Ethics and Morality: Comparing Moral Values and Ethics
- Author Brian Orchard
- Published October 25, 2007
- Word count 747
We are shaped to a large extent by our cultural setting, whose moral values imprint themselves on our minds in ways most of us are unaware of. Music, movies and television all carry value-laden messages that bombard us daily. Over time, these messages can subtly develop within us a new worldview. These cultural values become accepted as more mature than previous values, especially by the young, and govern how we see the world. The result, inevitably it seems, is a generational divide.
Expressing nostalgia for the values of days gone by is common to an older generation. We hear and read about the need to return to moral values of previous times without, in many cases, any clear definition of what those values might be. In reaction to change, older people often simply declare that things used to be better.
But is it really a question of whose values are correct? Indeed, do any values represent a correct standard, or are values of themselves relative? If so, should we accept that they can and will differ from one generation to the next?
The nature of the generational differences is in the way we view values themselves. The word value can have a broad range of meaning; in a cultural sense it refers to a principle, standard or quality. A desire to return to past values generally means a return to principles and standards held by society and culture at large in previous decades. However, another meaning of value that needs to be considered is "the desirability or worth of a thing." If this meaning is applied to cultural values, then we introduce a moving target, because such a definition implies variation over time.
The perceived value of something differs from person to person and may reasonably change. For example, do we really want to return to the days of men wearing three-piece suits to baseball games? Would it be better if women still wore girdles and white gloves when they left the house? It would be ludicrous to think in these terms to find solutions to generational differences today. But here is the catch: While certain values cannot be replicated today, the principles, standards and qualities they reflect may well be desirable and downright helpful to a younger generation. How can we improve our principles and standards without all the baggage that can come with trying to recapture the moral values of a previous time?
Author Jeremy Rifkin describes the problem in his book The Age of Access: "The world . . . has become a human construct. . . . This new world is not objective but rather contingent, not made up of truths, but rather options and scenarios. Reality, it seems, is not something bequeathed to us but rather something we create. . . ."
James Davison Hunter says it quite plainly in his book The Death of Character: "Values are truths that have been deprived of their commanding character."
To address issues in terms of moral values makes it difficult, if not impossible, for the generations to be drawn together on common ground. Successive generations have created their own values as cultural influences have progressively emphasized the importance of self.
Perhaps a change of focus would be helpful. Instead of addressing values, which are relative, why not think in terms of ethics? Ethics refers to principles of right and wrong, especially in relation to specific moral choices that affect others. Right and wrong become anchor points that keep us from being drawn in by the relativity of values.
Of course, this necessitates some clear and indisputable definitions of right and wrong. The standard for moral choices in regard to relationships with others was written a long time ago. In short, the Creator of human life simply states that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. Specifics explaining how to do that are supplied in summary form within the Ten Commandments.
Ethics based on these principles provide a basis for defining right and wrong. From these, each generation can enjoy individual development and progress, but the commonality of these principles allows successive generations to share them as well.
How much happier would relationships be if we were prepared to question the evolving cultural values that have shaped us and to accept a common set of ethical standards? Ethics that transcend humanly devised morality benefit people of all ages simultaneously.
Nostalgia for days gone by might lessen if young and old could enjoy their differences because of shared underlying principles of right and wrong.
Author, Brian Orchard, writes articles on current events and ideology for Vision Media. More information about these and other current events and ideology topics can be found at http://www.vision.org.Article source: http://articlebiz.com
There are no posted comments.
- Examination is not a true test of knowledge
- 3 Philosophical Questions We Should Ask Ourselves Regularly
- On Honesty
- When every day, I tell Janice that I'm her mother, and that her mother is always with her
- When in Janice's orphanage, I talk to Janice about politics of observer being victory of politics over abstract
- When because of Juno Skinner, from True Lies, the US supernatural woman can help me create positive moral tragic
- When the American supernatural woman gave me The Representative, and my past anti-nationalism, so that I can enjoy helping her
- When 21 years ago, the supernatural US woman used Miramax's 54 to tell me that sexy sexy socialism is evil
- When Alicia Silverstone's Batgirl creates communism from tyranny data, so that Janice can live safely in Batman Forever
- When taking the piss takes the piss out of Valak, in the Mullins barn, so that science can be a series of AI psychologies
- When the American supernatural woman turns CNN into a false political anti-magic, so that she can be outsmarted by UK royalty
- When The Craft's Bonnie Harper wants me to love Janice, by turning UK humour's freedom from science into an evil evil
- When I become a UK Prime Minister, so that Alison Parker and Brittney Havers can protect my Annabelle: Creation body
- When I delete my story, The Representative, so that the American people can criticize me if I fail to love Janice
- When future robots choose to end American extramarital affairs, so that my brain can turn Annabelle Creation into a real reality
- When the GOP can't use 112 Ocean Avenue, because the sexiness of the US Senator Kamala Harris opposes Harvard University
- When European men and women are designed by nature to want to serve American businesswomen because the latters support monarchy
- When as Janice's sexy mother, I mess with Europe's royal women by having her see me smoke a cigar in a mansion hot tub
- When I can wear a sequin maxi dress for Janice, because Annabelle Creation has turned me into her sexy American mother
- When American mothers choose to oppose UK monarchs, so that Darth Maul is safe from extramarital affairs and press conferences
- When Scream's Sidney Prescott creates the US, so that Fox News can't copy the UK's vow to ABC's Cecilia Vega
- When The Sentinel's Alison Parker has UK royals think that space is a son of CNN, so that space can be a US trophy wife
- When CNN and the White House create science, so that FHM's Kelly Brook can't turn all adults into female supermodels
- When geology watches the 2004 movie Wild Things 2, in order to remember why it was that a wizard outsmarted the North Pole
- When Heaven refuses to use a mansion like a nightclub, so that all adults can try to wear a suit like ABC's Cecilia Vega
- Shame on You!
- A British computer, that defeats Egyptian Gods so that no aristocrat or monarch is the creator of the sexy American female CEO
- When CNN jumps up and down on outer space, so that a Spanish university can ignore a teddy bear in a nightclub
- An attractive American female CEO, who defeats an attractive British female aristocrat in a way that isn't hypocritical
- Metaphysical Reflections about Spinoza and his Concepts Pertaining to Metaphysics and God and the Wave Structure of Matter