Personality Cafe banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
An Ethical person is a good person because of moral obligation and societal pressures.
Ethics exists in the scientific community as a list of rules which must be followed to ensure
the well being of subjects, and some experiments for this reason are considered unethical.

A Moral person is a good person because either they care or they believe what they are doing
is for a good cause. Now as they say "The Road to hell is paved by good intentions" but the point
is these were good people trying to do good things out of kindness or being good hearted. Even if
they were misguided.

Now in society if someone does something that is both unethical and bad we are going to be angry.
However if someone is being a bad person but also being ethical a lot of times people are not going
to question this behavior at all.

As example of doing bad things but being Ethical

You shot and killed someone kidnapping a child
You killed a serial killer
You shot someone who was breaking into someones yard

Now you can argue they did a bad thing but Ethically you did a bad thing to a person who was being both
bad and unethical. There is a show called Death-note where "Kira" is ridding the streets of criminals. Now
clearly this person is a psychopath and not the best person but they are also only hurting bad people so they
are arguably "Ethical" and so the behavior is overall forgivable to a lot of person.

A lot of times good people will argue for the rights of bad people because they themselves are "GOOD PEOPLE"
They believe in being kind to all and respect all life because that is the "Good Thing" to do. By a moral standard.

Realistically though these people are both bad people and completely unethical and so it makes more sense to get ride of them.
However "Eye for an Eye" ideal might be considered "Wrong" by the morally righteous. However those who are both LOGICAL
and those who are on the other end ETHICAL these people need to be removed for the safety of the collective group.

My mother often hated me as a child because I did the right thing for the fact I felt I was morally obligated to. My mother and often friends
would assume "You do this because you care about us" but that was never a true statement. So realistically I can not be classed as a
"Good Person". There is two stand points a person argues from, and its emotions or Ethics. We can have the MOM of a notorious psychopath
who committed arson, killed, kidnapped, drugs, and robbed a couple of banks. The Mom is going to say "No its my baby". Of course that is her kid
but ethically this person is still a bad person. All the Victims are going to attest to these crimes.

So what is better?

Is it better to be an ethical person or to be a Good Person?
 

·
Registered
INTJ sub: entj, istj, infj
Joined
·
456 Posts
To be more ethical than good is to be able to use more a reasoning power rather than a moral code.
The unhealthier a type is the more they might struggle with that ie. the unhealthy Fives. So it might be preferable for those to stick to a moral code.

"Delusional Fives may use their self-proclaimed intelligence as a crutch during debates, or as excuses for their behavior. "
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
This is an interesting discussion. I believe that trying to be a “good person” has gotten me into quite a bit of trouble in my life. My idea of a “good person” wasn’t healthy. I meant well but I got hurt and I also hurt others. This is just my experience, though, and not necessarily the experience of others.

I think strong ethics need to be in place first and foremost. Our emotions can easily get in the way when the focus is on “being good” - which, by the way, also led to me placing too much value on “being right.”

This may or may not be the type of answer you’re looking for. I appreciate that you brought up this topic and would like to see what others have to say about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,137 Posts
The dilemma underlying all this might be real, but I think your labels are arbitrary. It seems like a 'do ends justify means?' essay to me.

Don't quote me, but I think 'ethics' as a discipline tries to codify what goodness is, and provide a reasoning structure for getting to it. So you try to set them up as a dichotomy but I'm not sure if that works. The would-you-kill-hitler debate is a pretty longstanding one.

To me, it seems silly - and incorrect - to assert an 'ethical' person would shoot the bastard. An ethicist ime is just as likely to be the one to not shoot on the basis that 'killing people is not ethical, /discussion.' ETA: or vice versa, actually.

I respect both types of people, personally. And ime that's the most you can do. There are actual situations within real life where it's logically impossible to behave well towards everybody.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,229 Posts
Deep down people know the difference between right and wrong.

Very young children/infants, the mentally handicaped and people with anatomical abnormalities and brain injuries are the exception.

