of feelings such as religious or aesthetic feelings.
(Some people think they arise from a conscience.)
B. On this hypothesis, such feelings are a kind of satisfaction, shame, or guilt.
C. Objection: such feelings depend to a large extent upon how one has been reared.
1. Sociopaths or pyschopaths have no such feelings. These words are informal descriptors for . . .
"Antisocial personality: A personality disorder characterized by a basic lack of socialization and
by behavior patterns that bring the individual repeatedly into conflict with society. People with
this disorder are incapable of significant loyalty to individuals, groups, or social values and are
grossly selfish, callous, irresponsible, impulsive, and unable to feel guilt or to learn from
experience. Frustration tolerance is low. Such individuals tend to blame others or to offer plausible
rationalizations for their behavior." (American Psychiatric Association, A Psychiatric Glossary,
4th ed.)
2. Other feelings which some people experience are simply inappropriate. For example, feeling
guilty for taking your fair share; inferiority complexes, and so forth.
III. Hypothesis 3: Moral issues are those which involve a specific kind of situation, i.e., the acts which
affect other people.
A. On this view, whenever people interact, issues of moral concern arise.
B. By inference, then, there would be no matters of moral concern for Robinson Crusoe.
C. Objection: (1) There are self-regarding duties (your first duty is to yourself--you ought to develop
personal habits of courage, and so forth.) (2) Not all interactions are of moral concern; some or morally
unimportant.
1. Interestingly enough, this objection is a reason why the Golden Rule cannot be a universal
principle of morality.
2. We have duties to ourselves. Not all persons which to be treated in the same manner.
IV. Hypothesis 4: Moral issues are those actions which have the potential to help or harm others or
ourselves.
A. This is the definition we shall take as a working definition for this course.
B. Notice that if we have an issue of moral concern, it might involve something good. (Often, many
people think that if an issue is of moral concern then it is an issue involving some wrong action.)
C. On this definition, very few human decisions are actions are not of some moral concern--only those
with no foreseeable consequences which can help or harm others or ourselves.
1. The physical, biological, and social sciences would be used to determine the potential to help or
harm.
2. On this view, carelessness and unintentional actions are moral issues. The full explication of the
view is dependent upon a consistent theory of human action. (Is an accident of moral concern?)
a. Note that an amoral action by one person could be considered nonmoral (or even immoral) by a
specific society, depending upon the moral code of the society.
1. If I tell a lie without concern for the moral concepts of a society of what is good and bad,
then c.p. I have acted amorally. (Notice how such a view makes the use of "amoral"
intentional.)
2. For example, a sociopath, sometimes called a person without a conscience, and a very young
child are called "amoral" because such people have no feeling or understanding of the concepts
of right and wrong.
b. If I tell a lie without concern for the moral rules of society and it is a "white" lie and "white"
lies are permissible in that society, then I am actually acting amorally. Nevertheless, my action is
considered to be by the rules of that society nonmoral or morally permissible.
c. The "white" lie told in a society where such actions are against the moral code would be
considered an immoral action and would be called "wrong."
d. It should be noted that "amoral" is sometimes used in ordinary language in the
same way that "nonmoral" is used. Many dictionaries indicate the terms are
synonymous. E.g., the American Heritage Dictionary (4th ed. 2000) defines
"unmoral" as "1. Having no moral quality; amoral. 2.Unrelated to moral or ethical
considerations; nonmoral."
e. In this course, based on the reasons stated above, the distinction between "amoral" and
"nonmoral" is observed.
II. Let us summarize the differences between these terms in a slightly different way.
A. "Amoral" in dictionaries is sometimes defined with reference to value-free situations (neither moral
nor immoral).
1. This definition of "amoral" makes it a synonym of "nonmoral."
2. For example, physics would be an amoral discipline in this sense of the term.
3. Nevertheless, in this course we will not follow this ordinary language practice. Instead, we will
mark a theoretical difference between the two terms as described above.
B. "Amoral" is also used (in philosophy) in contrast to nonmoral and immoral. Amoral actions would
include nonintentional (but not necessarily unintentional) actions. I suspect then . . .
1. "Nonmoral" actions would be those actions where moral categories (such a right and wrong)
cannot be applied (such as matters of fact in scientific descriptions).
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/differences-between-ethical-issues-moral-issues-business48134.html
Related Articles
In business, you will inevitably run into situations where your morals and ethics will be tested. It is
important to understand that the above terms are not interchangeable, so a comprehensive connection
is crucial if you want to run a consistent, successful business.
