This is a trend I have been seeing lately even among my fellow anarchist types. I think a clarification within our imaginery community need’s to be made on which terminology best fit’s the role of describing whether a choice of action is the correct path to take or the wrong one. I’m a firm believer in that it is our language that gives way to corruption through unclear rationalism.
First to ground this topic in a logical manner, we have to bring up the term’s and their etymology . The root word for both has to be used to give a pseudo-definitive meaning behind them, and how they are perceived when spoken. The root for ethical is the Greek “ethos,” meaning “character.” The root for Moral is Latin “mos,” meaning “custom.” Now these are clearly left open to interpretation as neither of these languages were as definitive as the modern Germanic languages we are using to describe them.
Ethics were traditionally the methodology by which logic is used to establish right from action’s that are not right. Right as in preservation of Right’s as they were considered at that time.
Morals are the usage of defined right and wrong typically based on public perception and emotional outlines. Which directly implies a social boundry, and a thought of being a part of something.
As you can see from the way they are defined in modern times the push to make both terms to mean for the good of the group, society, and collective whole. However when the use of one word over the other is used, the connotation’s implied are vastly different.
Examples:
He was an ethical man.
He was a moral man.
As a typical person reading this, one would gather the opinion of a justice and fair person from the first. The second example dennotes connotation’s of being morally reposnsible for his fellow man within society. One states that he treated everyone as equals, and lived by principles. The other gives the impression of a man bound by guilt of obligation to responsibility for other’s.
Now this is not a typical topic in these forum’s, but after seeing curious attempt’s at moral justification to blame citizens of a country for the acts of aggression committed by the Government of a arbitrary region it needed clarification.
The only response I have to offer any other person whom decides to blame me for action’s of the Government, is that as an Individual, I can not presume to control what the statist people do. There are no rational arguments that define their action’s. There is only clear disregard for their own safety, and lack of any real ethical structure involved. Morality is meager and weak attempt at trying to replace ethical principles of any one person. More often than not, Morals are preached about and Ethics are principles that are lived by.
I have many arguments against morality, and it’s usage as justification. I have enough argument’s on this topic that even invalidates Justification and Justice itself on ground’s of moral emotive reasoning.
“The world is cold, ugly, and often violent place. The best that you can do is prepare yourself to handle the challenges that lie ahead, and remain grounded in your principles.” SFC Henning.
(Enjoy my poor grammar and spelling error’s. I’m an Engineer, and I reject Latin grammar rules on my Germanic language.)