There is something everyone possesses called a conscience. If you do evil things enough you can ruin your conscience to the point you no longer feel guilt. At this point a person's moral compass is broken.

Moral choices are made with rationale. This rationale involves the concience where our own thoughts are either accusing or excusing our behaviors and choices.

So my answer is that it's not the ethical person or the 'good' person who that is better; it is the forgiven person that is better.

None of us are good. None of us are that ethical, even if we pride our self on believing that. We all experience moral failures as a result of living in a fallen broken world.

This is the purpose that God provided a way for mankind to have forgiveness through Christ. There is no one who is "good" except God.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
To be more ethical than good is to be able to use a reasoning power rather than a moral code.
The unhealthier a type is the more they might struggle with that ie. the unhealthy Fives. So it might be preferable for those to stick to a moral code.

"Delusional Fives may use their self-proclaimed intelligence as a crutch during debates, or as excuses for their behavior. "
Im a 5w6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,755 Posts
For one, I disagree with your definitions and two, you assign both people as good under the assumption that an ethical or moral person shares your view of what's ethical and moral. Both are facing societal pressure under your definitions, not just ethical folks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
For one, I disagree with your definitions and two, you assign both people as good under the assumption that an ethical or moral person shares your view of what's ethical and moral. Both are facing societal pressure under your definitions, not just ethical folks.
There is in fact a SET STANDARD for Ethics as I gave an example of. As I said there is a set of "Ethical standards" for how you treat lab subjects. Morality on the other hand is up for debate. Now what I am basing this discussion on it motives. For example if someone does what seems good because they are following a "Code of Ethics" how good are they to a person who is doing the same out of the "Kindness of their hearts".

Here is an example

Person A is the perfect partner. They remember their partners birthday, They never cheat, they do everything in the world to make this partner happy. However Person A is only with this person because they are trying to impress their parents. No one knows this, including the partner. They are good to the partner because that is what is required. Do they love this person? No they do not but they will be a good partner because it is required.

Person B is kind of an idiot, sometimes forgets partners birthday, but they deeply love this person and would do anything for them. They display passion and romance for this partner in various ways because they truly love this person.

Now Person A has a shallow relationship but ensures that the partner is happy. Person 2 is not perfect but truly cares about the person. This here is the difference. One is ethical but has no love and one is truly loving that person. That is the difference I am talking about.

So, no societal pressures is irrelevant to person B because person B is doing things from their heart, they are not simply follow prototypical.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,137 Posts
I feel like you already know what you want the answers to be. As such, there's no real conversation going on here. Imo, naturally.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
No, he isn't. He is living a lie and depriving his partner of real love.


No one is perfect. At least his love isn't fake.

If I were the partner, I'd prefer a divorce settlement and freedom to find someone who really loves me.
You are missing the point of the discussion and can not see past your own personal values to try to understand something on a more complex level. You must realize that just because you feel things should be a certain way does not mean everyone is going to do things for the same reason as you. However I guess you did answer the question to the original post which was "Which one is better" as you clearly place more weight in morality vs ethics.

The point is regardless of how you FEEL, the person appears to outwardly be the perfect partner. They are not being a poor partner, they just do not have any emotional investment as you clearly believe they should. The emotionally invested person might not appear as good of a partner but they are doing what they are doing out of the fact they genuinely care.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
128 Posts
Complex? I think not. It is neither moral NOR ethical to deceive someone that they are loved because ONE person gets to decide for the OTHER that the "appearance" of love is good enough.

What does this other person believe? They don't get to decide. They don't know the truth. That makes them the victim of the lie.

Face the facts, then live them.
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
128 Posts
Your family history has caused you to perpetuate falsehoods and justify them. When you get some bravery to break this destructive cycle, you will be well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Is it better to be an ethical person or to be a Good Person?
All definitions here are taken from Webster's 1828 dictionary. This is before modern wordsmith's had a chance to fuck up the English language. You can see ethics are morals are easily tied together. The term "good" revealed here, is a bit of verbal rocket science by today's standards where people have an attention span of 1 1/2 minutes.

