Douluo III: The Honored One

Morality is the set of customs and norms that are considered "good" to direct or judge the behavior of people in a community. [ 1 ] It is also the differentiation of intentions, decisions and actions between those that are distinguished as proper (correct) and improper (incorrect). [ 2 ] It is distinguished from ethics in that the latter is a transcultural or universal morality, although they are often confused. Morality allows us to distinguish which actions are good and which are bad with objective criteria. Another perspective defines it as the knowledge of what human beings should do or avoid to maintain social stability. [ 3 ]

The term "moral" has the opposite meaning to "immoral" (against morality) and "amoral" (without morality). The existence of actions susceptible to moral assessment is based on the human being, as the subject of voluntary acts. It encompasses human action in all its manifestations and allows for the introduction and reference of values .

Moral concepts and beliefs are considered and codified according to a culture , religion , group, or other scheme of ideas, which have the function of regulating the behavior of its members. Conformity with such codifications can also be known as morality and it is considered that society depends on the widespread use of this for its existence. In practice, they are usually moral behaviors based, not on religious approaches, but consistent with a certain anthropology. Equivocal situations can arise if one tries to deny ethical value to behaviors that have their origin in religion. [ 4 ]

There are various definitions and conceptions of what morality means, which has been a subject of discussion and debate over time. Many opinions agree that the term represents that which allows us to distinguish between good and evil [ 5 ] in actions, while others say that only customs are evaluated as virtuous or pernicious.

The concept of morality differs from moral philosophy or ethics in that the latter rationally reflects on the various moral schemes with the aim of finding rational main ideas that determine the actions of correct ethics and the actions of incorrect ethics, that is, ethics seeks absolute or universal principles , independent of the morals of each culture.

History[ edit ]

All societies have behaviors that are at the core of a moral conception widely shared by individuals within the group. In the West, the moral conceptions of religions such as Judaism and Christianity have been important . In the East, Confucianism and Buddhism have also exerted a strong influence on the moral core of Asian societies.

The Swedish mythologist M. P. Nilsson , in the early 20th century , put forward a theory according to which the precepts considered taboo by primitive societies were at the origin of morality. The concept of taboo, which originally implied a mere prohibition motivated by the "fear of harm", was refined and transformed with the emergence of more elaborate religions. The provisions resulting from this fusion paved the way that led, in its final stage, to the emergence of moral conscience. [ 6 ]

Although it is common to trace Western moral reflection back to the teachings of Greco-Roman schools, where morality was taught in the form of practical precepts, moral reflection was very important in Egyptian Antiquity , judging by the large number of moral texts that have survived. In Greco-Roman Antiquity , numerous texts were produced, such as the Maxims of the Seven Sages of Greece and the Golden Verses of the Poets of Greece ; or in the form of apologues and allegories, until they later took on a philosophical character.

The ancient Romans attached capital importance to the mores maiorum ('customs of the elders', the customs of their ancestors established in a continuous series of judicial precedents) in legal life, so much so that for more than two centuries (until the 2nd century BC) it was the principal source of law . Its validity continues through the codification of these precedents in a text that comes down to us as the Law of the Twelve Tables , drawn up around 450 BC.

It occupies an important place in the teachings of Pythagoras , Socrates , Plato , Aristotle , Epicurus and, above all, among the Stoics ( Cicero , Seneca , Epictetus , Marcus Aurelius , etc.). The Neoplatonists were inspired by Plato and the Stoics fell into mysticism. The moderns have deepened and completed the theories of the ancients. [ 7 ]

Origins of morality[ edit ]

Many scientists believe that morality is a product of natural selection, which is thought to have preserved social behaviors favorable to the evolutionary success of groups. Animal societies show many examples of cohesion based on instinctive submission to what appear to be unwritten laws. The primitive groups that were ancestors of the human species undoubtedly had an organization of this type, which, with the development of cerebral faculties, progressively transformed into the institution of explicit laws, and respect for them. Societies that gave themselves laws and applied them turned out to be more capable of surviving and proliferating than those left to anarchy and savage competition between their members. [ citation needed ] The origins of morality are anthropocultural, since all rules and customs come from the culture in which we are born and develop. [ 8 ] Socrates is considered the father of ethics and morals. [ 9 ]

Sociobiology[ edit ]

This idea was expanded by Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson under the name sociobiology to encompass the entire human social fabric. [ 10 ] According to Wilson, who has summarized his views in a major work, Consilience, [ 11 ] our entire value system, including beliefs, virtues, and the norms associated with them, is a product of evolutionary opportunity. The system exists because it happened to be useful to the evolutionary success of the groups that practiced it.

Many philosophers and social scientists have strongly opposed sociobiology for various reasons. Some see in it vestiges of Social Darwinism , the empirical-logical position defended, in particular, by the 19th- century English philosopher Herbert Spencer , to justify, on the basis of Darwin's theory , the excesses of economic laissez-faire . Others believe that sociobiology exaggerates the role of genetic determinism to the detriment of environmental influences and promotes racial and social discrimination. A successful criticism of Wilson was made by Llano, in which he considers the unique ethical behavior of human beings compared to animals. [ 12 ]

Regardless of the controversy, it is clear that the advancement of societies has occurred with the appropriate development of laws, whenever this has occurred. On the other hand, comparative anthropology clearly shows that laws vary across peoples and periods, which is not always explained by categories of zoological hierarchy.

Whatever the origin of ethical behavior, there are reasons to believe that, through biological evolution—or, more likely, through cultural development—morality has progressively evolved from a pragmatic and utilitarian form to a more abstract conception of good and evil. Most civilizations distinguish between legislation, dictated by considerations of coexistence, and ethical norms, based on absolute values. The latter remain somewhat controversial, as demonstrated, for example, by the major debates on bioethics . But the distinction between good and evil seems to be deeply rooted in human nature . This is the key point.

Approaches to morality[ edit ]Philosophical morality[ edit ]

The term "moral" is used to refer to a set of precepts, values, permissions, and ideals that guide a group of people in a given historical period. It can also refer to someone's personal code of conduct. "Moral," with a capital letter, is used to refer to a philosophical discipline, Moral Philosophy, which is concerned with reflecting on our moral codes. [ 13 ]

Referring to Christian Ethics or Morality, von Hildebrand stated that it was a strict philosophical analysis. His assertion is based on data from experience on which one can reason adequately. [ 14 ]

Morality and ethics[ edit ]

Several authors consider these terms to be synonyms because their etymological origins are similar and refer to the character of the habits of a group. However, in other contexts the term "Ethics" is used to refer to Moral Philosophy, while "moral" refers to the different specific codes of behavior. [ 13 ] Some positions conceive ethics as the set of norms suggested by a philosopher or coming from a religion, while "moral" designates the degree of compliance that individuals give to the norms prevailing in the social group.

Not everyone agrees with this distinction, and therefore in a practical sense, both terms are used interchangeably, and often there is no distinction between the two concepts.

The nuance that delimits them is in the observation or practical application of the norm that entails the ethical mandate. Therefore, the ethical norm will always be theoretical, while morality or custom will be its practical application. [ 15 ] According to this point of view, morality is based on the values ​​dictated by conscience , which in turn are based on learned customs. This point of view says that morality is not absolute or universal, since its validity depends on the customs of a region, from here comes cultural relativism. Value is, therefore, the core of all morality. Each person has certain values, just as each person has a culture that identifies them. [ 16 ]

On the other hand, the universality of some moral system is one of the objectives of objective ethics whose content or effect is not considered relative or subjective , but effective and applicable to every rational man under a given context, as long as the agent capable of behavior can act in a rational way, understood as that in which all humans can agree when they decide to seek a specific moral behavior that is judged "good" or "correct", that maintains or causes an acceptable quality of life or avoids some inconvenient consequence, and that arises because of the repetition of certain probable behaviors for humanity.

Immanuel Kant ―through his categorical imperative― attempted to provide the basis for an objective morality born of reason and beyond religion . One of the main objections to his reasoning is the obligatory use of truth and duty to the exclusion of feeling . [ 17 ]

Friedrich Nietzsche 's critique of morality and ethics emphasizes that moral codes and the ethics that study or underpin these moral codes are presented as revealing profound truths about human beings.

