

|
Morality, in the strictest sense of the word, deals with that which is innately regarded as right or wrong. The term is often used to refer to a system of principles and judgments shared by cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which humans subjectively determine whether given actions are right or wrong. These concepts and beliefs are often generalized and codified by a culture or group, and thus serve to regulate the behavior of its members. Conformity to such codification may also be called morality, and the group may depend on widespread conformity to such codes for its continued existence. Individuals who choose to conform in this way are popularly held to posess "Moral Fibre", whereas those who lack "Moral Fibre" may be labelled as socially degenerate. A "moral" may refer to a particular principle, usually as an informal and general summary with respect to a moral principle, as it is applied in a given human situation.
The systematic study of morality is a branch of philosophy called ethics. Ethics seeks to address questions such as how one ought to behave in a specific situation ("applied ethics"), how one can justify a moral position ("normative ethics"), and whether we can justify ethics or morality itself ("meta-ethics").
For example, in applied ethics, the question of abortion being morally permissible is a current issue in United States society and politics. A common question in normative ethics is how one would go about justifying a lie, given that they think they are morally justified for the sake of protecting someone from harm. Do the terms "good", "evil", "right", and "wrong" make sense? Meta-ethics asks, how do we justify the existence of "good," or is it all relative and is morality simply a statement of one's preferences (i.e. through "cultural relativism")?
Of course, in any society there is a divergence between the notion of how we ought to behave and the reality of how we behave; so there is a difference between hypothetical punditry and real morality.
Contents |
Some evolutionary psychologists have argued that human morality originated from evolutionary processes. An innate tendency to develop a sense of right and wrong helps an individual to survive and reproduce in a species with complex social interactions. Selected behaviors, seen in abstraction as moral codes, are seen to be common to all human cultures, and reflect, in their development, similarities to natural selection and these aspects of morality can be seen in as the basis of some religious doctrine. From this, some also argue that there may be a simple Darwinian explanation for the existence of religion: that, regardless of the validity of religious beliefs, religion tends to encourage behavior beneficial to the species, as a code of morality tends to encourage communality, and communality tends to assist survival.
These explanations for the existence of morality do not, however, necessarily assist in deciding what is truly right for future actions. Should an individual's own morality really be determined by what is best for their genetic offspring (colloquially, but inaccurately, "the good of the species")? Viewholders counter that evolutionary psychology extends millions of years of empirical justification for our moral sense, provided that sense is indeed innate--more than recorded history could demonstrate. They claim sensible people would behave with morality knowing subconsciously that it has succeeded in the past. Still, an explanation of why and how humans could have a moral basis does not imply that they ought to hold these views.
Some observers hold that individuals have distinct sets of moral rules that they apply to different groups of people. There is the "ingroup," which includes the individual and those they believe to be of the same culture or race, and there is the "outgroup," whose members are not entitled to be treated according to the same rules. Some biologists, anthropologists and evolutionary psychologists believe this ingroup/outgroup difference is an evolutionary mechanism, one which evolved due to its enhanced survival aspects. Gary R. Johnson and V.S. Falger have argued that nationalism and patriotism are forms of this ingroup/outgroup boundary.
The evolutionary critique points to the radical ways which morality differs across times and cultures among human beings. Very few activities are always morally wrong across all human societies. For example, some groups still practice forms of infanticide, incest, and paederastry, activities that would be condemned harshly in most Western societies. It has been argued that morality is simply whatever norms are present within a given society at a given time.
The law considers itself independent of morality, even if the law happens to reflect or intends to reflect morality. (Of course, it is not difficult to argue that societal morality is inevitably encoded in law).
In some judicial systems, the word morality concretely means a requirement for the access to certain charges or careers, or for the obtaining of certain licenses or concessions, and generally consists of the absence of previous records on (e.g.) crimes, bankruptcy, political or commercial irregularities.
In some systems, the lack of morality of the individual can also be a sufficient cause for punishment, or can be an element for the grading of the punishment.
Especially in the systems where modesty (i.e., with reference to sexual crimes) is legally protected or otherwise regulated, the definition of morality as a legal element and in order to determine the cases of infringement, is usually left to the vision and appreciation of the single judge and hardly ever precisely specified. In such cases, it is common to verify an application of the prevalent common morality of the interested community, that consequently becomes enforced by the law for further reference.
The government of South Africa is attempting to create a Moral Regeneration movement. Part of this is a proposed Bill of Morals, which will bring a biblical-based "moral code" into the realm of law. This move by a nominally secular democracy has attracted relatively little criticism.
| General: Philosophy: Eastern - Western | History of philosophy: Ancient - Medieval - Modern | Portal |
| Lists: Basic topics | Topic list | Philosophers | Philosophies | Glossary of philosophical "isms" | Philosophical movements | Publications | Category listings ...more lists |
| Branches: Aesthetics | Ethics | Epistemology | Logic | Metaphysics | Philosophy of Education, History, Language, Law, Mathematics, Mind, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Religion, Science, Social philosophy, Social Sciences |
| Schools: Agnosticism | Analytic philosophy | Atheism | Critical theory | Determinism | Empiricism | Existentialism | Humanism | Idealism | Logical positivism | Materialism | Nihilism | Postmodernism | Rationalism | Relativism | Skepticism | Theism | Transhumanism |
| References: Philosophy primer | Internet Encyclo. of Philosophy | Philosophical dictionary | Stanford Encyclo. of Philosophy | Internet philosophy guide |