It is my belief there are no "good" people... not one good. There are however, people wishing to do better and trying very hard to do better, thus producing people that perform more ethically than others. Some people will live more morally than others. Some people care not for morals at all.

According to these definitions, being ethical and moral are really very close to the same thing.

What I find interesting is what people base their knowledge upon when determining what should be moral and why. Where are morals found? What determines what is right and what is wrong? If all people are corrupt and less than perfect, they are not capable of laying the foundation for any moral.

So where are morals found?



Ethics
ETH'ICS, noun The doctrines of morality or social manners; the science of moral philosophy, which teaches men their duty and the reasons of it.
2. A system of moral principles; a system of rules for regulating the actions and manners of men in society.

____
Morals
__

MOR'ALS, noun plural The practice of the duties of life; as a man of correct morals
1. Conduct; behavior; course of life, in regard to good and evil.
Some, as corrupt in their morals as vice could make them, have been solicitous to have their children virtuously and piously educated.
What can laws do without morals?
___


Good
GOOD, adjective
1. Valid; legally firm; not weak or defective; having strength adequate to its support; as a good title; a good deed; a good claim.
2. Valid; sound; not weak, false or fallacious; as a good argument.
3. Complete or sufficiently perfect in its kind; having the physical qualities best adapted to its design and use; opposed to bad, imperfect, corrupted, impaired. We say, good timber, good cloth, a good soil, a good color.
And God saw every thing that he had made, and
behold, it was very good Genesis 1:4.
4. Having moral qualities best adapted to its design and use, or the qualities which God's law requires; virtuous; pious; religious; applied to persons, and opposed to bad, vitious, wicked, evil.
Yet peradventure for a good man some would
even dare to die. Romans 5:7.
5. Conformable to the moral law; virtuous; applied to actions.
In all things showing thyself a pattern of good works.
Titus 2:3.
6. Proper; fit; convenient; seasonable; well adapted to the end. It was a good time to commence operations. He arrived in good time.
7. Convenient; useful; expedient; conducive to happiness.
It is not good that the man should be alone. Genesis 2:9.
8. Sound; perfect; uncorrupted; undamaged. This fruit will keep good the whole year.
9. Suitable to the taste or to health; wholesome; salubrious; palatable; not disagreeable or noxious; as fruit good to eat; a tree good for food. Genesis 2:9.
10. Suited to produce a salutary effect; adapted to abate or cure; medicinal; salutary; beneficial; as, fresh vegetables are good for scorbutic diseases.
11. Suited to strengthen or assist the healthful functions; as, a little wine is good for a weak stomach.
12. Pleasant to the taste; as a good apple.
My son, eat thou honey, because it is good and the honeycomb, which is sweet to thy taste. Proverbs 24:13.
13. Full; complete.
The protestant subjects of the abbey make up a good third of its people.
14. Useful; valuable; having qualities or a tendency to produce a good effect.
All quality, that is good for any thing, is originally founded on merit.
15. Equal; adequate; competent. His security is good for the amount of the debt; applied to persons able to fulfill contracts.
Antonio is a good man.
16. Favorable; convenient for any purpose; as a good stand for business; a good station for a camp.
17. Convenient; suitable; safe; as a good harbor for ships.
18. Well qualified; able; skillful; or performing duties with skill and fidelity; as a good prince; a good commander; a good officer; a good physician.
19. Ready; dexterous.
Those are generally good at flattering who are good for nothing else.
20. Kind; benevolent; affectionate; as a good father; good will.
21. Kind; affectionate; faithful; as a good friend.
22. Promotive of happiness; pleasant; agreeable; cheering; gratifying.
Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity. Psalms 133:1.
23. Pleasant or prosperous; as, good morrow, Sir; good morning.
24. Honorable; fair; unblemished; unimpeached; as a man of good fame or report.
A good name is better than precious ointment.
Ecclesiastes 7:1.
25. Cheerful; favorable to happiness. Be of good comfort.
26. Great or considerable; not small nor very great; as a good while ago; he is a good way off, or at a good distance; he has a good deal of leisure; I had a good share of the trouble. Here we see the primary sense of extending, advancing.
27. Elegant; polite; as good breeding.
28. Real; serious; not feigned.
Love not in good earnest.
29. Kind; favorable; benevolent; humane.
The men were very good to us. 1 Samuel 25:3.
30. Benevolent; merciful; gracious.
Truly God is good to Israel, even to such as are
of a clean heart. Psalms 73:1.
31. Seasonable; commendable; proper.
Why trouble ye the woman, for she hath
wrought a good work on me. Matthew 26:10.
32. Pleasant; cheerful; festive.
We come in a good day. 1 Samuel 25:3.
33. Companionable; social; merry.
It is well known, that Sir Roger had been a good fellow in his youth.
34. Brave; in familiar language. You are a good fellow.
35. In the phrases, the good man, applied to the master of the house, and good woman, applied to the mistress, good sometimes expresses a moderate degree of respect, and sometimes slight contempt. Among the first settlers of New England, it was used as a title instead of Mr.; as Goodman Jones; Goodman Wells.
36. The phrase good will is equivalent to benevolence; but it signifies also an earnest desire, a hearty wish, entire willingness or fervent zeal; as, we entered into the service with a good will; he laid on stripes with a good will.
37. Comely; handsome; well formed; as a good person or shape.
38. Mild; pleasant; expressing benignity or other estimable qualities; as a good countenance.
39. Mild; calm; not irritable or fractious; as a good temper.
40. Kind; friendly; humane; as a good heart or disposition.
GOOD advice, wise and prudent counsel.
GOOD heed, great care; due caution.
In good south, in good truth; in reality.