His analysis of Christian morality is famous, in which he demonstrates how Christian values, for example, humility and compassion, are actually based on hypocrisy and resentment (according to his theory). Moral values ​​are stratagems of domination by some people over others. But no morality or ethics recognizes this because concealment is essential to them. To uncover these concealments, Nietzsche proposes a method he calls "genealogical." He undertakes a " genealogy of morals ." It involves conducting psychological and language analysis based on ethical and moral texts and observations of moral behavior.

For Nietzsche, in his work The Genealogy of Morals , he tells us that morals and ethics that pass off certain values ​​as "true" and "universal" are "slave morals." His proposal entails the total creative freedom of each person in the strictest sense, similar to that applied when speaking in contemporary art of the freedom of an artist. The "morality of masters" rejects the elaboration of a list of values ​​required of others. Each person must fulfill his desires and allow the desires of others to be expressed, without prior codes of truth.

Moral theology[ edit ]Main article: Christian ethics

In Christianity there is an area of ​​theological study that considers morality as the determination of what dictates evil and good. In this area, moral evil is understood as sin , injustice , wickedness , that which opposes moral good , understood as the will of God , the holy , justice , goodness . This belief, proper to the Christian faith , considers immoral acts as offenses against God, which entail the separation between man and Him, and which break the order necessary for living. [ 18 ] ​[ 19 ]

Christians do consider morality as something universal , since the Bible describes that all men (even Gentiles ) have a law written in their hearts [ 20 ]​ a natural law that was given by God, which is manifested as an innate morality , and which constitutes the spiritual root of human conscience . [ 21 ] ​[ 22 ] ​[ 23 ]

The existence of immorality, as a phenomenon, is also considered to be a result of man's free will , by which God gave human beings the ability to decide or the free choice between good and evil, or between blessing or curse . [ 24 ]

Objective morality[ edit ]

The set of moral norms is called objective morality because these norms exist as social facts, regardless of whether a subject wishes to abide by them or not. Moral acts arise from the conviction that an individual's actions are always carried out for certain ends and that everyone who does something must do so with a purpose, unless their reason overrides them, as occurs in a variety of situations. However, sociological realities suggest that people often act out of inertia, habit, unreasonable tradition, or the so-called "mob mentality."

Opposed to this self-justifying stance is the individual's acceptance of responsibility. By exercising moral values, he or she can become the architect of his or her destiny, as a person of sound judgment.

Throughout history and across cultures, there have been different views of morality. Generally, morality is applied in areas where people's decisions express an intention relative to other individuals. In fact, there is an academic dispute over whether morality can exist only in the presence of a society or also in a hypothetical individual unrelated to others. Morality is also measured when a person is alone, unobserved, for example, in situations where integrity is required.

Moral dichotomies[ edit ]Autonomy and heteronomy[ edit ]

A conception of morality can tend in any of the possible directions in a field. There are morals that recommend restrictions on behavior ( heteronomy ), just as there are morals that recommend free self-determination ( autonomy ), and a variety of intermediate positions. Ultimately, the true understanding of the autonomy of morality lies in the question of the foundation of freedom. One can affirm the autonomy of the free being, and at the same time, emphasize that such autonomy is not absolute, since it depends on many factors, not all of which change. [ 25 ]

Immoral and amoral[ edit ]

Within the concept of morality, two other concepts emerge that are, each in their own way, antonyms and should not be confused. One is " immoral ," which refers to any behavior or person that violates a specific morality or social morality. When we say that a person acts immorally, we mean that they act incorrectly, doing wrong.

On the other hand, the concept of "amoral" or amorality, refers to a position in which people consider themselves lacking in morals, so they do not consider human facts or acts to be bad or good, right or wrong. The greatest defense of amorality is made in Taoism , in which it is considered that morality corrupts human beings, forcing them to do good things when they are not prepared and prohibiting them from doing bad things when they need to experiment to realize the repercussions of their actions. [ 26 ]

Everything "moral", according to them, involves forcing the nature of the human being and is the fruit of distrust and fear of others, of what they can do if they are not subject to the strict government of laws that govern their behavior. [ 27 ] In the case of Christian ethics, a moral code is recognized, which, in no way, is a rigid order that stifles personality.

Human beings are moral beings because they have the capacity to choose how to act, are responsible for their actions, and are able to evaluate the consequences that arise from them. Moral conscience is manifested in the question: What should I do? To answer, people must reason about right and wrong. Behaving in accordance with what is good becomes a moral value . And moral norms develop and protect those values. Thus, the value of life is protected by the rule "you shall not kill." Animals are not capable of making reflective decisions; they do not ask themselves what they should do. Their lives are outside the realm of morality, which is why they are said to be amoral. Someone is immoral if they do not comply with the moral norms of their community , [ 28 ] to the extent that such norms conform to an anthropology that responds to the true being of man. In this sense, Zubiri recalled how the human being—from an ontological perspective—is linked to transcendence. [ 29 ]

Morality in different political-philosophical schools[ edit ]

There are various positions that propose the nature of ethical standards, some of which are cited in the following scheme:

Sociologism : This conception defends that moral norms originate in society and from it receive the strength and vigor to impose themselves on individuals. Many defenders of this theory are aware that sociological customs prevailing in a certain era lack ethics. And this shows the weakness of this approach, a point analyzed with acuity by Hildebrand. [ 30 ]Marxism : In his last economic writing, Glosses on Wagner , Marx begins: "I do not start from man, but from a given social period." By this he meant that, as history has shown, in different human conceptions and behaviors, ethics is not a social category whose normative contents are of absolute, universal, and eternal practical (moral) validity, as Kant claimed with his categorical imperative , but rather these contents are subject to the historical relativism of the different systems of life that humans divided into classes adopted at different periods of their existence as a species, since they overcame barbarism. Thus, for Marx, there is a morality and a type of human being corresponding to each period of history, as the prehistory of the generic human being liberated from all external, natural, or social need, which is what is conceived in the morality of the communists. Just as it happens in the base or material structure of society, where the modes of production configure their respective social formations that until now have corresponded to so many stages or periods of the development of the productive forces, the different ethical, moral, legal, ideological and political superstructures, were the changing expression of the interests of the different dominant classes within each of the social formations that have been configuring the progressive characteristic periodization in the economic-social, political, moral and cultural of human beings throughout history.Historicism : This position proclaims that, throughout history and at a variable pace, the vital sensitivity of some generations is replaced by that of others and, in accordance with this process, at the same time that some principles gain validity, others disappear. It has been objected to this theory that the recognition of the historicity of the human being can condition access to the truth, but does not call into question the universality of norms. Various authors have stressed that the variable circumstances of history must be taken into account, which does not mean that the capacity to know minimum and essential demands of the moral law is limited. [ 31 ]Theologism : This movement argues that moral standards have an origin determined by God . We can find a theological position, relatively frequently, in primitive peoples, for example, in the people of Israel , in the Judeo-Christian people and the morality of the prophets , in various ancient regions of the Middle East . In fact, history shows that all religions have some kind of moral code. In the case of Christianity, a moral order revealed in the Old Testament and expanded in the moral message of Jesus is recognized . [ 32 ]Natural Law Theory : There is a wide variety of theories that base their ethical views and moral norms on natural law . Among them, undoubtedly the most important is scholastic theory , according to which all people possess an identical nature, which is human nature. This maintains a profound relationship of order with the rest of beings and, above all, with God .Moral relativism : A widely accepted philosophical position is the one that accepts moral relativism, which denies the existence of an objective morality, imposed by the will of God or by the validity of natural laws, but rather assumes that it would be something conventional associated with cultures, beliefs and times. Authoritative thinkers throughout the ages have warned of the risks of this type of approach: Socrates , Plato [ 33 ]​ and Kant . [ 34 ]​ Heisenbergplaces the consequences of moral decline in the same order of effects as the atomic catastrophe. [ 35 ]​ The condemnation of ethical relativism is also shared by followers of the Frankfurt School . [ 36 ]​ At the legal level, positive law sometimes has an objective foundation, which removes from individual discretion the criteria regulating relationships of coexistence. [ 37 ]Objectivism : This philosophical stance asserts that the only way to achieve morality is through the use of reason and the acceptance of reality objectively, independent of perception. What is good for the sustenance, support, and fulfillment of human life as an individual is understood as the standard of morality, and the opposite as immoral. Under this standard, this theory defends an objective and universal moral code based solely on reason.Anarchism : Anarchist morality, for Piotr Kropotkin, is based on the principle of equality, from which the well-known phrase "Treat others as you want to be treated" is extracted."Furthermore, this principle of treating others as one wishes to be treated, what is it but the genuine principle of equality, the fundamental principle of anarchy? And how can one come to believe oneself an anarchist without putting it into practice? (...) And equality is equity. By calling ourselves anarchists, we declare in advance that we renounce treating others as we would not wish to be treated by them; that we no longer tolerate inequality, which would allow some among us to exercise violence or cunning or skill in a way that would displease us. But equality in all things—a synonym for equity—is anarchy itself. To hell with the white bear that arrogates to itself the right to deceive the simplicity of others! We do not want it and we suppress it out of necessity. It is not only against this abstract trinity of law, religion, and authority that we declare war. Being anarchists, we declare war on the accumulation of lies, cunning, exploitation, depravity, vice, in a word, inequality, which they have poured into the hearts of all of us. We declare war on their way of acting and thinking. The governed, the deceived, the exploited, the prostitute, etc., wound above all our feelings of equality. In the name of equality, we no longer want prostitutes, nor exploited, nor deceived, nor governed."

