Moral and Non-Moral Standards

Moral and Non-Moral Standards

Name of the Student:

Name of the Institution:

Date:

Introduction

Every action taken by a person directly stirs a corresponding reaction, but of different nature. The build up of the reaction depends on the emotions which are also different in each personality, but can be controlled by some customs, moral codes and laws. Moral standards are these constrictions that force some stabilizing effects on the behavior of people and enhance coexisting survival of individuals or people within a community. They are like vehicles that carry loads of codes and rules that guide a society (Moser & Carson, 2011). Non moral standards on the other hand are not corrective in nature since they are not directed by morals or ethics of right and wrong. The distinction between the moral and the non moral standards may be very minimal. Nonetheless, this paper seeks to analyses the existing variations between the moral and non moral standard in view of intertwining them according to various societal ethics.

Discussion

Conformity to the societal expected codes of behaviors and conducts is to a large extent what determines a person’s values in terms of morals and principles of that society. The term morality may well be used in ethics as codes of value measurements, but is defined by the specific norms and standards by which the people live and are expected to coexist (Moyers, 2006). They can be in the form of the laid rules and regulations of an institution, expectation of some modes of behavior in some distinct group, or it can be the means of separating the good people out of the bad.

Time and situational variations evolved from a life where moral standards are derived from the family, friends and the various societal groups. It has come to a life where experience, learning and intellectual developments that would enable a person to automatically conform to the expected standards (Steins, 2007). While matters of considerate benefits or damages to the welfare of human existence are the matters of moral standards, the non moral standards are involved with the standards that are used to decide and judge the bad and the good, the legal right and the wrong in the society.

Moral values persuade a person to be obligated to some duty or responsibility even if they are in perfect conflict with their self interest or other non moral values. However, the non moral values have no restriction whatsoever as long as the person is deemed satisfied by what she or he has done at self interest level. It is not easy for an organization to authoritatively or smoothly try to change or form moral standards based on its own decision and adequately provide valid reasons that would support and justify that. This explains the fact that these standards implication supports and justifications, hence their being accepted as binding, right and of beneficial to the whole humanity (Timmons, 2013). Modern ethicists look at moral obligations and standards beyond the normal association with religion, but associate it with behaviors which are accordingly as per the society.

According to Gerb (2005), moral standards are attached or associated with some emotions and vocabulary which are deemed special in their components and meanings. It is true that every act, verbal or non verbal, have its consequences. The consequences of guilty conscience are shame and impartial involvements with activities of societal betterment. At the same time acts that are supposed to fulfill self interests no matter the cost to the welfare of others in the society are non moral acts and non moral standards are used to judge them. Shaw (2011) acknowledge also that not all the professional codes of conducts are of moral standards or obligations since they are basically placed for the benefit of the company or the organization and the moral principle of different people counteract in such places.

Conclusion

The purity of the morals may be mixed with non moral characteristics, but through moral observations and the will to follow its standards the broad perspective of good morality have proven critical to help all. One major factor is therefore thee experience, how we were brought up, the behaviors around us and our culture have various influences on moral and non moral principles.

References

Conference on Values, Rational Choice, and the Will, & Chan, D. K. (2008). Moral psychology today: Essays on values, rational choice, and the will. Berlin?: Springer.

DiMauro, L., & Grant, T. (2006). Ethics. Detroit: Greenhaven Press.

Gert, B. (2005). Morality: Its nature and justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Moser, P. K., & Carson, T. L. (2011). Moral relativism: a reader. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Moyers, T. L. (2006). Wanderings: Exploring moral landscapes past and present. Lanham, Md. [u.a.: Univ. Press of America.

Shaw, W. H. (2011). Business ethics. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.

Steins, R. (2007). Morality. New York: Rosen Pub. Group.

Timmons, M. (2013). Moral theory: An introduction. Lanham, Md. : Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.