1.1. Summary
All knowledge originates from the sensations that man obtains from the objective external world through the sense organs.
1.2. The argument
Etymologically. "Moral" comes from the Latin "mos" which means habit or custom; and "ethics" from the Greek "ethos" which means the same thing.
Moral is the set of principles, criteria, norms, and values that guide our behavior. Morality makes us act in a certain way and allows us to know what we should know, what we should do in a specific situation.
It tells us which way to go, directs our actions in a certain direction.
Ethics. It is the theoretical reflection on morality, ethics is in charge of reflectively discussing and substantiating that set of principles or norms that constitute our morality.
Ethics is the philosophical and scientific study of morality and is theoretical while morality is practical.
Ethics deals with reason and depends on philosophy and instead morality is the behavior in which our life consists.
1.3. The difference between ethics and morals.
This is a problem that I think has happened to most of the people and we have asked ourselves what is not the same? Well no, by definitions of the roots they mean the same "custom", but nowadays they have been diversifying and what we know today as ethics are the set of norms that come to us from within and moral norms that come to us from the exterior, that is, of society.
1.4. The scientific and rational character of ethics.
The scientific character that has been based on the fact that ethics is a science, but why a science? Why not a technique? Well, to clarify this doubt we have to define what a science is; Science is a grounded paradigm, a paradigm because it establishes a universal model or behavior pattern of reality and it can tell us how that reality is going to behave, that is, science can predict the behavior of an object because it provides the model under which it acts, thus science does not "tell" us how an object behaves but how an object "should" act. It is well-founded since it uses the scientific method, which is in charge of corroborating by all possible means the adequacy of the model with reality.Finally, the scientific nature of ethics is based on the fact that this discipline presents a valuable paradigm of behavior that man must carry out.
The rational character comes through the use of reason.
Ethics with is an experimental science, but rational since it bases its ethical models through reason.
This reason provides us with causes, reasons, the why of goodness in a carried out behavior.
With all this it can be said that ethics is concerned with providing the reasons why certain behaviors are good and therefore worthy of being carried out, also of arguing against bad behaviors such as homicide, drug addiction, deception, theft, etc.
1.5. The brain is the receptor to build itself in the context in which it develops.
Throughout his life, man can use a huge variety of guiding criteria to choose his own behavior, although many of them do not have to do with ethics and morals. Six levels or stages of criteria can be distinguished: pleasure and instincts, inconsistent norms and the superego, social pressure, moral and civil norms, self-appreciated values, the deep self.
Based on pleasure and instincts. With this criterion, man, from childhood, seeks the pleasant and avoids the unpleasant, that is, seeking pleasure and avoiding pain.
This level of instinctive pleasure is the normal one between children and adults who have not received an education that has shown them an openness towards other higher values.
But neither should this criterion be completely discarded when it comes to choosing a fun, hobby or topic of conversation, since this level is an authentic criterion that serves as a guide in many cases in a legitimate way. Pleasure or error so to speak is when you go to the two extremes, that is, 1) the exclusive use of this level in any situation in life, or 2) the absolute elimination of this criterion as if pleasure were something bad. On the contrary, pleasure is a value without any doubt since it seeks the satisfaction of the vital needs of the human being.
The criterion based on the super self. This criterion is easily recognized since the subject allows himself to be rigidly guided by certain norms or values that the authorities have induced him since childhood, and as they are from childhood, those norms and values are already part of the subject's unconscious and for that reason has an authoritarian, rigid, exaggerated character. In fact, this type of criterion prevents the subject from making exceptions when he is in a doubtful situation. The orientation that he experiences is already mechanical and he cannot even know why he has to act out of necessity in a certain sense or direction. There is a great conflict between the first level and the second.
The criterion based on social pressure. This resides in the absorption of all the norms and values that influence the individual in the environment or society in the form of “social pressure”. The guide of conduct within a society is thus fashion and propaganda.
