Definition of Morality and Its Origins

Originated from the Latin world “moralis,” mortality means proper behaviour, character and manner of a person.  The differentiation between what is good and proper from what is not good and improper can be described as Morality. It is the difference in intention between good and bad. Morality can also be defined as the amalgamation of standards and principles infused into a society from code of conduct that is based on certain philosophy or religion or culture. The morality thus, can be dependent on the religion, culture or philosophy. A person with necessary powers can also define what constitutes mortality but shall keep in mind the difference between what constitutes good and what constitutes bad for the society (Edelstein & Nunner-Winkler, 2016).

Goodness and rightness are often used as synonyms of mortality. The philosophy of mortality is based on the virtuous behaviour and conscious of a person. As per Aristotal the rational soul believes in supreme good with the virtue and rightness as the basis of behaving in that direction. While defining morality the famous philosopher has talked about the importance of highest good and the importance of ultimate aim of an individual to feel happiness while doing highest good. Most of the activities of human beings are directed towards certain goals and aims and achieving highest good for others and one’s own self can be defined as morality (Garner, 2010). Each activities whether it is about helping a person in need or shopping grocery items the end aim and goal is to be happy. For example while purchasing something from the market to eat the end is not the hunger but it is the happiness to be felt after eating what has been purchased (Lim, 2016). Similarly when a person helps another person in need the former will feel happiness by helping the later to feel mentally satisfied and happy. Morality is about achieving highest good with the objective of happiness and rightness. However, the difference between morality and happiness is also very contrast and sharp thus, to think that all happiness is directly related to morality would be wrong. Aristotle said that the characteristics of Rightness and virtuousness are the two most crucial aspects of morality Rightness and virtuousness can also be considered as the two main qualitative characteristics which are associated with Morality. For the Greeks achieving excellence is equivalent to virtue. Thus, Greeks have defined virtue as a verb where it is about achieving excellence. For example a professional singer will feel virtuous by singing to the best of his or her ability to achieve excellence. Human beings are rational and it is the quality that separates human beings from animals and other creatures of the planet (Pigliucci, 2013). Growth and nutrition are governed by nutrition and all livings beings have nutritive souls. Sensitive souls are possessed by humans and animals which make them distinct from plants. However, above all human beings have rational soul to understand what is good and what is not good. The ability to understand that with clear understanding of rightness and goodness is present in human beings. By using the rational and sensitive soul human beings can act to achieve highest good. Achieving highest good with right and virtuous behaviour is all about morality. Supreme good and morality thus very much inter-connected. In defining mortality Aristotle emphasise on the importance of behaving in the right manner while defining morality. Moral virtue is the feature that contributes to one’s behaviour and should be directed towards achieving the highest good for one’s own self and others without doing anything harmful and wrong towards others and the society (Velleman, 2014).

Relation between Morality, Happiness, and Rightness

Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics: Books I to IV also stated the importance of learning process. Individuals learn throughout their life about different moral values. From the early child hood parents and teachers teach children what is good and helps them to differentiate between good and bad with the objective of encouraging the children to do highest good. As a child grows he learns from his habits and practices more than anything else. With education children acquire significant knowledge and wisdom to make clear distinction between good and bad. The reasoning and instructions given by teachers and parents are effective in understating the moral values and mortality but human beings learn more from their habits and practices than anything else. While explaining morality in the book Aristotle lists the principal virtues and corresponding vices. The list provided by Aristotle about virtues and vices are reproduced below as these are essential to morality as per the philosopher.

Actions performed by individuals voluntarily can only be held against the individual while assigning responsibility. Thus, when individuals are under physical compulsion or coerced into any situation to act in certain ways it would be not possible to assign any responsibilities to the respective individuals. The measurement guide to judge moral values is the choices one made under free and fair circumstances without any pressure. The aim is to choose what is good over what is bad. However, often human beings are ignorant and unsure about good and bad. Morality is exactly what helps human beings to be rational and make a clear distinction between good and bad to understand (Dorter, 2009).

Plato, another ancient philosopher, has guided the world with his philosophy on virtue-based eudaemonistic to explain the importance of morality and ethics. Plato has related happiness and well-being with morality. According to the famous philosopher the peak attribute of moral thought is to be happy and do well for others. The concept of Plato on morality seems quite subdued and elusive with the philosopher directly connecting happiness and well-being with morality. However a closer look on his explanation makes it clear that Plato has nowhere targeted to investigate the concept directly rather introduced the concept under the veil of other questions. The philosopher mentioned that the human good varies with different dialogues so people will be confronted with discrepancies which will hard to explain while understanding the concept morality (Bendene, 2017).