Ethics or moral philosophy is the branch of philosophy that studies human behavior , [ 1 ]​[ 2 ]​ right and wrong, [ 3 ] ​[ 4 ]​ good and evil , [ 4 ]​ morality , [ 5 ]​ good living , [ 6 ]​ virtue , happiness and duty . Contemporary ethics is usually divided into three branches or levels : metaethics studies the origin, nature and meaning of ethical concepts, normative ethics seeks norms or standards to regulate human behavior and applied ethics examines specific ethical controversies. [ 7 ] ​[ 8 ]

Ethics and morals are closely related concepts that are sometimes used synonymously, but traditionally they differ in that ethics is the academic discipline that studies morality. [ 5 ] Ethics does not invent moral problems, but rather reflects on them. [ 9 ] The actions relevant to ethics are moral actions, which are those performed freely , whether private, interpersonal, or political. [ 10 ] Ethics is not limited to observing and describing these actions, but seeks to determine whether they are good or bad, to pass judgment on them, and thus to help guide human behavior. [ 11 ]

The study of ethics dates back to the very origins of philosophy in Ancient Greece , and its historical development has been broad and varied. Throughout history, there have been diverse ways of understanding ethics and different moral proposals to guide human life.

Although ethics has always been a branch of philosophy, its broad scope connects it with many other disciplines, including anthropology , biology , economics , history , politics , sociology , and theology . [ 12 ]

Definitions[ edit ]

The word ethics is derived from the Ancient Greek ēthikós ( ἠθικός ), meaning "relating to one's character", which in turn comes from the root word êthos ( ἦθος ) meaning "character, moral nature". [ 13 ] This word was transferred into Latin as ethĭcus .

Rushworth Kidder states that "standard definitions of ethics have typically included phrases such as 'the science of ideal human character' or 'the science of moral duty'". [ 14 ] Richard William Paul and Linda Elder define ethics as "a set of concepts and principles that guide us in determining what behavior helps or harms sentient creatures". [ 15 ] The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy states that the word "ethics" is "commonly used interchangeably with ' morality ' ... and is sometimes used more narrowly to refer to the moral principles of a particular tradition, group, or individual." [ 16 ] Paul and Elder state that most people confuse ethics with behaving in accordance with social conventions, religious beliefs, the law, and do not treat ethics as an independent concept. [ 17 ]

The word "ethics" in English also refers to several things. [ 18 ] It can refer to philosophical ethics or moral philosophy, a project that attempts to use reason to answer various kinds of ethical questions. As the English moral philosopher Bernard Williams writes, attempting to explain moral philosophy: "What makes an inquiry philosophical is reflective generality and a style of argument which aims to be rationally persuasive." [ 19 ] Williams describes the content of this area of ​​inquiry as addressing the very broad question, "how one ought to live". [ 20 ] Ethics can also refer to a common human ability to think about ethical problems that is not particular to philosophy. As the bioethicist Larry Churchill has written: "Ethics, understood as the capacity to think critically about moral values ​​and to direct one's actions in terms of those values , is a generic human capacity." [ 21 ] Ethics can also be used to describe a particular person's own idiosyncratic principles or habits. [ 22 ]​ For example: "Joe has strange ethics."

Branches[ edit ]Metaethics[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Metaethics . [ edit ]This article or section has references , but needs more to support its verifiability .

Search sources: "Ethics" – news · books · academic · imagesThis notice was posted on December 6, 2024.

Metaethics is the branch of ethics that studies the origin and meaning of ethical concepts, [ 23 ]​ as well as metaphysical questions about morality, in particular whether moral values ​​exist independently of humans, and whether they are relative, conventional, or absolute . [ 23 ]

Unlike traditional ethics, metaethics does not answer questions such as "what is 'good'?" but rather "what is a person doing when they talk about 'good'?" or "what characteristics are characteristic of moral language?" It is, in short, an elucidatory discourse that in turn addresses another discourse, the moral one. An ethical doctrine elaborates and verifies specific statements or judgments. An ethical sentence, moral judgment, or normative declaration is an assertion that will contain terms such as "good," "bad," "correct," "incorrect," "obligatory," "permitted," etc., referring to an action, a decision, or even the intentions of the person acting or deciding something. When ethical sentences are used, people, situations, or actions are being morally assessed. Moral judgments are established when, for example, it is said: "that man is bad," "one should not be killed," etc. These statements contain the terms "bad," "one should not," etc., which imply moral assessments.

An ethical judgment involves the development of a moral judgment and a standard that indicates how the members of a society should act.

In 1903, George Edward Moore published Principia Ethica , a work considered the birthright of metaethics, although the word "metaethics" is not mentioned in it. Nevertheless, that work places particular emphasis on the analysis of the predicates "good" and "bad" as defining properties of ethical judgments. The work introduces, for example, the problem of the naturalistic fallacy . Since then, metaethics has grown significantly in scope. It now includes not only matters concerning the meaning and use of moral terms, concepts, and propositions, but also issues related to the logic of moral statements, such as deontic logic .

Some problems of metaethics are the problem of being and ought , the problem of moral luck , and the question of the existence or non-existence of free will . Perhaps the most important function of metaethics is of a gnoseological nature : to establish the way in which normative or value judgments could be founded, if this is possible. That is to say, although in metaethics a claim of normative and value neutrality prevails in its analyses, its work is closely related to the question of the validity of moral propositions.Normative ethics[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Normative Ethics . [ edit ]The trolley dilemma is a thought experiment that can be used to illustrate and test various ethical theories.

Normative ethics is the branch of ethics that studies the possible criteria for determining when an action is right and when it is wrong. [ 24 ] It seeks general principles that justify normative systems and argues why certain norms should be adopted . A classic example of such a criterion is the golden rule . [ 24 ]

Within normative ethics, there are three main positions: [ 24 ] Consequentialism holds that actions should be judged solely on the basis of whether their consequences are favorable or unfavorable. [ 24 ] Different versions of consequentialism differ, however, about which consequences are relevant in determining the morality of an action. [ 24 ] For example, moral egoism holds that an action will be morally right only when its consequences are favorable to the person performing it. [ 24 ] Utilitarianism , on the other hand , holds that an action will be morally right only when its consequences are favorable to a majority. [ 24 ] There is also debate over what should count as a favorable consequence.

