Summary
Excerpt
Table Of Contents
- Cover
- Title
- Copyright
- About the author
- About the book
- This eBook can be cited
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- THE SOURCES OF MORAL IN THE CONTEXT OF ETHICS-MORAL DISCUSSIONS (Nebiye KONUK KANDEMİR)
- ECONOMICS AND ETHICS: CONFLICT OR ADAPTATION? (Fatma ŞENSOY and Ekrem YILMAZ)
- ETHICS IN EDUCATION and PRESCHOOL TEACHING IN TERMS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS (Mustafa Otrar (Assoc. Dr.) and Kübra Fırat (Dr.))
- ETHICAL CONTEXT OF POTENTIAL OLD-AGE PROBLEMS IN TURKEY (İlteriş YILDIRIM)
- SCIENTIFIC ETHICS IN STUDIES ON DISADVANTAGED GROUPS (Esra IŞIK)
- ETHICS IN ONCOLOGY (Mehmet Mahir FERSAHOĞLU)
- ETHICS IN NURSING (Ezgi TAMER)
- HEALTH ETHICS AND OBESITY (Mustafa NARCI and Nuriye ESEN BULUT)
- GENERAL ASSESSMENTS ON ETHICAL ISSUES IN PSYCHIATRY AS A DISCIPLINE OF MEDICINE (Zekeriya KÖKREK)
- NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
List of Contributors
Nuriye ESEN BULUT
Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training and Research Hospital
University of Health Sciences, General Surgery, Istanbul, Turkey
ORCID: 0000-0002-4845-8964
Mehmet Mahir FERSAHOĞLU
Fatih Sultan Mehmet Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
OCRID: 0000-0003-2526-1832
Kübra FIRAT
College of Education and Human Development
University of Missouri, Columbia, USA
OCRID: 0000-0002-1981-7542
Esra IŞIK
Department of Sociology, Faculty of Science and Arts
Dumlupinar University, Kütahya, Turkey
OCRID: 0000-0003-2983-4183
Zekeriya KÖKREK
Department of Psychology
İstanbul Ticaret University, Istanbul, Turkey
OCRID: 0000-0003-0689-5952
Nebiye KONUK KANDEMİR
Department of Sociology
Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir, Turkey
OCRID: 0000-0002-2046-1133
nebiye.konukkandemir@deu.edu.tr
←7 | 8→Mustafa NARCI
Isik University, Istanbul, Turkey
OCRID: 0000-0001-6918-0087
Mustafa OTRAR
Kırklareli University, Kırklareli, Turkey
ORCID: 0000-0001-8543-6177
Fatma ŞENSOY
Istanbul Health and Technology University, Istanbul, Turkey
ORCID: 0000-0002-3109-1457
Ezgi TAMER
Vocational School of Health Services, Operating Room Services
İstinye University, İstanbul, Turkey
ORCID: 0000-0002-8008-8801
İlteriş YILDIRIM
Department of Sociology, Faculty of Art and Science
Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey
OCRID: 0000-0003-4559-0473
Ekrem YILMAZ
Faculty of Law and Faculty of Law and Economics
University of Greifswald, Germany
ORCID: 0000-0002-1375-9660
Nebiye KONUK KANDEMİR
THE SOURCES OF MORAL IN THE CONTEXT OF ETHICS-MORAL DISCUSSIONS
Introduction
At the conceptual level, it can be said that when the word good, beautiful, correct, moral, and ethical is said in the world of mind, it can also be said that what is bad, ugly, immoral and unethical is defined. Each individual’s life pattern, cultural background, belief styles, and physical abilities (intelligence, ways of understanding) are in the background of these definitions and when considered as an object, “good” or “bad”; It evolves into a different meaning in the world of the individual who tries to understand it as much as the individual who makes the recipe. From this perspective, “Moral” refers to a vast universe that is difficult to define. This leads to the search for the sources of morality. As Çilingir stated, moral justification appears to be a reflexive method.
Every moral determination, sooner or later, right or wrong, explicit or implicit, systematic or diffuse, directly or indirectly, tends towards a certain moral/ethical grounding (legitimation/justification). Moral justification, in the most general view; advice can be described as a deep reflection on morality and ethics, and hence as a critical reflexive method to justify and legitimize moral concepts and judgments. (Citing from Çilingir, 2003: 151; Bodur, 2017: 168)
The sources of morality and the efforts to determine the boundaries of morality are important because they carry the clues of social order and coexistence, as well as in terms of justifying moral concepts. For this reason, in the study, the sources of morality are discussed with some of the discussions in the literature.