Social pressure is the main source that guides and drives the behavior of educated people. On many occasions there is nothing objectionable about this behavior, but on many occasions people wonder if an individual who acts with a certain behavior, did it responsibly or by simple inertia, and if he could have acted differently. Normally if we confuse the "obligation" as the "social pressure", but the true obligation is the one that gives origin or merits of an ethical nature, that is, it is not the obligation that comes from outside, but what has to come from our interior, which one imposes oneself, of an autonomy and based on the values that we have assimilated. This is why this criterion is very generalized and of little ethical value,however, it is superior to the other criteria because it is a conscious orientation (although not always in its entirety). for example; a person wears a certain type of clothing because it is what he sees, is fashionable or what he hears in the propaganda; on the other hand, she is not aware of the origin of the norms and values instilled in her childhood by which they can arrive or be very punctual.
The legal criterion. This consists of guiding and directing the conduct through rules and laws established by third parties in some code. In response to this law or set of norms, the individual is willing to contravene what their instincts, their unconsciousness (super self) and social pressure say. It can be said that by doing this you have certain guarantees of the value of your conduct, however, adherence and fidelity to the law does not constitute the essence of moral value. With this we can say that there may be real differences between a civil code and a Moorish code, which could be in a real opposition.
Axiological criteria. This criterion is based on values internally perceived and appreciated as such, this criterion coincides with what is called "acting on one's own conviction". With this criterion, a person can discover some values and appreciate them as such, based on those values they can judge their situation and guide their behavior, even when they have to go against the laws, social pressure and their customs or instincts. A notable property of this criterion is the ability to eliminate those conflicts that may arise from previous levels and act, with serenity and responsibility, since his conscience is no longer divided, but chooses and acts according to what he perceives as valuable. For this reason, their conduct acquires an ethical value. The axiological criterion is the most appropriate for ethics,since the four previous levels can differ with respect to what the person considers valuable in his inner body. However, the axiological criterion shows some defects.
The first is the limitation of the sustained values, a person normally discovers the values that are practiced in his environment, but nothing else, he has to make use of the deep self, to be able to glimpse a wide horizon of values.
The second defect is their individualism, this criterion deals with individual ethics and in order for it to be collective, the deep self must be used again.
The criterion based on the deep self. The deep self is the nucleus of the human being, it is the person, the plane of being, it differs from the plane of having, which are the qualities of the personality among which are the status, knowledge, the unconscious, the degree of intelligence and beauty, etc. the deep self is what truly distinguishes each individual, since it does not reside in what it is believed to be and worth. The importance of the deep self stands out for several reasons.
conclusion
Life is not a substance, but a phenomenon of self-eco-organization.
The first fundamental acquisition is that our brain machine is hyper-complex.
The brain is one and multiple. The smallest word, the least perception, the least representation bring into play, in action and in connection myriads of neurons and multiple layers or sectors of the brain. This is bihemispheric; and its favorable functioning occurs in complementarity and antagonism, between a more polarized left hemisphere on global apprehension and the concrete. The brain is hypercomplex.
Our brain is in a box that is the skull, it does not have direct communication with the universe. This communication takes place indirectly via the nervous network from the sensory terminals. What reaches our retina? For example, they are stimuli, which in our current language we call photons, that will impress the retina and those messages will be analyzed by specialized cells, then transcribed into a binary code which it will reach our brain where, again, they go, according to processes that we do not know, to be translated into representations. It is the ruin of the conception of knowledge-reflection.
Our world views are translations of the world. We translate reality into representations, notions, ideas, then theories. From now on it has been experimentally demonstrated that there is no intrinsic difference between hallucination and perception.
Bibliography
Adderholt-Elliot, M (1989) Today's Gifted Child.
Five philosophical theses of Mao Tsetung, April 1965 Editorial del Pueblo, Beijing.
Edgar Morín Epistemology, complexity, paradigm.
Introduction to complex thinking, Gedisa, Barcelona. 1997.
Science with a conscience, Barcelona, Antrophos, 1984.
