RE: Is Your Morality Being Manipulated?
Interesting study
It's been a while since I've entered into these sorts of discussions, but if I recall correctly ethics enters this discussion as what "ought" to be, in a more universal sense. Morals reflect what we do and can sometimes be subjective.
An example could be a code of honor. In one society it could be a code of honor to never shoot a man in the back. That would be their moral imperative. In another society the situation would warrant further review. For instance, what if the person you'd have to shoot in the back was stronger and more capable than you, and was about to kill innocents if you didn't take them out? Does the code of honor to not shoot someone in the back supercede that or bow before it?
Some would call this situational ethics. But I don't think it fits. It's wrong to murder in cold blood. But is it wrong to kill to defend those who cannot defend themselves, even if killing involves a non-personal attack from a safe distance? I think most of us would agree that it is not wrong.
Perhaps another way to put it would be that ethics objectively embrace the NAP. Morals are a society's effort to codify ethics.
Or, since it's been a while since I've worked through this, I have my wires crossed. ;)
Thank you for the feedback. Yes you are correct about ethics, that is to govern our moral behavior on what we think "ought" to be right and wrong.
If you think about your example, that is the kill or be killed mentality and there is nothing wrong with that, ultimately that is part of our survival instincts but were we built with killer instincts? The thought of harming others should not be entering anyone's mind at all but that is not the case in this world.
Just because you can think it, doesn't mean you should think it.
We have the answers to most of our questions within us. If an individual had the correct knowledge and understanding of morality, and ethics, one would not need to harm anyone at all or worry about being harmed.