Morality is a chain of values-norms-institutions that includes the material and moral behavior patterns believed to exist in a society. This chain determines the quality and direction of the behavior of the individual toward himself, the society in which he lives and the form of will in that society. Morality, according to the science of religion, is a set of rules and behaviors that are thought to be unchangeable and universal. Philosophically, it is a set of rules of behavior that are considered to be absolutely good or that originate from certain lifestyles. It is a standard of behavior used by society in terms of psychology. In terms of social ←9 | 10→science, morality is the whole of the rules of individual and social behavior in a certain period of a society (Çifci, 2016: 66).
Morality, as it takes place in the Ethics Dictionary,1 is defined as “an established form that settles in the soul and comes into being easily, without the need to exhaust itself with works and deeds and thoughts.” It is stated that moral scholars talk about the existence of three forces in the human soul, and these are the power of knowledge, the power of wrath (to repel harm) and the power of lust (the source of attaining benefits) (Rıfat, 1975: 129).
Moral rules are classified as “objective” and “subjective” morality in terms of universality. While objective morality argues that there can be universal moral norms, subjective morality argues the opposite. Another classification is “ethics of happiness” (eudaimonism) and “ethics of duty and responsibility.” Happiness ethics is a moral philosophy based on human happiness. The morality of duty and responsibility, on the other hand, argues that it is not a moral behavior for people to pursue their own happiness, and that they should be concerned and sensitive to the problems in society. Another classification is “religious morality” and “secular morality.” Secular morality is called “rationalistic morality” and religious morality is called “divine morality” (Aktan, 2009: 41).
It has been discussed whether the morality originates from the individual’s environment, is shaped by religion, is a product of cultural transfer or is completely based on individual psychological and personality. However, it can be said that while the extents of individual morality concern the psychological balance of a single person, social morality has an overwhelming power with an avalanche-like growth effect. A person can establish an inner balance by experiencing something or a situation in his inner world that he is not even aware of as “bad” or that he does not call “bad.” However, when this situation is socialized, it does not give a chance to the “bad,” “good” or what could be good to live. At this point, it is convenient to make a classification in the form of individual and social morality to draw the boundaries of this confusion. At the point where individual and social morality meet and encounter, it is the definition of “moral” based on a ←10 | 11→subjective definition and the possibility of encountering with social imposition. Social imposition has two positive and negative aspects. As Yıldız stated
People are seen as having the capacity to choose what is good or bad. In this respect, they are considered as subjects who have responsibility and the capacity to take action. However, in addition to these features, there are two more human-related features by some. The first of these is the possibility and possibility that people can turn to bad instead of good, which is considered as one of the biggest threats to social structures. The second feature mentioned about the human being, in full compliance with the first, is that the human being is an entity that can be protected from being turned into evil by various means and methods. It can be easily understood what kind of methods this understanding can use to save people from the bad situation they are in. According to proponents of this understanding, … the freedom to judge and choose requires an external force that compels a person to do what is good for his own salvation, for his own sake, or for his own benefit. In the absence of such a directing external force, it is obvious that man will lose his way. (Yıldız, 2012: 34–35)
From this point of view, social encounters balance an individual’s life in terms of moral and non-moral. Moral ones are those that strengthen social peace, facilitate living together, and give individual rights and freedoms a chance to live. However, it is clear that imposing on the society “this is moral” or “this is not moral” is controversial in terms of individual freedoms. Hart (2000: 15), in his work Law, Freedom and Morality, answers the questions of “Is the fact that a certain behavior is immoral according to common standards enough to justify making this behavior punishable by law, is it morally permissible to impose morality on its own, should immorality in itself be a crime?” seeks answers.
At this point, within the framework of the concepts of “ethics” and “morality,” one of them contains more rules than the other. Ethics is distinguished from morality by being a set of norms valid in the social field. Ethics, unlike morality, which is the measure of right behavior, is a field of knowledge (Yıldız, 2012: 25). This field of knowledge deals with the philosophical theoretical problems of ethics on the one hand, and the specific normative side of ethics, the actions and behaviors of people on the other.
Ethics as a field of study of the phenomenon of morality is a discipline of philosophy that makes it possible to theoretically examine morality, which is a practical field of activity (Özlem, 2010). While ethics is the theory of right and wrong behavior, morality is the application of these theories. Ethic while morality is related to the values that an individual wants to express in a certain situation, morality is concerned with the application of these values (Aktaş, 2014: 24).
←11 | 12→Ethics, on the other hand, is divided into two main parts. One of them is the part that deals with the philosophical and theoretical problems of ethics, the other one deals with the specific normative side of ethics.
Details
- Pages
- 188
- Publication Year
- 2023
- ISBN (PDF)
- 9783631902400
- ISBN (ePUB)
- 9783631902417
- ISBN (Softcover)
- 9783631885079
- DOI
- 10.3726/b20847
- Language
- English
- Publication date
- 2023 (April)
- Keywords
- Culture Digital Age İnformation Age Literacy Social Network
- Published
- Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Warszawa, Wien, 2023. 188 pp., 1 table.