To make good to perform; to fulfill; as, to make good one's word or promise; that is to make it entire or unbroken.

1. To confirm or establish; to prove; to verify; as, to make good a charge or accusation.
2. To supply deficiency; to make up a defect or loss. I will make good what is wanting.
3. To indemnify; to give an equivalent for damages. If you suffer loss, I will make it good to you.
4. To maintain; to carry into effect; as, to make good a retreat.

To stand good to be firm or valid. His word or promise stands good
To think good to see good is to be pleased or satisfied; to think to be expedient.
If ye think good give me my price. Zechariah 11:12.
As good as, equally; no better than; the same as. We say, one is as good as dead. Hebrews 11:2.
As good as his word, equaling in fulfillment what was promised; performing to the extent.
GOOD, noun That which contributes to diminish or remove pain, or to increase happiness or prosperity; benefit; advantage; opposed to evil or misery. The medicine will do neither good nor harm. It does my heart good to see you so happy.

There are many that say, who will show us any good Psa 4.

1. Welfare; prosperity; advancement of interest or happiness. He labored for the good of the state.
The good of the whole community can be promoted only by advancing the good of each of the members composing it.
2. Spiritual advantage or improvement; as the good of souls.
3. Earnest; not jest.
The good woman never died after this, till she came to die for good and all.
The phrase, for good and all, signifies, finally; to close the whole business; for the last time.
4. Moral works; actions which are just and in conformity to the moral law or divine precepts.
Depart from evil, and do good Psa 34.
5. Moral qualities; virtue; righteousness.
I find no good in this man.
6. The best fruits; richness; abundance.
I will give you the good of the land. Gen 45.

GOOD, verb transitive To manure. [Not in use.]
GOOD, adverb As good as well; with equal advantage. Had you not as good go with me? In America we use goods, the Gothic word. Had you not as goods go?

In replies, good signifies well; right; it is satisfactory; I am satisfied. I will be with you to morrow; answer, good very good So we use well, from the root of Latin valeo, to be strong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Your family history has caused you to perpetuate falsehoods and justify them. When you get some bravery to break this destructive cycle, you will be well.
This might be correct.

