Sunday Musings – October 2, 2022
The paradox of ethics and morality
I am very appreciative of those who are intentional about attempting to live a moral and/or ethical life and who also have a sense of humor regarding their journey with this attempt.
As I reminded myself and readers in a previous blog, moral and ethics, although often used interchangeably, can be viewed differently. According to many sources, including britannica.com, “both morality and ethics loosely have to do with distinguishing the difference between “good and bad” or “right and wrong.” Many people, however, think of morality as something that’s personal and normative and ethics as the standards of “good and bad” distinguished by a certain community or social setting.”
As a philosophy major, a person who can obsessively overthink and a person who daily strives to make decisions resulting in the least harm to self, others and Mother Earth I am acutely aware there are no perfect decisions. Given my goal I am most interested in morals and not ethics. Although I do not wish to offend others in a certain community or social setting, my experience is that often what some consider ethical is based on limited information and/or on a religious standard which may have originated in a different time and place based on an attempt to explain something which was mysterious. There is, for example, now no scientific evidence that a variety of sexual practices between consenting adults is harmful to others. There is no danger in eating certain food products if scientifically prepared unless one has a specific allergy. There may or may not be evidence that praying facing a certain direction is more powerful than praying facing another direction There is evidence that prayers can produce positive energy which is physical in nature. There is evidence, whether training animals or humans, a positive versus a negative approach works most effectively in almost all situations.
I happen to believe that given what we now know the use of single use plastic is immoral. The reason it is immoral is related to the extent to which this plastic is adversely affecting fish and other living parts of Mother Nature. Yet some would suggest that consistently bringing up the subject at restaurants and retail stores simply makes the staff of the establishments feel chastised and/or resentful and is not likely to diminish the use of single use plastic. Thus, one might say it is immoral to badger people with one’s concern about the use of single use plastic. In some communities where the livelihood of many is dependent on multi use plastics it is considered unethical to broach the topic unless one has a financially viable option.
Some think that the constant attempt to invite others to consider how their behavior affects others and the rest of Mother Earth is motivated by a political agenda. If this is true, the goal can be to ensure that people are politically correct only to make them seem superior to those who are less politically correct. Those who are less concerned about being politically correct would then be more moral and ethical than those who are politically correct.
Unlike most other animals, plants and certainly minerals, we humans deliberately create products which adversely affect the life of the universe and thus adversely upset the balance of the universe. It is true, of course, that certain acts of Mother Nature - severe storms - upset the existing balance but one could postulate that storms are just being storms and cannot be labeled as ethical, unethical, moral, immoral, or even amoral. They are busy being themselves although it is also true actions of we humans also affect acts of Mother Nature. Certain animals exist by feeding off other animals. Most would not suggest these animals are unethical or immoral. Only us humans, it seems are capable of ethical or moral behavior and of judging others as ethical, unethical, moral or immoral.
It could be asserted that the terms moral, immoral, ethical, unethical, and amoral are themselves both immoral and ethical. If one truly could accept that all action and thus inactions act on the entire universe than what we call immoral or unethical would not be in one’s best interest and, thus, only if one chose to act against one’s best interest would one be immoral or ethical. If indeed one chose to act against one’s best interest one would not be consider sane. If one is insane, one cannot be considered immoral or unethical because one is incapable of rational thought.
The only logical conclusion is that it is both immoral and ethical to think in terms of morality and ethics. It might be useful to think more broadly in terms of what behavior is most likely to have the least negative effects on the rest of the universe and/or to be honest and admit our goal is to kiss the Blarney Stone.
The point is that most of us want to be our best selves while, at the same time, not adding to the existential angst of the world by engaging in the unethical and immoral practice of proving that we have patented and own ethics and morality. That would be patently unethical and immoral.
Written October 2, 2022
Jimmy F Pickett
Coachpickett.org
The paradox of ethics and morality
I am very appreciative of those who are intentional about attempting to live a moral and/or ethical life and who also have a sense of humor regarding their journey with this attempt.
As I reminded myself and readers in a previous blog, moral and ethics, although often used interchangeably, can be viewed differently. According to many sources, including britannica.com, “both morality and ethics loosely have to do with distinguishing the difference between “good and bad” or “right and wrong.” Many people, however, think of morality as something that’s personal and normative and ethics as the standards of “good and bad” distinguished by a certain community or social setting.”
As a philosophy major, a person who can obsessively overthink and a person who daily strives to make decisions resulting in the least harm to self, others and Mother Earth I am acutely aware there are no perfect decisions. Given my goal I am most interested in morals and not ethics. Although I do not wish to offend others in a certain community or social setting, my experience is that often what some consider ethical is based on limited information and/or on a religious standard which may have originated in a different time and place based on an attempt to explain something which was mysterious. There is, for example, now no scientific evidence that a variety of sexual practices between consenting adults is harmful to others. There is no danger in eating certain food products if scientifically prepared unless one has a specific allergy. There may or may not be evidence that praying facing a certain direction is more powerful than praying facing another direction There is evidence that prayers can produce positive energy which is physical in nature. There is evidence, whether training animals or humans, a positive versus a negative approach works most effectively in almost all situations.
I happen to believe that given what we now know the use of single use plastic is immoral. The reason it is immoral is related to the extent to which this plastic is adversely affecting fish and other living parts of Mother Nature. Yet some would suggest that consistently bringing up the subject at restaurants and retail stores simply makes the staff of the establishments feel chastised and/or resentful and is not likely to diminish the use of single use plastic. Thus, one might say it is immoral to badger people with one’s concern about the use of single use plastic. In some communities where the livelihood of many is dependent on multi use plastics it is considered unethical to broach the topic unless one has a financially viable option.
Some think that the constant attempt to invite others to consider how their behavior affects others and the rest of Mother Earth is motivated by a political agenda. If this is true, the goal can be to ensure that people are politically correct only to make them seem superior to those who are less politically correct. Those who are less concerned about being politically correct would then be more moral and ethical than those who are politically correct.
Unlike most other animals, plants and certainly minerals, we humans deliberately create products which adversely affect the life of the universe and thus adversely upset the balance of the universe. It is true, of course, that certain acts of Mother Nature - severe storms - upset the existing balance but one could postulate that storms are just being storms and cannot be labeled as ethical, unethical, moral, immoral, or even amoral. They are busy being themselves although it is also true actions of we humans also affect acts of Mother Nature. Certain animals exist by feeding off other animals. Most would not suggest these animals are unethical or immoral. Only us humans, it seems are capable of ethical or moral behavior and of judging others as ethical, unethical, moral or immoral.
It could be asserted that the terms moral, immoral, ethical, unethical, and amoral are themselves both immoral and ethical. If one truly could accept that all action and thus inactions act on the entire universe than what we call immoral or unethical would not be in one’s best interest and, thus, only if one chose to act against one’s best interest would one be immoral or ethical. If indeed one chose to act against one’s best interest one would not be consider sane. If one is insane, one cannot be considered immoral or unethical because one is incapable of rational thought.
The only logical conclusion is that it is both immoral and ethical to think in terms of morality and ethics. It might be useful to think more broadly in terms of what behavior is most likely to have the least negative effects on the rest of the universe and/or to be honest and admit our goal is to kiss the Blarney Stone.
The point is that most of us want to be our best selves while, at the same time, not adding to the existential angst of the world by engaging in the unethical and immoral practice of proving that we have patented and own ethics and morality. That would be patently unethical and immoral.
Written October 2, 2022
Jimmy F Pickett
Coachpickett.org
RSS Feed