Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Ethics and morals.Ethics and morals.Posted May 5, 2011 19:26 UTC (Thu) by chad.netzer (guest, #4257)In reply to: Ethics and morals. by RogerOdle Parent article: Interview with Linus Torvalds (LinuxFR)
> For instance, bank robbers are acting entirely ethically when they rob the bank and distribute the loot as they agreed. It is immoral but ethical.
Total rubbish.
If a king is hoarding all the grain, and I rob his silos to feed the people, it is *moral* but unethical. See, not so simple is it?
The Golden Rule is an ethic. It is *the* ethic. And in general, it precludes bank robberies.
(Log in to post comments)
Ethics and morals. Posted May 5, 2011 19:58 UTC (Thu) by RogerOdle (subscriber, #60791) [Link]
All you have done is point out how pointless questions of ethics are. Being ethical does not actually mean that someone is being good. And being unethical does not mean someone is being bad. It only means that they are following rules. There is always a set of rules that contradicts another so all human behaviour is both ethical, because it conforms to somebody's rules, and unethical, because it violates somebody else's rules, at the same time. To condemn a persons actions as unethical has no real tangible meaning.
* Is a whistle blower ethical or unethical? He violates his non-disclosure agreement (unethical) but he points out wrong doing (ethical). Maybe.
* Is your hypothetical king wrong for hording? Why haven't your hypothetical people provided for their own needs? Why have they become a burden to the king? These kinds of examples are oversimplified and intended to generate an emotional response, not a reasoned one. Is that ethical?
Ethics and morals. Posted May 5, 2011 20:22 UTC (Thu) by chad.netzer (guest, #4257) [Link]
> All you have done is point out how pointless questions of ethics are.
I think what I've done is to point out how pointless *your* absolutist definitions of ethics (and morals) are.
Ethics and morals. Posted May 6, 2011 0:13 UTC (Fri) by h2 (guest, #27965) [Link]
RogerOdle, this thread has to be the one of the more surreal things I've ever seen on lwn.net. Voting is immoral? Or unethical? This viewpoint is weird, to put it mildly. And God cares about your property? Man, I'm not sure what you guys drink or smoke, but whatever it is, hand it over, it must be potent. And you aren't embarrassed to type those words? Being religious and all? What branch of religion says this? Some strange mix of fringe rightwing christian cult and Ayn Randian 'let the strong overrule the weak and say no sorries in the process, just keep your hands off my property', that was stolen from the Indians in the first place ? Assuming you live in the US, of course, there aren't many other nations on this planet that contain advocates of this type of twisted view.
As someone who has studied a large amount of serious philosophy, I view the question of morality/ethics as almost the exact opposite of what you do.
To me, morality is a relative, almost meaningless term, defined by the time and place it occurs in. What is immoral today was not so yesterday, and might not be tomorrow. Every religious system that contains dogmas will almost inevitably then contain its own relative morality. For example, we have a Christian morality, which does not agree with an Islamic morality, which does not agree with a Jewish morality, though they may intersect, but not by necessity.
Ethics, on the other hand, is a far more demanding concept, and goes far deeper than does mere relative morality. Spinoza, for example, in his book titled 'The Ethics', which oddly never really mentions the word at all, for very good reason once you understand the question, is a good place to start. Ethics, that is, flows out of substance, the fundamental fabric of existence, what I assume you are referring to when you use the term 'God'.
Because ethics is a deeper concept, it's harder to explain, though one should know it when it is violated. This is also known as 'The Way', or 'Following the Way'.
What's up with that website anyway, it wants me to confirm an incompetently configured https: security exception just to read Linus's ramblings on things he doesn't understand? I'll pass, thanks.
This would be comical if it weren't so bizarre, and sad.
|
|||||||||||||