The fundamental problem with the work of Plato on the morality, ethics and virtue is which method to follow to understand the concept. The philosopher has used Unitarian, revisionist and develop mentalist approach while explain the concept of morality in the public domain. The confusion lies with the public to determine which method to be followed while understanding the concept. Plato’s theory on soul known as tripartite theory of soul, discusses on the three parts which according to the philosopher are three main components of psyche. The three parts of souls as per the philosopher are logical, spirited and appetitive. Individuals must use all the three parts while determining the moral values (Berman, 2014). The moral values would be supported by all three so called components and parts of soul as explained by the philosopher in his work (Bloomfield, 2014). The philosopher talked about the importance of each part working and functioning to fulfil the responsibilities without interfering with the maters of others for the moral values to be guided subconsciously by these three parts of souls. Only when all the parts are in agreement without interfering with the function of other parts to do highest good for others and the society the behaviour of an individual would be regarded as moral. Thus, according to Plato morality is a combination of decisions and actions to do good for the society and others (Vernezze, 2017).

Importance of Learning about Morality

As per Socrates positive thinking and virtue are inevitably linked to morality. The importance of positive thinking and virtue is directly connected with morality but nowhere there is any prove to show that the morality would be achieved by individuals with positive thinking and virtue. It is action rather than thinking that determines whether the act is morally correct or not to evaluate morality. There are two sides to the argument when it comes to morality (Cecílio & Martins, 2018). In one side there are Socrates who claims there is nothing they are aware of as virtue and then on the other hand there are Socrates who directly relate positive thinking and virtue with morality. One of the essential features of Socrates work is the heroic quality in human being where men are only concerned about whether the actions of theirs are good or not. The men are not even bother to find out whether their actions endanger their lives but all they care about is the effects of their acts on good and bad. The heroic quality discussed by Socrates in his work is a prime attribute of morality as per the great philosopher. In fact over the years many philosophers have used the analogy of the Socrates to define morality (Plato. & Fox, 2016).

Thus, it is important to understand that different philosophers have provided different viewpoints on the subject of morality. Whereas Aristotle has explained the importance of virtue and rightness to adhere with moral values Socrates have presented the theory using personal trait of human beings. Plato on the other hand has discussed rightness virtue along with the importance of understanding the impact of different actions on the society. Out of all the definitions on morality the one thing that has been found to be common in every philosopher’s explanation is the importance of goodness and rightness. The importance of learning, teaching to understand what is good and what is not good is equally important to take correct decisions and actions to comply with morality. The habits and experiences of human beings also determine the morality of among individuals as one learns more from their experiences and habits than any form of teaching and instructions. Hence, it is clear that doing good over bad and being right over wrong are essentially connected with morality (Rinella, 2007).    

References:

Bendene, E. (2017). PLATO AND MODERN MORALITY. Philosophical Books, 14(2), 10-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0149.1973.tb01503.x

Berman, S. (2014). Prudence and morality: Socrates versus moral philosophers. South African Journal Of Philosophy, 33(4), 381-394. doi: 10.1080/02580136.2014.967591

Bloomfield, P. (2014). Morality and self-interest (4th ed., pp. 1-38). New York: Oxford University Press.

Cecílio, G., & Martins, M. (2018). After Socrates – A Trilogy: (i) Remembering Socrates. Revista Archai, 2(23), 275-340. doi: 10.14195/1984-249x_23_10

Dorter, K. (2009). Metaphysics and Morality in Neo-Confucianism and Greece: Zhu Xi, Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus. Dao, 8(3), 255-276. doi: 10.1007/s11712-009-9125-x

Edelstein, W., & Nunner-Winkler, G. (2016). Morality in context (10th ed., pp. 12-78). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Garner, R. (2010). Beyond morality (10th ed., pp. 12-37). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Lim, B. (2016). Plato and Aristotle: Morality as the Meaning of School Subjects. The Journal Of Moral Education, 18(1), 27. doi: 10.17715/jme.2006.08.18.1.27

Pigliucci, M. (2013). Answers for Aristotle (5th ed., pp. 17-57). New York.

Plato., & Fox, A. (2016). Plato and the Christians (18th ed., pp. 17-98). London: SCM.

Rinella, M. (2007). Revisiting the Pharmacy: Plato, Derrida, and the Morality of Political Deceit. Polis: The Journal For Ancient Greek Political Thought, 24(1), 134-153. doi: 10.1163/20512996-90000111

Velleman, J. (2014). Morality Here and There: II. Aristotle in Bali. SSRN Electronic Journal, 3(7), 14-36. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2468523

Vernezze, P. (2017). Socrates in Sichuan (6th ed., pp. 137-187). Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books.