this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
39 points (89.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43810 readers
1 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Or "ethical" vs "moral"

all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fubo@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago

Morality is to do good and refrain from evil; to praise good and condemn evil; to seek out good and keep away from evil.

Ethics is to figure out what makes something good or evil: understanding what we can mean by those words; and what sorts of actions, motives, or dispositions fall under those categories, and why.

Justice is to build social systems that promote good and deter evil; including establishing the facts of what someone has done, and prescribing actions to be taken in response.

[–] 1bluepixel@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I think simply put:

Morality is an inherent classification of right and wrong behaviors, often the result of tradition, upbringing, and/or society.

Ethics is a moral system at which one may arrive through philosophy and rational thought.

Ethics tends to define right and wrong in terms of its impact on human well-being, and not just as a inherent sense of right and wrong. As such, it may arrive at conclusions that feel "morally wrong" but actually perpetuate a greater well-being. (One example being utilitarianism.) This is also its danger, as one may argue oneself into a behavior which is rationally ethical but inherently harmful (e.g. eugenics).

The power of ethics is that it can be used to derive moral guidelines for new circumstances, such as AI or global ecological considerations. Such considerations can be derived from morality, but they have a tendency to not truly appreciate new variables and instead attempt to reduce new systems to familiar circumstances, thus often missing nuance.

I'd argue that ultimately, a sound ethical system must be derived from rational ethical thought, gently guided by sound morality as a safeguard against dangerous fallacies.

[–] SeahorseTreble@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Thanks for your reply. :)

Wouldn't ethics then define right and wrong in terms of its impact on the well-being of sentient beings, rather than just human well-being?

And I suppose the difference with morality might be that certain actions that don't necessarily negatively impact other sentient beings, such as recreational drug use, might still be considered immoral by some due to cultural norms rather than practical considerations about the rightness or wrongness of them?

[–] 1bluepixel@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think generalizing the good of human beings to all sentient beings is a great example of how a rigorous ethical discourse can expand traditional morality. The idea of giving rights to great apes is a wonderful example and I hope we can get there soon.

And likewise, a lot of traditionally "wrong" behaviors can be argued to be morally neutral if they don't really diminish the well-being of human beings. Sex work is another example.

[–] SeahorseTreble@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I completely agree. Would you, in theory, be in support of giving rights to all sentient beings where possible, ensuring the best possible treatment and experiences of all individuals that have a conscious/subjective experience of life?

I would ideally like to see humanity extend moral/ethical consideration beyond humans to all animals, hypothetical alien animals, sentient AI, or any other sentients that emerged in future. I believe sentientism is the core underlying philosophy behind this idea of ethics.

[–] danhakimi@kbin.social 10 points 2 years ago

Originally, ethics were supposed to be a field of philosophy dealing with right and wrong on an individual scale, like virtue ethics, and morals, on a social scale, see "social mores." Over time, that distinction disappeared, and in some cases got flippedβ€”see, an "ethics committee." So don't sweat it, they're interchangeable, and everybody here is just talking about the connotations they've picked up in different contexts.

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

This is covered in the beginning of this ethics lecture series (at 1:50). Ethics is about expressing your personal values in how you exist in the world, whereas morality is about being in harmony with society.

Please watch this ethics professor, because I'm just a guy on the internet. The whole channel is worth a watch if you're interested in philosophy.

https://youtu.be/OCk4Advab54?si=v6BpavpTYxjeNAaX

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 2 years ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://youtu.be/OCk4Advab54?si=v6BpavpTYxjeNAaX

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Morality is the evolutionary selection pressure that human societies place on themselves.

Ethics is an attempt to calculate the optimal response to an event, for some definition of "optimal".

It's kinda like the difference between natural language and formal language. One is not designed, not static, and often not self consistent, but consistency isn't the goal. The other is a rigorously defined system that is scrutinized for inconsistencies, because consistency is the goal.

[–] menturi@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If I were to concisely put it with a fews word each, would it be a close approxmation to say morality is an automatic response and ethics is a rational response?

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 years ago

Hah, I felt I was already trimming it down to be as concise as I could get it. Maybe ethical systems are always rational, but I wouldn't take that to mean automatic responses are not rational.

I think the important part is that morality doesn't have a central goal and isn't designed, and ethics does and is.

[–] Nemo@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago

Morality one component of ethics but not the whole. Ethics is the process of figuring out what to do. The other components are aesthetics and practicality.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Legality is a code of behavior shared by society at large.

Ethicality is a code of behavior voluntarily adopted by disparate individuals as a condition of inclusion in a formally defined community.

Morality is an individually defined code of behavior. However, morality is often shared by people of similar cultural background: that common background tends to lead them to adopt the same moral code.

[–] birdcat@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't have anything to contribute, but I would like to recommend this video because it's awesome.

how would YOU solve a moral dilemma?

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 2 years ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

how would YOU solve a moral dilemma?

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] grayman@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ethics is right and wrong. Think stealing and lying.

Morals are anything to do with life. Taking or creating life is a moral issue. Think kill, murder, rape.

An issue is typically one or the other. eg It's morally ok to kill someone in self defense. You wouldn't say it's ethical to kill someone in self defense.