Deontology holds that there are duties that must be fulfilled, regardless of any favorable or unfavorable consequences they may bring, and that fulfilling these duties is acting morally. [ 24 ] For example, caring for one's children is a duty, and it is morally wrong not to do so, even when this may result in large economic benefits. Different deontological theories differ in the method for determining duties, and consequently in the list of duties to be fulfilled. [ 24 ]

Virtue ethics focuses on the importance of developing good habits of conduct or virtues , and avoiding bad habits, that is, vices . [ 24 ]Applied ethics[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Applied Ethics . [ edit ]

Applied ethics is the branch of ethics that studies the application of ethical theories to specific and controversial moral issues. [ 25 ]

Some of these issues are studied by subdisciplines. For example, bioethics studies issues related to the advancement of biology and medicine, such as induced abortion , euthanasia , and organ donation. [ 26 ]

Professional deontology seeks to justify the moral values ​​that should guide professionals , and studies the values ​​that do guide professionals. [ 27 ] In the first sense, professional deontology is a normative and philosophical discipline. In the second sense, it is more of a descriptive and therefore scientific discipline . [ 27 ] Professional deontology also has subdisciplines such as medical ethics , military ethics , business ethics , computer ethics or engineering ethics . [ 28 ]

Environmental ethics deals with the ethical relationship between humans and the environment . [ 29 ] Perhaps the two fundamental questions of this discipline are: What duties do humans have toward the environment, and why? [ 29 ] In general, the answer to the first question is a consequence of the answer to the second. [ 29 ] Different answers or approaches to answers have given rise to different environmental ethics. [ 29 ]

Military ethics is a set of practices and discourses that serve to guide the armed forces and their members to act in accordance with certain values ​​and standards, and to demonstrate these reference values ​​to the general public.

Economic ethics deals with the ethical relationships that should guide economic relations between human beings and the effect that such norms would have on the economy of our societies. In fact, many of the economists who developed modern economic theory started from ethical foundations. The closest example is utilitarianism, first developed as a moral doctrine and later used for neoclassical value theory. [ 30 ] ​[ 31 ]

Organizational ethics is ethics applied to a particular circumstance—the organization—with its specific aspects. It is a scientific discipline that "investigates the impact that individuals, groups, and structures have on behavior within organizations, with the aim of applying this knowledge to improving the effectiveness of such organizations." [ 32 ]

Other issues studied by applied ethics are the death penalty , nuclear war , racism, and recreational drug use . [ 25 ]Concepts[ edit ]Main category: Ethical conceptsFreewill[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Free Will . [ edit ]See also: FreedomTraditionally, only actions of free will are considered worthy of credit or blame . ( Angel with the virtues Temperance and Humility versus Demon with the sins Anger and Hatred . Fresco of 1717, Church of St. Nicholas , Cukovets , Pernik Province , Bulgaria .)Free will (from the vulgar deformation of the Latin word arbitrium , [ 33 ]​ in turn from arbiter , 'judge' [ 34 ] ​), free will or free choice is the belief among those philosophical doctrines according to which people have the power to choose and make their own decisions. Many religious authorities have endorsed this belief, [ 35 ]​ while it has been criticized as a form of individualistic ideology by thinkers such as Baruch Spinoza , Arthur Schopenhauer , Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche . Lately brain scientists are questioning free will. [ citation needed ]

The principle of free will has religious , ethical, psychological , legal , and scientific implications . For example, ethics may assume that individuals are responsible for their own actions. In psychology, it implies that the mind controls some of the body's actions, which are conscious . [ citation needed ]

The existence of free will has been a central theme throughout the history of philosophy and science . It differs from freedom in that it entails the potential to act or not act. [ 36 ]Virtue[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Virtue . [ edit ]Cardinal and Theological Virtues by Raphael , 1511

Virtue ( Latin : virtus ) is moral excellence . A virtue is a quality that is considered morally good . A virtue is a person's disposition to act in accordance with certain ideal projects oriented towards goodness, truth, justice and beauty. [37] In other words , it allows one to do what is right and avoid what is wrong. The opposite of virtue is vice . Virtue is of great importance for the ethical life.

Other examples of this notion include the concept of merit in Asian traditions, as well as that of De ( Chinese德). The four brahmavihara ("divine states") of Buddhism can be considered virtues in the European sense. [ 38 ] ​[ 39 ]Responsibility[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Responsibility . [ edit ]This article or section has references , but needs more to support its verifiability .

Search sources: "Ethics" – news · books · academic · imagesThis notice was posted on April 24, 2017.

Responsibility is a value that is in the conscience of the person who studies Ethics on the basis of morality.

Put into practice, the magnitude of these actions is established, as well as how to address them in the most positive and comprehensive way to help in the future.

A person is characterized by responsibility because they possess the virtue not only of consciously making a series of decisions, but also of assuming the consequences of those decisions and being accountable for them to whomever is appropriate at any given time.Obligation[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Moral Obligation . [ edit ]

Moral obligation is what justifies the will of a value . Therefore, it must originate in authority , society , the unconscious , or the fear of punishment .

When a person grasps a value with their intelligence , they are prompted by that value, and then they propose to the will the realization of that value. But they press it gently, without suppressing free will ; they see an objective necessity and, as such, suggest it to the will for its realization. It is, therefore, a demand proper to reason, grounded in an objective value, but born in the most intimate and highest part of each person: their own reason. Therefore, moral obligation is autonomous.

The basis of obligation is reason versus value. Therefore, it is stated that value is the basis of moral obligation. Not only on the subjective level , but also on the objective level , since the law is the expression of a value originating in reason. This law has the capacity to produce in the subject, who is guided by his reason, the feeling of obligation. This is called the obligatory nature of the law , a typical property that is deduced from the value expressed by it. In other words: the person, with his reason, transcends the level of facts and recognizes the value of the laws, with this the same imposes an obligation or demand of a rational type, without underestimating free will and its autonomy .Ethical problems[ edit ]

Ethical problems arise from applying ethical theory to real-life situations.

Specific questions

Ethics is used in some aspects of determining public policy , but it can also be used by people facing difficult decisions. The kinds of questions that applied ethics addresses, for example, are: " Is it immoral to have an abortion? "; "Is euthanasia immoral?"; "Is affirmative action right or wrong?"; "What are human rights and how do we determine them?"; "Do animals have rights too ?"; and "Do people have the right to self-determination ?" [ citation needed ]

A more specific question might be: "If someone else can improve their life more than I can, is it then moral to sacrifice myself for them if necessary?" Without these questions, there is no fulcrum on which to balance the law, policy, and practice of arbitration; indeed, there are no common assumptions held by all participants, so the ability to formulate the questions precedes the balancing of rights. But not all issues studied in applied ethics concern public policy. For example, making ethical judgments regarding questions such as "Is lying always wrong?" and "If not, when is it permissible?" precedes any label.

People, in general, are more comfortable with dichotomies (two opposites). However, in ethics, problems are often multifaceted, and the best proposed actions address many different areas at once. Many buttons are pushed to improve the overall situation rather than benefiting any particular faction.

And not only has it been shown that people consider the character of the moral agent (i.e., a principle implicit in virtue ethics), the fact of the action (i.e., a principle implicit in deontology), and the consequences of the action (i.e., a principle implicit in utilitarianism) when making moral judgments, but also that the effect of each of these three components depends on the value of each component. [ 40 ]

Ethical dilemma[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Ethical Dilemma . [ edit ]In philosophy, ethical dilemmas , also called ethical paradoxes or moral dilemmas, are situations in which a person finds themselves under two (or more) conflicting moral criteria. A closely related definition characterizes ethical dilemmas as situations in which all available options are wrong. The term is also used in a broader sense in everyday language to refer to resolvable ethical conflicts, psychologically difficult choices, or other types of difficult ethical problems. This article deals with ethical dilemmas in the narrow philosophical sense, often referred to as genuine ethical dilemmas . Several examples have been proposed, but there is disagreement about whether they constitute genuine ethical dilemmas or merely apparent ones. The central debate surrounding ethical dilemmas concerns the question of whether they exist. Proponents usually present apparent examples, while opponents usually try to show that their existence contradicts very fundamental ethical principles. Ethical dilemmas come in several types. An important distinction concerns the difference between epistemic dilemmas , which give the agent a possibly false impression of an irresolvable conflict, and real or ontological dilemmas . There is broad agreement that epistemic dilemmas exist, but the main interest in ethical dilemmas takes place at the ontological level. Traditionally, philosophers held that it is a requirement for good moral theories to be free from ethical dilemmas. But this assumption has been challenged in contemporary philosophy .Problem of being and what should be[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from The Problem of Being and Ought to Be . [ edit ]David Hume raised the problem of is and ought in his Treatise of Human Nature .This article or section needs references that appear in a reputable publication .