However, you must realize not every person in the world has the same motivations as you.
Now do you believe not being motivated by emotions as yourself makes everyone a bad person?
This is what I have been told my entire life. All actions must have an emotional bases. If a person
feels indifferent towards something they are not motivated to perform that action but is society says
this is required they are pressured to do so if they want to or not. Does that make them a bad person?
 

·
Registered
INTJ
Joined
·
128 Posts
INTJs are rather immune to "society says this is required." We don't feel it that much. One-on-one personal things motivate us.

If a person feels indifferent towards something they are not motivated to perform that action but is society says this is required they are pressured to do so if they want to or not. Does that make them a bad person?
No, the person is not bad, but they are hurting.

I can't ask for rights as a human being because I have 0. I am a tool and My attachment to others is not something that exist. My attachment to others is just passing amusement. I know I mean nothing to them and vice versa. If I would have asked for happiness would it have been a sin?
Of course not. Life is too short to be unhappy.

It's tough to break free of control. Your abusers will threaten to make you miserable -- but they already do. They will threaten to take away things that you want -- but they already have: Power over your own life. You need that in order to have integrity and self-worth. Otherwise the deception will continue.

It was done to you. Don't do it to another person.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,323 Posts
How about both? I consider myself both ethical and moral. Whenever I have to make any moral or ethical decisions, I'll think about things from many different perspectives .
It's quite tempting to kill a serial killer and other bad people, yes....But then I often find myself wondering about this question, "If let's say I have a family member who is a bad person, and they ended up getting killed by others, how would I feel?"
Maybe this is why I like to punish bad people (just enough to scare them so that they will learn their mistakes and not repeat the same mistakes in future), but I also like to spare them from death and avoid pushing them to the extreme (because their family members are innocent and I didn't want to end up hurting their family members).

So if let's say I saw a kidnapper abducting an innocent child, I'll call the police, and then I'll use a stick or a brick or something and attack his head from the back, or maybe I'll drug his drink or something, just enough to make him unconscious so that I can rescue that child. But I wouldn't want that kidnapper dead though because he might have a pregnant wife at home or a bunch of children at home waiting to be fed, so I'll just hit him unconscious and then let the police handle him.

As for serial killers, I'd much rather have them locked up in prison for a long time, rather than killing them. If I were to kill them, their family members would end up suffering.
But if I were to get them locked up in prison for a long time, the serial killer would suffer, but at least their family members would be spared.
 

·
Registered
Zombie
Joined
·
676 Posts
I don't really see a huge distinction between morality and ethics. Nor do definitions of these words spell out a huge difference. You could class either an ethical or moral person as 'good' in numerous ways.

Either way, it doesn't really matter. Good things happen to bad people, & bad things happen to good people. The universe doesn't care for moral or ethical standards. Whether doing something because of conviction, or a desire to appear to do the right thing, the outcome is the same. Belief does indeed influence actions, but it's not always clear what motivated someone to act, and even if explicitly stated, whether it's the true cause of their decision to act. People can talk a good game to rationalise moral beliefs, but actions speak louder than words.

Viewing life through a lens of morality sounds good on the surface, but it's a great way to get viewed as pious and acting holier-than-thou. The truth is if you live to a perfectionistic moral code, hardly anyone is capable of living up to such a high standard, thus conflict is inevitable, and it could end up more alienating than being immoral. There's real risk to living by a code at all costs, which is why the more conflict averse will look the other way, even if they believe what they are witnessing is wrong.

I think the word "better" is a poor choice for this question. Is the goal to combat immorality at every turn regardless of the cost, or simply get through life with the least amount of negative effect on others?
 

·
Beer Guardian
PerC Host, ENTP 5w6 So/Sx 584 ILE
Joined
·
14,958 Posts
I'm shooting for somewhere in between the two, because nobody is going to manage to be completely good, nor completely ethical.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top