What's the difference and in fact, is there any? Should there be? Best thought experiment I can mention: You\re on a deserted island with your daughter. She dies. You rip her head off and use it to play football with yourself. Can't really be unethical since you are the only person there. Is it moral though? If not why not?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/morality 1. conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/morals -noun 9. the moral teaching or practical lesson contained in a fable, tale, experience, etc. 10. the embodiment or type of something. 11. morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethics 1. ( used with a singular or plural verb ) a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture. 2. the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics. 3. moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence. === Thought experiment's assumption: ethics require multiple people I disagree based on the third definition of ethics. Based on the definitions, I think that morals and ethics reference the same thing: rules of conduct. They can both be applied individually or to groups of people.
@ijffdrie: But there is no society in that scenario. It's just him and the corpse. Nobody else will ever be affected by anything that takes place on that island.
Immoral doesn't stop just because you left a society. From the viewpoint of most societies on earth, it's still immoral, even if it happens away from their borders.
Why should be ripping of my dead childs head be immoral though? Why should anything that concerns only you be considered immoral?
Because, due to evolutionary development, we have learned to stay away from corpses. Playing around with corpses is therefore concidered creepy by the average human. Since most of society consists of average humans, society finds playing with corpses creepy and therefore immoral.
Now you see why I don't necessarily think that ripping ones head off is immoral too since anal sex is everything but immoral. That begs the question which I asked at the start: Is there such a thing as an immoral act outside of interaction between people?
Well from an evolutionary point of view it's rather unhygenic to rip off your daughter's head and I think it's a good instinict to see corpses as something which one shouldn't hang around with. However morals are really in the eye of the beholder. No action is essentially immoral or moral to everyone. I have no idea how anal sex even fits into morals and maybe it is just the higher disease transmission rate and lack of babies in return. So in answer to your question, in my opinion yes as he may harm himself and others may see it as illogical if they knew it was occuring (If a tree falls in a forest yadda yadda yadda). Going by this logic the only immoral actions are ones which may harm yourself or others but due to the fickle and I guess logical nature of humans most don't find things like planking, swordfighting,smoking immoral, just illogical. Thus leading to an immoral action being something which goes against normal human logic and intelligence which naturally we fear. People who are mentally unstable are more likely to commit bizzare actions most of society may class as immoral like ripping off their dead daughter's head to play soccer. The man kicking the head gains enjoyment out of it and no one suffers (unless he gets a blood infection but he's overcome that deeper instinct). Ethics on the other hand is a system to reduce personal advantage and intelligence to protect society as a whole. But consequently that means an ethical action is immoral if one takes morality to extremes. It is unnatural from an individual perspective to be expected to sacrifice for others and not exploit them. However one may see a gain to society as beneficial to themselves if they gain happiness etc and thus ethics and morals are tied. To some rape might be moral but unethical as they don't care about the emotions of the other person but acknowledge the damage it may cause at advantage to themselves (Self gain > harming others). Same with fraud etc. Not commiting fraud if the opportunity arised would be immoral to some people as it would be illogical not to (and you disagree with this statement as you see it as lunacy as you yourself see it as highly immoral due to the lack of emotional intelligence being displayed). TL;DR Morals are in the eye of the beholder, a moral action is beneficial and logical, an immoral action causes harm and is illogical. Ethics overcome the flaw in morality which is that self gain takes priority over protecting society. Thus allowing guilt or at least knowledge of wrong doing when one commits a moral action which others class immoral. Thus for society as a whole morals and ethics are the same but for the individual they are not.
Agreed with rinefraek. also i think i would raep her b4...rawr >=d drie what was that about immorality?
well at least the person didn't have sex with the corpse that would be even worse.anyhow yes dismembering a corpse is not the proper thing to do unless your someone that does autopsy in a murder case or something like that to find out how someone died.
Why? Why is dismembering a corpse immoral if it's just you and the corpse on a deserted island? Who are you harming, what are you doing that is wrong?