Search sources: "Ethics" – news · books · academic · imagesThis notice was posted on April 20, 2024.

The is-ought problem (also called Hume's law, Hume's guillotine, and sometimes confused with the naturalistic fallacy ) is a problem in metaethics concerning the possibility of deducing normative sentences from descriptive sentences. Descriptive sentences are those that say what is the case (e.g., "emperors are cruel"), while normative sentences are those that say what ought to be the case ("emperors ought to be cruel").

Of course, just as one can demand justification for normative sentences, one can demand justification for descriptive sentences. But this is another problem, one that may find other answers. Descriptive sentences can (perhaps) be justified on the basis of empirical research . Thus, for example, the truth value of the sentence "emperors are cruel" can be determined by doing historical research. However, the same cannot be said for the sentence "emperors must be cruel." The truth or falsity of this sentence must be determined by other methods, and if the possibility of proving its truth through deduction from true premises is ruled out, then it is worth asking whether there is any other way.

The gap between facts and duties has nothing to do with the content of the descriptive propositions from which one starts. It makes no difference whether these are metaphysical, scientific, or everyday propositions. The error lies in the procedure, not in the starting point. The unnoticed empirical-normative ambiguity of certain terms leads to logical fallacies such as: "The essence of sexuality is procreation. Therefore, contraception is not permitted, because it does not reflect the nature of sexuality."

Hume's facts/values ​​dichotomy is related to the analytic/synthetic dichotomy : analytic (logical) propositions have no need for verification (they are always true), while synthetic propositions must be verified by experience and can be true or false, and ethical propositions come from experience. [ 41 ]Problem of moral luck[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from The Problem of Moral Luck . [ edit ]

The moral luck problem is the ethical problem that arises from the fact that in many cases, it seems right to morally evaluate an agent even though a significant part of what she is evaluated on depends on factors outside her control. [ 42 ] Such situations are called moral luck , and they conflict with an intuitive moral principle , called the control principle , according to which an agent is only morally evaluable to the extent that what she is evaluated on depends on factors under her control. [ 42 ]

Proposals for solutions to the problem can be divided into three main groups: [ 42 ] those that, despite appearances, deny the existence of moral luck; [ 42 ] those that accept the existence of moral luck, and prefer to deny or restrict the scope of the control principle; [ 42 ] and those that argue that it is simply inconsistent to accept or deny the existence of some types of moral luck, so that the problem never arises. [ 42 ]

The problem had its classic formulation in the works of Thomas Nagel (1979) and Bernard Williams (1981). [ 42 ]Ethics of eating meat[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from The Ethics of Meat Eating . [ edit ]

The ethics of meat eating refers to the question of whether it is ethical to eat non-human animals . It is one of the most prominent topics in food ethics . [ 43 ] Meat consumption takes into account ethical considerations rescued from other schools of thought; including posthumanism ; which in its search to mitigate a set of values ​​created around an anthropocentric perspective , seeks to revolutionize the power structures of humans among their own species, as well as with others. In the case of meat consumption, the position of human superiority with respect to species whose meat is consumed and processed industrially is reconsidered. Within posthumanism, there is an ethical transformation from an anthropocentric perspective to a biocentric one ; where the well-being of the human being is not stopped being taken into account , but not placing it in a position of power compared to other animal species. However, while posthumanist schools of thought are disruptive to other human processes, there are ethical subdivisions regarding how the reduction of meat consumption should be understood: Zoocentrism (broad or narrow as appropriate), Speciesism , Biocentrism and Ecocentrism [ 44 ]

The most common moral objection to eating meat is that, for most people living in the developed world, it is not necessary for survival or health. [ 45 ] Some argue that killing animals solely because people enjoy the taste of meat is wrong and morally unjustifiable. [ 46 ] [ 47 ] However, there are thinkers like Donna Hararway , who does not see veganism as an alternative. Largely because she considers such thinking to be a discourse of false promise. According to her, the relationship that humans have with animals also includes eating them. The reason for this is that culture is how these symbiotic bonds are created. However, there are thinkers like Dressler who oppose this view because Haraway only focuses on the way animals interconnect through work, since she sees it from a Marxist perspective. Another point Dressler makes about Anne Harrway's view is that she allows animal suffering and justifies it by saying that they have to share the pain to know what it means. Thus, just as there are ethical currents defending veganism, there is a wide debate regarding how the relationship between humans and other species should be. [ 48 ] Vegetarians and vegans [ 49 ] may also oppose the practices underlying meat production , or cite concerns about animal welfare , animal rights , environmental ethics , and religious reasons .

In response, some proponents of meat eating have presented various scientific, nutritional, cultural, and religious arguments in support of the practice. Some carnists oppose only the raising of animals in certain ways, such as factory farming , or the cruel killing of animals; others avoid only certain meats, such as veal or foie gras . Many of the views presented in this article could be extended not only to meat eating but also to the use of animals in research , food (including eggs and dairy ), clothing , and the entertainment industries ( zoos or bullfighting ).Debate on abortion[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Abortion Debate . [ edit ]Legal status of abortion in the world Allowed upon request, no gestational limit. Allowed upon request, with a gestational limit after the first 17 weeks. Allowed or unpunished upon request, with gestational limit in the first 17 weeks. Allowed upon request, with an unclear gestational limit.Legally restricted to cases of: Risk to the woman's life , health*, rape *, fetal defects * or socioeconomic factors Risk to the woman's life, health*, rape or fetal defects Risk to the woman's life, her health* or fetal defects Risk to the woman's life*, to her health* or rape Risk to the woman's life or health Risk to the woman's life Illegal without exceptions No information* This category does not apply to some countries ( see § Legal status of abortion in the world )Note: In some countries, abortion laws are modified by other laws, regulations, legal principles, or court decisions. This map shows their combined effect as implemented by the authorities.

In relation to induced abortion or voluntary interruption of pregnancy, it refers to the discussion, controversy and polemic about its practice, social and economic context in which it occurs. The parties involved in the debate are the " pro-choice " and " pro-life " movements. [ 50 ] ​[ 51 ]​ The former emphasize the right of women to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy, [ 52 ]​ the latter emphasize the right of the embryo or fetus to have its gestation terminated and to be born. [ 53 ]

For many people, abortion is a moral issue related to the beginning of the human person, [ 54 ]​ the rights of the unborn child, and a woman's rights over her own body. [ 55 ]​ The debate has become a political and legal issue in some countries, with anti-abortion activists seeking to enact, maintain, and expand anti-abortion laws, while abortion rights activists seek to repeal or relax those laws while expanding access to abortion. Abortion laws vary considerably across jurisdictions, from outright bans on the procedure to public funding of abortion. The availability of safe abortion also varies around the world.

Around 56 million abortions are performed each year worldwide, [ 56 ]​ with approximately 45% being unsafe. [ 57 ]​ The moral, ethical, and legal issues surrounding abortion have been debated. [ 58 ] ​[ 59 ]Metaethics[ edit ]This section is an excerpt from Metaethics . [ edit ]This article or section has references , but needs more to support its verifiability .

Search sources: "Ethics" – news · books · academic · imagesThis notice was posted on December 6, 2024.

Metaethics is the branch of ethics that studies the origin and meaning of ethical concepts, [ 23 ]​ as well as metaphysical questions about morality, in particular whether moral values ​​exist independently of humans, and whether they are relative, conventional, or absolute . [ 23 ]

Unlike traditional ethics, metaethics does not answer questions such as "what is 'good'?" but rather "what is a person doing when they talk about 'good'?" or "what characteristics are characteristic of moral language?" It is, in short, an elucidatory discourse that in turn addresses another discourse, the moral one. An ethical doctrine elaborates and verifies specific statements or judgments. An ethical sentence, moral judgment, or normative declaration is an assertion that will contain terms such as "good," "bad," "correct," "incorrect," "obligatory," "permitted," etc., referring to an action, a decision, or even the intentions of the person acting or deciding something. When ethical sentences are used, people, situations, or actions are being morally assessed. Moral judgments are established when, for example, it is said: "that man is bad," "one should not be killed," etc. These statements contain the terms "bad," "one should not," etc., which imply moral assessments.

