Ethics and Morality: A Comparative Study

Ethics and Morality

The Greek noun ethos means usual, from which derives the adjective Ethik, meaning relating to customs. Etymologically, ethics means the science of morals.

The Latin noun morem means usual, from which derives the adjective moralem, meaning relating to customs. The term morality means the science of morals.

From a strictly etymological point of view, both terms, ethics and morality, signify the same thing: the science of morals.

The current distinction between morality and ethics is artificial but based on its utility.

Moral

Morality is the set of behaviors, norms, and values that govern a society at a given time.

  • Subjective moral: Set of behaviors, norms, and values of an individual.
  • Objective moral: Set of behaviors, norms, and values of a society.

The objective moral of a society and the subjective moral of its members may or may not align.

The set of beliefs, norms, values, and goals that guide our behavior toward the good is the object of moral.

Ethics

Ethics is the theoretical reflection on behaviors, norms, and values that shape morality. Ethics, briefly defined, is a theoretical reflection on morality, on the prevailing customs and their justification.

Examples

  • Objective: All men and women should have equal rights. All people have the right to freedom.
  • Subjective: The leftist party is the best. Real Madrid is the best soccer club.

1. The Moral Act

Actions susceptible to being approved or rejected by society are classified as moral acts.

People perform actions consciously or unconsciously, willingly or unwillingly. All these acts are acts of the person.

To judge an act as morally necessary, it must be done consciously and voluntarily:

  • Being aware means that the subject must know clearly what is done.
  • Voluntary means that the subject must want to do what they do and choose from several options.

Freedom is essential for the act to be human.

These human actions have social consequences, directly or indirectly, and thus may be positively or negatively evaluated by others.

The moral judge would be responsible for those acts we do consciously, voluntarily, and have direct or indirect social consequences.

  • Immoral act: Act that is at odds with the moral standards.
  • Amoral act: Act indifferent to the moral standards.
  • Act of person: Any act that a person makes consciously or unconsciously.
  • Human act: Act of a conscious, deliberate person.
  • Moral act: Act that we do consciously, voluntarily, and has social implications.

2. The Moral Judgments

A judgment is every proposition or sentence in which something is affirmed or denied about a subject:

  • Judgments in fact: Describe an event or say something without expressing a personal opinion.
  • Value judgments: Affirm or deny the value of something, based on reference standards considered valid by the one making the judgment. Ex: Stealing is wrong.
  • Moral judgment: A value judgment whose rules are moral and, therefore, evaluates a certain action or behavior. Example: Theft is reprehensible.

When we judge an act morally, we must consider another set of circumstances:

  • The reason: The cause that moves them to act, the answer to the question “why?”
  • The end: The mental representation of the result to be achieved, the answer to the question “what for?”
  • The means: The instruments, procedures, or strategies used to achieve the end, the answers to the questions “with what?” and “how?”
  • Robbery: Taking things belonging to others, using force against property or violence or intimidation against persons.
  • Theft: Taking things belonging to others, against the will of the owner, without the use of force or violence or intimidation against persons.
  • Embezzlement: Taking of movable property entrusted to the offender.

3. The Moral Values

Any moral system offers a scale of moral values.

Moral value is the quality that human actions have that make them progress or not according to the subject in the process of humanization.

Actions that favor the process of humanization are good and are classified as positive or valuable, while those that do not favor it are bad and are defined as negative values.

  • Ethics for: Claim that humans have a specific purpose in life; the task of ethics will be to discover it and propose ways of achieving it.
  • Ethics of duty: Seek ways to ensure that moral standards will be universal and mandatory for all.

Ethics of Conviction

1. Aristotelianism

Aristotle is the philosopher who has had the most influence on Western culture. His ethics is teleological because, according to his doctrine, actions are aimed at achieving specific goals. It follows the principle of eudaemonism because the highest end is pursuing happiness. The starting point for Aristotle is the idea that humans are distinguished from other beings because they can achieve happiness by practicing virtue.

Aristotle observed that, just as the organs of living things have a purpose, humans think and act to achieve some purpose, which the philosopher called property.

Property is that by which human beings work, not as a means to get something, but as an end in itself.

According to Aristotle, the highest good that humans can hope for is happiness.

For human beings, happiness consists in the exercise of reason.

Aristotle called intellectual virtues those that humans use to exercise reason.

Human beings are not just rational; not all happiness lies in the activity of reason, but also in other goods outside this contemplative activity.

Moral virtue is the force that leads humans to act in ways that achieve the property.

Aristotle defines moral virtue as the mean between two extremes:

  • DEFAULT: cowardice, selflessness
  • VIRTUE: courage, generosity
  • EXCESS: recklessness, greed

2. Epicureanism

This school of philosophy was founded by Epicurus and a group of friends who lived simply, away from riches. They believed it was important to address the problems that worried people and prevented them from enjoying the happiness that all human beings seek.

Epicureans seek pleasure by means of reason and prudence.

  • The fear of the gods: They are happy and do not worry about the fate of humans.
  • The fear of death: Understood as the disintegration of atoms that make up the body.
  • The fear of the hereafter: No immortality because the atoms that form the body break down, and life is over.

Having overcome the fears that trouble human beings, happiness is the absence of worry and pain.

Individuals should avoid pleasures that can lead to pain or disease.

Virtue is the way to achieve pleasure, and tranquility is the desired state. A virtuous person is one who has the plan for maximum pleasure with minimum pain.

3. Christianity

The life and preaching of Jesus coincided with the beginning of the Roman Empire and a point of crisis in philosophical and religious thought. These reasons, along with the personality of Jesus, a man with roots in the village, who expressed himself simply, helped spread his doctrine. He expounded his message with examples and miracles. He spoke in clear and direct words, saying that his message came from God.

Jesus spread the groundbreaking news that the ultimate end for man is God himself. This ultimate end is not just another goal, but the greatest good to which humans can aspire, whose possession brings full happiness.

Compared to other moral concepts that consider the good as attainable, the Christian faith holds that the ultimate good, the possession of God, is a divine gift, a grace.

The commitment to Jesus is moral and practical, based on his message, summarized as love for all.

4. Utilitarianism

J. Stuart Mill, philosopher and economist, is one of the most representative authors of English utilitarianism. From his early years, he received a thorough education covering different fields of knowledge. This is close to Aristotelian and Epicurean moral because it reduces ethical values and good to the attainment of certain useful and convenient assets.

The maximum happiness for humans is the attainment of what is useful to the individual and society, always understanding the highest good.

The utilitarian principle states that actions are good insofar as they produce well-being and bad as far as they produce discomfort. Well-being is pleasure or the absence of pain.

As a principle, it is uncontroversial; everyone seeks happiness as the ultimate goal. But regarding well-being, the cited authors did not have the same ideas. While Bentham believed that the important thing is the amount of well-being, Stuart Mill inclined more towards quality.