- Do you agree with the differences in the definitions of ethics and morals? Why or why not?
- What would you add to these definitions? What would you delete from them?
I think that the way the text defines the two are spot on and actually clears up some ambiguity to the relationship of the two terms. I agree because there has to be some delineation between the singular and the plural. That is the individual and the groups. And just because the individual doesn’t agree with something that he/she still has to conform in some instances to the group. And occasionally visa-versa.
The text can be expounded maybe with some more examples of variations. And honestly, wouldn’t delete any of it.
I do agree with with these differences as they make sense in the social concept. Through experience, the problem presented by ethics is exactly the lack of attention to this definition, causing any number of misunderstandings and confusion in several social sectors, professional or not.
The one thing that I might note is how much of us are we shape from society. Like society as put social norms on us and to a certain extent it affects a lot of what we perceive. Thus Ethics might have some influence over morals.
I agree with the definitions for morals and ethics. I found that cleared up the ambiguity of each. My one change would be to add more examples of each in different scenarios other than that I would not delete anything from them.
Completely misleading. The better way to phrase the difference between morality and ethics is to say that morality is the common, everyday evaluation of whether a behavior is socially acceptable. Ethics is the critical reflection on personal and social morality. Groups and societies have moral expectations just as individuals have moral judgments.
Equating morality with the individual and ethics with society makes it impossible to see that some social arrangements are immoral and that groups as a whole can be morally wrong.
Everyone (except some psychopaths) has a moral sense. But not everyone has a sense of ethics (thinks critically about their moral intuitions and emotions).
Yes. I agree with the differences highlighted. Obviously as I understand, ethics confines one action to what might be conceived as in the best interest of a society or community or a congregation in a church. Whereas an individual moral is influenced by his or her basic intuitive reaction to a definite situation in a more private environment.
This article provides a reasonable explanation of the differences between personal morals and group ethics. That there must be a difference between the two is self evident - societal rules would be unlikely to appeal to all individuals, whose convictions have been shaped by their differing experiences. Nevertheless, normative group behavior must exist for society to function smoothly, and to avoid conflicts between individuals whose personal convictions differ too widely for compromise.
I might add that personal morals and group ethics can both be wrong, and that ideally, they could serve to correct one another. A person with potentially destructive personal convictions could be constrained by the necessity of cooperation with group ethics, and problematic group norms can be corrected by the resistance of those with alternative moral convictions.
This article gives us a great explanation of the difference between morals and Ethics. I would just add the best definition that I found on Ian Welsh website and was originally given by Welsh’s friend Stirling which is that morals are how you treat people you know. Ethics are how you treat people you don’t know.
I agree that ethics is based on society believes weather it is a religious group or a government. I apply my morals to based on my believes to things that are placed upon my from members of the society.
I agree with the differences because each individual does not follow or believe the same ethics. This is the reason to have morals as a sense of individuality. Most likely thought our morals would be based on societal ethics.
I would add to the definition examples of how your morals could change based on the societal ethics. I wouldn’t delete anything from the article as it all helps in aiding to the definition.
Ethics is most of the time, the right thing to do in society ( its norms) and in the sight of “God”, wheres morals for me is your or (mines) personal dilemma of the choices you make regardless of society or peer pressure and your conscious effort to do the right thing. ( Of course, I did not intentionally wanted to move the discussion from its focus but just putting it out there).
I do agree with the differences between morals and ethics. I think morals is something that is personal but can differ for each person. Ethics I think is more of a societal thing. To me, they are two separate things and since no two people are exactly the same morals can differ for each person while ethics aren’t.
Personally, I don’t think I would add or delete anything from the definition. I think it’s clear and concise while also drawing a clear line between them.
I’m totally in agreement with you. Have a good day!
Ethic and moral are separate areas. Ethic deals with societal norms while moral deals with character. A man is judged by his character while his ethical standards are what go on around him.
After much thought, it is interesting to see these two terms used to describe the individual and the whole. At first I was under the impression that both terms could be used interchangeably. After reviewing the article, I am going to have to agree with the provided explanation of morals in regard to a personal code, and ethics as a whole. From personal experience I have worked with individuals with different backgrounds and beliefs who believed I was in certain ways not equal to them. In their personal lives, there would be no associating with someone different from them. However given the ethics of the workplace interaction between these individuals and myself was the expected norm.
I would not have anything else to add or delete from these definitions. I agree that the split from individual and group standards is appropriate here.
Yes, I agree with the differences in 220.127.116.11. I think it describes the differences between them perfectly.
Ethics and morals are similar in definition, but have very different definition according to individual opinions. The differences pointed out in the article were accurate in my opinion and described both in understanding terms. I have always believed that morals are individual based and ethics are what the general populations believes to be the “rules to life”. An example given was being in a work environment and how you may have to set aside your morals to meet the requirements of the companies ethics. At my job we are not allowed to talking about what religion we practice, what political party you are apart of, your sexual orientation and much more. We can participate in these activities/beliefs outside of work, but once we walk through that door all personal morals gets silenced and we take on the ethical morals of the company in order to best do our job. I would not change anything about the definition, I would add that the morals of a large population or business/company are based off of a generalized idea of ethics in the area they are located.
I too thought these terms were interchangeable in definition, but the way the article explains it made me think of how I can apply both terms to my own day to day life and how I decided on my morals based on the ethical views that surround me.
I like the example of thinking about a defense criminal lawyer when talking about these two. I have always wondered why people will go to such levels to defend some one that they know is guilty. Morally he knows the defendant needs to be put away in jail because of the crime that was done and the crime that they could continue to do. Ethically he has to defend the guilty because of his job. When you are passionate about your job you tend to do it the best you can, feels wrong if your cheating at your job.