An ethical judgment involves the development of a moral judgment and a standard that indicates how the members of a society should act.

In 1903, George Edward Moore published Principia Ethica , a work considered the birthright of metaethics, although the word "metaethics" is not mentioned in it. Nevertheless, that work places particular emphasis on the analysis of the predicates "good" and "bad" as defining properties of ethical judgments. The work introduces, for example, the problem of the naturalistic fallacy . Since then, metaethics has grown significantly in scope. It now includes not only matters concerning the meaning and use of moral terms, concepts, and propositions, but also issues related to the logic of moral statements, such as deontic logic .

Some problems of metaethics are the problem of being and ought , the problem of moral luck , and the question of the existence or non-existence of free will . Perhaps the most important function of metaethics is of a gnoseological nature : to establish the way in which normative or value judgments could be founded, if this is possible. That is to say, although in metaethics a claim of normative and value neutrality prevails in its analyses, its work is closely related to the question of the validity of moral propositions.History[ edit ]Main article: History of ethicsAncient Age[ edit ]

Since the beginning of philosophical reflection, consideration of ethics has been present. Plato addresses the ethical theme in various places and from different contexts. Thus, for example, in the Gorgias he seeks to overcome hedonism and the law of the strongest. In the Phaedo he demonstrates the importance of what exists after death to regulate one's own behavior. In the Republic he addresses jointly individual ethics (from the perspective of justice within the soul) and public ethics, with a complex theory of the State, which finds complements and different points of view in two other works, the Statesman and the Laws . In the second half of the work Phaedrus , one of the main themes is ethics. [ 60 ]

The Nicomachean Ethics , arguably Aristotle 's most important ethical treatise , is based on the premise that every human being seeks happiness (eudemonic ethics). For Aristotle, all natural beings tend to fulfill their proper function and are oriented toward fully realizing their potential. The good, which is the same as the perfection of a being or the realization of its capacities, is the fulfillment of its proper function, that which only it can achieve. Human beings, too, are oriented toward the full realization of their proper function. The question that arises, then, is what is the proper function of humankind. And if there is more than one good proper to humankind, what is the highest and most perfect good that humankind can achieve?

As in his other works, Aristotle surveys the opinions of his contemporaries on this subject and finds that they all seem to agree that the supreme goal of humankind is to live well and be happy, although there is much disagreement about what happiness and good living consist of. For Aristotle, a happy (full) life is one that allows one to pursue higher activity (contemplation), with sufficient autonomy (material goods, health), and in the company of a sufficient number of friends (cf. Nicomachean Ethics I).

Only actions in which one can choose and decide what to do are moral. On the other hand, actions that are suffered, compulsory, or forced are neither moral nor immoral. What is moral is action that depends on the will, if one acts correctly. When does one act correctly? The correct way to act depends on the sphere of action (dianoethical or intellectual, ethical or moral) and is partly guided by the customs of the community to which one belongs (if the community is ethically sound, something Aristotle assumed for the Greek world, perhaps uncritically) and is learned through education. When one acts according to these guidelines, one lives well and is virtuous.

On the other hand, the Stoic and Epicurean philosophers proposed moral theories based on opposing principles: virtue and living in moderation (Stoicism), and the pursuit of pleasure (Epicureanism).

Middle Ages[ edit ]

It is a time when ethics embraces elements of the classical doctrines of happiness (the goal of human action is to obtain the good that makes us happy) and unites them with Christian doctrine (seen as divine Revelation), especially according to the rules contained in the Commandments. The ultimate goal of human action is charity, which is achieved by living according to the Gospel and which allows humankind to access the vision of God (in heaven), where humankind achieves its fullest fulfillment and the supreme good.

Various authors speak of ethics, and from different perspectives. It is worth remembering two great names: Saint Augustine of Hippo and Saint Thomas Aquinas (especially in the second part of the Summa Theologiae , which includes numerous elements of Aristotle's ethics). [ 61 ]

Later, and following in the footsteps of the ideas of Thomas Aquinas, what would later be known as the principle of double effect was developed in the Catholic sphere .

Modern Age[ edit ]

Modern ethical philosophers work primarily with an eye to the ancient world (Stoics, Epicureans, Plato, Aristotle), albeit with some elements inherited from medieval Scholasticism. Descartes incorporates some elements of ethics in his famous Discourse on Method . Within rationalism, Baruch Spinoza developed a more comprehensive and systematic ethical proposal. Within the realm of empiricism, David Hume worked at various times to understand the deep motives of human actions.

The great modern ethical revolution was achieved through Immanuel Kant , who rejected a foundation of ethics on anything other than the moral imperative itself (formal deontology), since if morality were oriented toward the pursuit of happiness, it could not provide any categorical or universal norms. Idealist philosophers developed this morality of the categorical imperative . They thus countered utilitarianism by asserting that the principle of utility is not the sole criterion for the correctness of actions.

Contemporary Age[ edit ]

Twentieth- century ethics has seen very important contributions from numerous authors: vitalists and existentialists developed the sense of choice and responsibility, and Max Scheler developed a phenomenology of values. Authors such as Alain Badiou have attempted to demonstrate that this main tendency (in opinions and institutions), the question of "ethics" in the twentieth century , is in reality a "true nihilism " and "a threatening denial of all thought." [ 62 ]

Recently, and developing an in-depth analysis of the origins and foundations of ethics, various studies have appeared on the role of emotions in the development of anti-foundationalist ethical thought, as Richard Rorty has pointed out . In the last two decades, the Scottish philosopher MacIntyre has established new tools for the historical-philosophical analysis of different rival versions of ethics.

David Couzens Hoy argues that Emmanuel Levinas 's writings on the face of the Other and Derrida 's meditations on the relevance of death to ethics are signs of the "ethical turn" in continental philosophy that occurred in the 1980s and 1990s. Hoy describes post-critical ethics as "obligations that are presented as necessarily to be fulfilled but are neither imposed nor enforceable." [ 63 ]

Hoy's model of post-critique uses the term "ethical resistance." Examples of this would be an individual's resistance to consumerism in a retreat to a simpler but perhaps harsher lifestyle, or an individual's resistance to a terminal illness. Hoy describes Levinas's account as "not an attempt to use power against itself or to mobilize sections of the population to exercise its political power; ethical resistance is instead the resistance of the powerless." [ 64 ]

Today concludes that

The ethical resistance of powerless others to our ability to exercise power over them is, therefore, what imposes unenforceable obligations on us. Obligations are unenforceable precisely because of the other's lack of power. That actions are both obligatory and unenforceable is what places them in the category of ethical. Obligations that were enforced, by virtue of the force behind them, would not be freely assumed and would not fall within the realm of ethics. [ 65 ]Moral psychology[ edit ]

Moral psychology is a field of study that began as a topic in philosophy and is now properly considered part of the discipline of psychology . Some use the term "moral psychology" relatively narrowly to refer to the study of moral development . [ 66 ] However, others tend to use the term more broadly to include any topic at the intersection of ethics and psychology (and philosophy of mind ). [ 67 ] These topics are those that involve the mind and are relevant to moral issues. Some of the major topics in the field are moral responsibility , moral development, moral character (especially as related to virtue ethics ), altruism , psychological egoism , moral luck , and moral disagreement. [ 68 ]

Evolutionary ethics[ edit ]Main article: Evolutionary ethics

Evolutionary ethics refers to approaches to ethics (morality) based on the role of evolution in shaping human psychology and behavior. Such approaches may draw from scientific fields such as evolutionary psychology or sociobiology , with a focus on understanding and explaining observed ethical preferences and choices. [ 69 ]

Descriptive ethics[ edit ]

Descriptive ethics is at the less philosophical end of the spectrum, as it seeks to gather particular information about how people live and draw general conclusions based on observed patterns. Abstract, theoretical questions that are more clearly philosophical, such as "Is ethical knowledge possible?", are not central to descriptive ethics. Descriptive ethics offers a value-free approach to ethics, defining it as a social science rather than a humanities one . Its examination of ethics does not start from a preconceived theory, but rather investigates observations of actual choices made by moral agents in practice. Some philosophers draw on descriptive ethics and the choices made and unquestioned by a society or culture to derive categories, which typically vary with context. This can lead to situational ethics and situated ethics . These philosophers often view aesthetics , etiquette , and arbitration as more fundamental, filtering "bottom-up" to imply the existence, rather than explicitly prescribe, theories of value or conduct. The study of descriptive ethics may include examinations of the following:

Ethical codes are applied by various groups. Some consider aesthetics itself to be the foundation of ethics, and a personal moral core developed through art and storytelling is highly influential in subsequent ethical choices.Informal theories of etiquette tend to be less rigorous and more situational. Some consider etiquette to be simply negative ethics—that is, where can one evade an uncomfortable truth without doing something wrong? A prominent proponent of this view is Judith Martin ("Miss Manners"). According to this view, ethics is more of a summary of common-sense social decisions.Practices in arbitration and law , for example, assert that ethics itself is a matter of balancing "right against right"—that is, prioritizing two things that are both right, but that must be carefully traded off in each situation.Observed choices made by ordinary people, without help or advice from experts, who vote , buy, and decide what is worth valuing. This is a major concern of sociology, political science , and economics . [ 70 ]Etymology[ edit ]

The word "ethics" comes from the Latin ethĭcus , and this from the ancient Greek ἠθικός transliterated as ēthikós . The feminine form comes from the late Latin ethĭca , and this from the Greek ēthikḗ . [ 71 ] According to some authors, êthos , meaning "character", should be differentiated from ethos , meaning "custom", since "ethics" follows from that sense and is not this one. [ 72 ]

Etymologically, "ethics" and "morals" have the same meaning, since the word "moral" comes from the Latin mos , which means "habit" or "custom." [ 73 ]

Moral theology is a branch of theology that deals with right and wrong in human behavior . Most religions have a moral component (we therefore speak of religious morality as opposed to secular morality ). In religions, from a theological point of view and to the extent that ethics is derived from revealed truth from divine sources, ethics is studied as a branch of theology. Many, especially in Christian circles, have made famous—although it is not a principle originally formulated by them—the Golden Rule , which teaches people to "treat others as you would wish to be treated." It is a common denominator in many of the major moral codes and religions.

Christian ethics is based on the practice of good and good works, as commanded by Jesus Christ in the Gospel. [ 1 ] ​[ 2 ] ​[ 3 ] ​[ 4 ] ​[ citation needed ] On the other hand, good or good deeds are intrinsically present in the person himself, who according to Christian teaching was made in the image and likeness of God.

It is worth noting that in the Lutheran culture of the Nordic countries, it is believed that man is not good in himself and that he needs God to free him from his evil deeds. [ citation needed ]

Ethics in the Bible[ edit ]Ethics in the Old Testament[ edit ]

The books of the Old Testament reflect a rich variety of beliefs and conditions, from their beginnings as shepherds of nomadic tribes to city life, from a henotheistic clan to the ethics of monotheism and its prophets . [ 5 ]

The Bible, taken as a whole, does not allow its teachings on biblical ethics to be viewed as a single unit. However, with careful study, a diverse number of ethical themes can be discovered. [ citation needed ]

Prescriptive statements, for example, are found throughout, as are themes such as sanctification, covenant relationships with God, or the religious community itself.

God as example and supreme goodness[ edit ]

From a theistic perspective, God is the ultimate goodness, therefore, He is the plenitude of good, being, and power. Therefore, everything God does is good, and since Jesus Christ is God, we can say that everything Jesus Christ does is good. Therefore, an action is better (more good) the more it resembles what Jesus Christ would do, and it is worse (less good) the further it deviates from what Jesus Christ would do. For all this, it is proposed that we should follow Jesus Christ by following his example: "Act as Jesus Christ would act " (Philippians 2:5). We can also remember that true happiness consists in doing good , so God is happiness, and the way to achieve it is to follow the example of Jesus Christ by acting as he himself would act. This is a reflection on moral theology, seeing God as the ultimate goodness.

Political corruption is a criminal phenomenon consisting of the intentionally improper conduct of public officials and authorities, usually in collusion, or by indication, or pressure of individuals outside the State, private or foreign companies and power groups, making use of State resources to which they have access, to obtain an illegitimate benefit, generally in a secret manner. [ 1 ]

According to Hernández Gómez (2018), corruption is defined as "any violation or deviant act, of any nature, for economic or non-economic purposes, caused by the action or omission of institutional duties, of those who should seek to achieve the purposes of public administration and instead prevent, delay or hinder them." [ 2 ] For this reason, we can speak of the level of corruption or transparency of a legitimate State. [ 3 ]

Forms of corruption vary, but the most common are insider trading and sponsorship ; as well as bribery , influence peddling , tax evasion , extortion , fraud , embezzlement , malfeasance , caciquismo , cronyism , co-optation , nepotism , impunity and despotism . [ 4 ] Corruption often facilitates other types of criminal acts such as drug trafficking , money laundering , illegal prostitution and human trafficking , although it is certainly not restricted to these organized crimes and does not always support or protect other crimes.

A known antidote to political corruption is transparency .

Fundamentals[ edit ]Gerrymandering is the adjustment of political boundaries to ensure that the candidate always has the right name. The term originates from this political cartoon created by Gilbert Stuart in 1812. The cartoon's name is " The Gerrymander ," a play on the surname of the governor of Massachusetts , Elbridge Gerry, and " salamander ," due to the whimsical , reptilian shape he gave to his electoral district in order to be elected.

Sayéd and Bruce (1999) define corruption as "the misuse or abuse of public power for personal and private benefit," understanding that this phenomenon is not limited to public officials . It is also defined as the "set of attitudes and activities through which a person violates commitments made to himself, using the privileges granted, those agreements made, with the objective of obtaining a benefit unrelated to the common good." It generally targets rulers or elected or appointed officials, who dedicate themselves to exploiting state resources in one way or another to enrich themselves or benefit relatives or friends.

The concept of corruption differs depending on the country or jurisdiction . The truth is that some political practices may be legal in one place and illegal in another. In some countries, police and prosecutors must maintain discretion over whom they arrest and prosecute, and the line between discretion and corruption can be difficult to draw. Countries where transparency in public accounts, procurement, concessions, and the like is limited or even nonexistent will be more exposed to these actions. However, if the media are not transparent in informing citizens, or are restricted in their ability to do so, or are simply manipulated, the process of corruption will be more difficult to eradicate and prosecute.

Following Max Weber , it can be said that the great difference between the exercise of power by the Ancien Régime and the democratic world, is that in the Ancien Régime this exercise was markedly patrimonialist. However, in democratic regimes, since sovereignty rests with the people, the exercise of power has to answer to the nation. [ 5 ] On the other hand, the assertions of Theobald are useful, who, in addition to defining corruption as "the illegal use of public office for personal benefit", intuits that in the pre-industrial world personal dependencies gave way - in the industrial world - to the formal codification of social organizations seeking efficiency. However, family or friendship ties still persist with more presence the lower one goes down the bureaucratic pyramid. Developed countries also present corruption, but it tends to slow down when there are extraordinary increases in the quantity and quality of the means of production, and also if there were an international economy based on a stable system of exchange of values, goods and services . [ 6 ]

Guys[ edit ]

Mujica recognizes two types of corruption: [ citation needed ]

Grand corruption : which generates distrust in central authorities, perverts the functioning of the state apparatus, and diverts resources.Petty corruption : which tends to mobilize small amounts of economic resources or other assets, and which is located in the procedural scenario of citizen service.Dynamic[ edit ]

Ana María Arjona [ 7 ]​ states that those authors who "study the phenomenon from the economic theory" focus corruption in a scenario of cases isolated from the others, insufficient for the case of organized groups.

For his part, Michael Johnston, [ 8 ]​ according to the processes experienced by corrupt actors, identifies four types of corruption: (A) market corruption (corrupt practices that occur in the exchange of goods and services ); (B) patronage networks and machinery (routine practices that are in few hands); (C) favoritism (disposition of a small group of exceptional exchanges); (D) critical corruption (where there is a large number of people in extraordinary exchanges).

