Morality Introduction

This paper compares and contrasts two definitions of the term “morality” to show how both definitions are problematic. The simple Google definition of “morality” is easy to understand but it also seems to suggest that standards of right and wrong are universally understood. The more in-depth definition by Gert suggests that “morality” has to be contextualized according to the beliefs of the groups or society that put forward the standards of acceptable behavior. Both definitions are similar in that they identify morality as the degree to which behavior corresponds with these standards—but they differ in terms of how those standards are understood. Google implies they are basic and universal; Gert implies they are much more subjective.

Differences of Definition: Ross, Gert and Google

Ross makes the case that “moralism is not the same thing as morality”—that it is quite distinct from morality in the sense that it is a surfeit of morality. Morality is defined by Google dictionary as “the extent to which an action is right or wrong.” Gert gets down deeper into the definition of morality by stating that the term can be applied in two ways—descriptively and normatively:

1. “descriptively to refer to certain codes of conduct put forward by a society or a group (such as a religion), or accepted by an individual for her own behavior, or

2. “normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons” (Gert).

Morality, according to Gert can thus be used to refer to a system of morals—i.e., ideas or standards...

Or morality, also according to Gert, can refer to a rational moral order—i.e., a universal sense of right conduct.
Google’s Definition in Closer Detail

The Google definition of morality as a concept that measures the degree to which one’s behavior can be judged as right or wrong is the simplest of the two definitions but also the most problematic. It insinuates that there is a standard of right or wrong that exists but it does not describe what this standard is or how it is defined. One would have to know what ethics is to understand the standard. Morality according to the Internet definition of the term provides only a brief window in to the terminology used to explain action in a moral way. It means that one is either behaving rightly or wrongly, correctly or incorrectly.

However, implicit in this understanding is the idea that there can be different types of morality, as there can be different types of standards. There can be, for example, a Christian morality or a Muslim morality or a Hindu morality or a Protestant morality or a Catholic morality or an atheistic morality or a philosophical morality. But who sets the standard? How is the standard affixed as the standard? The Internet definition of morality does not provide much in the way of explanation on this point. Morality is thus conceived as a process of adherence to a standard or rule of conduct that distinguishes right conduct from wrong conduct, but what about the morality of setting the standard? What if the standard itself is immorally set? Does there need to be an objective standard by which all else can be judged? The Internet…