There has come to be a difference in how the terms "Ethics" and "Morality" are used. There is also a difference between what makes for right conduct according to two basic sorts of morality.
What Is Moral?
"Moral" and "ethical" used to be interchangeable. They aren't anymore, which is why I use both on my home page. The reason they're not interchangeable anymore is because "ethical" has come to refer mainly to right conduct in a profession, so we have "medical ethics," "business ethics," and the like. "Moral" is used more broadly to describe right conduct for everyone, or in some cases, for everyone in a particular society or culture. I'll leave these points for another article. Here I want to say a little about morality.
Most moral theories and standards are deontological, or consequentialist, or based on religious doctrine. I'll consider religion-based morality another time.
Deontology defines good or right conduct in terms of universality, duty, and what we can call intrinsic value. Consequentialism, or utilitarianism as its main type is called, defines good or right action in terms of effects on the greatest number of people. So, if you're wondering if what you intend to do is morally right, you either have to ask whether you're prepared to have everyone do what you intend to do when they want to, or ask how your intended conduct will affect the largest number of people. If you are thinking of lying, deontological morality prohibits your lying under any circumstances, because lying is wrong in itself and we can't have everyone lying when they want to. But utilitarianism will not only allow you to lie, it actually requires you to lie if doing so benefits more people than it hurts.
If you're a professional philosopher, deontological theories and standards and consequentialist or utilitarian theories and standards are incompatible. But if you're an ordinary person, you almost certainly combine them as a matter of course. The exception is politicians, who seem always to be utilitarians.
Imagine yourself at the bedside of a dying woman. She asks you if her son is on his way to the hospital to see her before she dies. You've just been told that he was killed in a car accident while racing to the hospital. What do you do? Deontology won't let you lie, regardless of the devastating and pointless effect on the dying woman. Utilitarianism requires that you lie and tell her he's on his way, because you shouldn't increase the number of unhappy people. To most people, the choice looks pretty clear. Is it?