Causes[ edit ]

The causes can be endogenous (internal) or exogenous (external): [ 9 ] ​[ 10 ]

Among the many endogenous causes (those that have to do with the individual) we can list the following:Lack of a social conscience.Lack of education or a culture of commitment.Distorted and negative paradigms.Antisocial personalities and megalomania.Biased perception of the degree of corruption present.Underestimating the possibility of being discovered.As exogenous elements of corruption (those that depend on society), we have:Effective impunity in acts of corruption.Partisan corporatism.Social models that transmit a lack of values, creating a lack of these.Excessive discretionary power of the public official.Concentration of powers and decisions in certain government activities .Discretion and scarcity of collegial decisions.International bribery.Economic or legal control over the media that prevents corruption cases from being exposed to the public.Lack of limits and control over power, due to the absence of the separation of powers, "that the legislative (nation) controls the executive (state), and on the other hand the judiciary, and the citizen sleeps peacefully," James Madison.Too low wages.Lack of transparency in information concerning the use of public funds and decision-making processes.Low efficiency of public administration.Extreme complexity of the system.

A classification of the causes of corruption compiled by Arjona from the contributions of authors such as Cagliani, Rose-Ackerman and Johnston identifies three types: economic, political-institutional and cultural.

Duration: 15 minutes and 28 seconds.15:28Podcast on corruption in Mexico by Shot Informativo, Tec de MonterreyEconomic effects[ edit ]

Corruption [ 11 ] undermines economic development by generating considerable inefficiency and distortions. In the private sector , corruption increases the cost of doing business and entrepreneurial activities by adding to the price of the illicit funds themselves, the cost of handling negotiations with officials, and the risk of non-performance or detection. Although some argue that corruption reduces costs by circumventing excessive bureaucracy, the availability of bribes can also induce officials to invent new rules and delays. Overtly removing costly and time-consuming regulations is better than covertly allowing them to be circumvented through bribery. Where corruption inflates the cost of doing business, it also distorts the playing field, shielding well-connected firms from competitors and thus propping up inefficient businesses.

Corruption also creates distortions in the public sector by diverting public investment to capital projects where bribery and kickbacks are more prevalent. Officials may increase the complexity of public sector projects to hide or pave the way for such deals, thereby further distorting investment. Corruption also lowers compliance with construction, environmental, and other regulations, reduces the quality of government services and infrastructure, and increases budgetary pressures on the government.

Economists argue that one factor behind the differences in economic development between Africa and Asia is that in Africa, corruption has primarily taken the form of rent extraction, resulting in financial capital being moved out of the country rather than invested there (hence the often accurate stereotypical image of African dictators holding Swiss bank accounts). In Nigeria, for example, over $400 billion was stolen from the treasury by Nigerian leaders between 1960 and 1999. [ 12 ] Researchers at the University of Massachusetts have estimated that between 1970 and 1996, capital flight from 30 sub-Saharan African countries exceeded $187 billion, exceeding those nations' external debts. [ 13 ]​ The results, expressed in developmental delays or arrests, have been modeled in theory by economist Mancur Olson . In the African case, one of the contributing factors was political instability, and the fact that new governments frequently confiscated assets corruptly obtained by previous governments. This encouraged public officials to hide their wealth outside the country, away from possible future expropriation. In contrast, Asian administrators, such as Suharto's "New Order," frequently took a cut in business transactions or provided conditions for development through investment in infrastructure, law and order, etc. [ 14 ]

Environmental and social effects[ edit ]

Corruption facilitates environmental destruction. Corrupt countries may formally have legislation designed to protect the environment, but it cannot be enforced if those charged with enforcing it are easily bribed. The same can be said for social rights, labor protection, unionization, and the prevention of child labor. Violating these legal rights allows corrupt countries to gain an illegitimate economic advantage in international markets.

The economist and Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen has observed that "There is no such thing as a non-political food problem ." While drought and other natural events can trigger famine conditions, it is the action or inaction of the government that determines their severity, and often even whether a famine will occur. Governments with strong kleptocratic tendencies can undermine food security even when harvests are good. Public officials frequently steal state property. In Bihar, India, over 80% of the food aid allocated to the poor is stolen by corrupt public officials. [ 15 ] Similarly, food aid is frequently stolen at gunpoint by rulers, criminals, warlords, and the like, and sold for a profit. The 20th century abounds with examples of governments undermining the food security of their own nations, sometimes intentionally. [ 16 ] ​[ 17 ] ​[ 18 ]

According to Transparency International 's 2011 Corruption Perceptions Index , "more than two-thirds of the [183 countries and territories] ranked scored below 5," with 0 being "highly corrupt" and 10 being "highly transparent." In 2009, the annual report stated: "It is clear that no region of the world is immune to the dangers of corruption."

Corruption can have disastrous consequences. Time magazine reported that "corruption and negligence" were responsible—at least in part—for the sky-high death toll caused by the massive earthquake that devastated Haiti in 2010. The magazine added: "Professional engineers are rarely used to construct buildings; government inspectors are simply bribed."

Political effects[ edit ]

Corruption breeds distrust in political parties , political leaders, and most public institutions. It leads many people to adopt less cooperative strategies and encourages people to drop out of politics to avoid being exploited by members of corrupt networks. As a result, in many countries, it leads to abstention and a loss of interest in politics for prolonged periods. Occasionally, however, protest movements emerge that attempt to confront political power, generating political instability and subsequent political or police repression.

Effects on humanitarian aid[ edit ]Former President of El Salvador , Francisco Flores (right), who was accused of embezzling $5 million from government coffers. [ 19 ]

The scale of humanitarian aid to poor and unstable regions of the world is increasing, but it is highly vulnerable to corruption, with food aid, construction aid, and other valuable aid being at greatest risk. Food aid can be intentionally diverted from its destination directly and physically, or indirectly through manipulation of needs assessments, registration, and distribution, to favor certain groups or individuals. Similarly, in construction and reception, there are numerous opportunities for diversion and profit through substandard workmanship, kickbacks or contracts, and favoritism in the provision of adequate reception materials. Therefore, while humanitarian aid agencies try to counter aid diversion by including excess aid, recipients, for their part, are primarily concerned about their exclusion. Access to aid may end up being limited to those with connections, those who pay bribes, or those forced to provide sexual favors. Similarly, those capable of doing this can manipulate statistics to inflate the number of beneficiaries and divert additional aid.

Corruption and human rights[ edit ]

In broader terms, corruption is the appropriation of public power for private purposes. From the most general to the most specific level, corruption can be viewed as: "the privatization of public power" [ 20 ] (the presentation of private interests as public, state capture), the misappropriation of funds, the exchange relationship between a public body and a private body to obtain an advantage. [ 21 ]

There are indicators to measure corruption from the perspective of citizens. The best-known measurement is the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) conducted by Transparency International. This indicator combines surveys and evaluations on corruption collected by various established institutions and which pose different questions based on samples of several respondents, then are standardized and subject to statistical adjustments. [ 22 ]

To understand the relationship between corruption and human rights, it is necessary to consider that States have four human rights obligations. The first is "Respect," which implies not interfering with or jeopardizing the fulfillment of human rights. This obligation is fulfilled by the State through abstentions and is violated through actions. The State must refrain from, for example, torturing or unlawfully depriving people of their liberty. The second is "Protect ," which falls on State agents according to their powers, to create the legal framework and institutional machinery necessary to prevent human rights violations committed by the State apparatus. The third is "Guarantee," referring to maintaining and ensuring the enjoyment of human rights , and will also be responsible for improving and restoring them in the event of violations. And the fourth is "Promote," which means that State agents have the obligation to provide people with all the necessary information to ensure that they are able to enjoy and exercise their human rights. [ 23 ]

Corruption has negative effects on the exercise of human rights. This can be seen, first, in that authorities, through bribery, condition the exercise of human rights, for example, when prosecutors demand money from crime victims, when court officials solicit bribes from parties involved in any procedure, when nurses, doctors, and hospital administrators ask patients for bribes, etc. A second relationship occurs when the state accepts bribes so that a private individual can carry out an action prohibited by law, for example, contravening industrial safety measures that can lead to accidents, such as mine explosions, obtaining impact assessments through bribery to carry out megaprojects, such as dams, mines, wind farms, and tourism developments; buying votes and bribing public officials in charge of organizing elections to commit electoral fraud, thereby infringing on the political rights of citizens as well as the other affected candidates. [ 24 ]