More on Ethics and Morality
Morality is a system of principles or rules of conduct to which humans conform. Presently our “wider culture” exemplifies the debasement of rules of conduct with little common agreement as to what rules or principles we should be following.
Debates are common over ethics within certain areas of scientific research. One such recent discussion involves the potential development of a drug to erase bad memories. Such a drug might be welcomed by those who suffer from PTSD and other disorders. But could memories (good or bad) serve an important purpose?
The concept of forgiveness being a moral response from a victim to a wrongdoer raises ethical questions, particularly the challenge of forgiving those who are not truly sorry for the wrong they have perpetrated.
The practice of “lifting” is an ancient but also a very current problem that is not only (or even mainly) restricted to the criminal element who perpetrate stealing crimes in our society. In fact, this time of year is particularly difficult for retailers as shoplifting by the general public is at its peak.
The school system has not only changed with the times in regard to the teaching of morality, but has openly advocated a more moral relativistic approach to students.
There are many sides of democracy that we take little time to think about, but perhaps in this year it is especially worthwhile noting one aspect of democracy that very much shapes our lives.
Parents are the primary socializing agents of society and their role goes far beyond care and nurture.
It is not that most people would disagree that society needs some standards of morality, it is rather a problem of agreeing what those standards should be.
How do we determine what is right? It's not as easy as it sounds, despite the fact that there's a vast field of study devoted to the topic which is described using terms like ethics, or moral philosophy.
The involvement of popular and religious figures in swaying the outcome of elections is clearly growing. While most of us are understandably shocked at the inflated importance given to the opinions of celebrities, perhaps we are overlooking the inappropriateness of religious authorities selling their support.
The responsibility for teaching children ethical standards has subtly shifted from parents to social institutions. The trend has been quietly championed by educators and is becoming more apparent as we begin to see the fruit of efforts begun over a century ago.
A compass is a relatively simple instrument based on a simple concept. With its northward facing needle, it is a consistent and true indicator of physical direction. By placing moral in front of compass, we evoke a clear picture of mental processes that point a person in a particular direction in life.
Since ethics deal with the formation and expression of character, there is no better place to begin their development than in the family home.
During the month of June 2007, a nationwide telephone poll of Americans between the ages of 17 and 29 was conducted by the New York Times, CBS News and MTV. The poll’s unsurprising conclusion is that young Americans are leaning left.
To a large extent we are shaped by our cultural setting, and its values imprint themselves on our minds in ways most of us are unaware of. But is it really a question of whose values are correct? Indeed, do any values represent a correct standard, or are values of themselves relative?
Patriotism, simply defined, is devotion to one’s country. However, a few social commentators are beginning to record what they observe to be a growing trend of antipatriotism, especially in some of the major Western nations.
Human dignity is hard to define, but a definition is important if bioethicists hope to preserve it within the various realms of technological advancement.
Stanford University’s William B. Hurlbut, a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics, discusses his proposed alternative to using embryonic stem cells in the controversial field of stem cell research.
Although embryonic stem cells are microscopic, their potential usefulness in molecular medicine and medical therapies is huge. Equally huge are the ethical issues surrounding these tiny biological entities.
Modern science is nudging us ever closer to a moral precipice. But can science serve as the arbiter of moral and ethical standards?
Does humanity have the right to define or even discard moral standards according to personal preference?
What's at the heart of moral regeneration?
The basis for ethics must be morals, not the other way around.
Recently an Anglican bishop advanced the idea of godless morality. Is such a concept realistic?
Will biotechnology change our views on sex and procreation?