Definitions
By definition, morals are values that we attribute to a system of beliefs, be they religious, political or
philosophical, for example. Ethics are how business owners apply those beliefs in their short and longterm business decisions. As a result, these concepts inevitably are intertwined and must be applied
carefully to maintain an image of professionalism and accountability.
Moral Issues
Your business invariably will face potential moral issues and approaches. Most importantly, however,
your morals should be clear -- they will define your business and what it stands for. As such, it is
prudent to insert these morals into your organization's mission statement. Mentioning issues like
honesty, accountability, integrity and dedication creates a sense of trust between you and your clients.
It is also advisable -- for both legal and moral reasons -- that you promote yourself as an "equal
opportunity employer" in your mission statement, website and job postings. This indicates that you do
not discriminate based on areas such as age, marital status, disability, race, nationality or religion -- all
of which are protected under United States labor laws.
Related Reading: List of Ethical Issues in Business
Ethical Issues
Once your company's morals are established, they will be reflected in your actions. From a legal
standpoint, this can affect your hiring practices and employee treatment. For more ambiguous terms,
such as honesty or integrity, you put these into practice through transparency with your customers and
adherence to the morals your business claims to follow. In short, while morals affect your stance on
certain issues, ethics dictate how you deal with them.
Examples
Considering the connection between morals and ethics, the issues associated with them do not
necessarily differ. For example, assume that your business values environmental protection -- your
morals. In turn, your organization may feel inclined to associate with certain environmental
organizations, charities and sound environmental practices -- your ethics. The same applies, for
example, if you are faced with an applicant who is a close friend or family member. If you consider
yourself an "equal opportunity employer," then your ethical obligation is to consider her qualifications
against other potential candidates, rather than practice nepotism. You may even decide to rule her out
altogether or have someone else evaluate her if you fear your objectivity is compromised.
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals
Ethics and morals relate to right and wrong conduct. While they are sometimes
used interchangeably, they are different: ethics refer to rules provided by an external
source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces or principles in religions. Morals refer to an
individuals own principles regarding right and wrong.
Comparison chart
Ethics
Morals
Individual - Internal
Because we believe in
something being right or
wrong.
Flexibility
The "Gray"
What are
they?
Where do
they come
from?
Why we do
it?
Origin
Acceptabili
ty
1 Source of Principles
4 Origins
6 References
Source of Principles
Ethics are external standards that are provided by institutions, groups, or culture to which
an individual belongs. For example, lawyers, policemen, and doctors all have to follow an
ethical code laid down by their profession, regardless of their own feelings or preferences.
Ethics can also be considered a social system or a framework for acceptable behavior.
Morals are also influenced by culture or society, but they are personal principlescreated
and upheld by individuals themselves.
Consistency and Flexibility
Ethics are very consistent within a certain context, but can vary greatly between
contexts. For example, the ethics of the medical profession in the 21st century are generally
consistent and do not change from hospital to hospital, but they are different from the
ethics of the 21st century legal profession.
An individuals moral code is usually unchanging and consistent across all contexts, but it
is also possible for certain events to radically change an individual's personal beliefs and
values.
Conflicts Between Ethics and Morals
One professional example of ethics conflicting with morals is the work of a defense
attorney. A lawyers morals may tell her that murder is reprehensible and that murderers
should be punished, but her ethics as a professional lawyer, require her to defend her
client to the best of her abilities, even if she knows that the client is guilty.
Another example can be found in the medical field. In most parts of the world, a doctor
may not euthanize a patient, even at the patient's request, as per ethical standards for
health professionals. However, the same doctor may personally believe in a patient's right
to die, as per the doctor's own morality.
Origins
Much of the confusion between these two words can be traced back to their origins. For
example, the word "ethic" comes from Old French (etique), Late Latin (ethica), and Greek
(ethos) and referred to customs or moral philosophies. "Morals" comes from Late
Latin's moralis, which referred to appropriate behavior and manners in society. So, the two
have very similar, if not synonymous, meanings originally.
Morality and ethics of the individual have been philosophically studied for well over a
thousand years. The idea of ethics being principles that are set and applied to a group (not
necessarily focused on the individual) is relatively new, though, primarily dating back to
the 1600s. The distinction between ethics and morals is particularly important for
philosophical ethicists.
Videos Explaining the Differences
The following video explains how ethics are objective, while morals are subjective.