Ethics is a general term for what is often described as the "science 
(study) of morality". In philosophy, ethical behavior is that which is 
"good" or "right." The Western tradition of ethics is sometimes called 
moral philosophy. This is one part of value theory (axiology) – the other 
part is aesthetics – of the four major branches of philosophy, alongside 
metaphysics, epistemology, and logic.

The history of ethics

The formal study of ethics in a serious and analytical sense began with 
the early Greeks, and later Romans. Important Greek ethicists include the 
Sophists and Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, who developed ethical 
naturalism. The study of ethics was developed further by Epicurus and the 
epicurean movement, and by Zeno and the stoics.

Although not developed in a formal and analytical sense, the subject of ethics 
was of great concern to the Hindu people in Ancient India. For the first time 
in world history, they described the highest ethical standards called 
"absolute ethics" by Albert Schweitzer. Millennia later, the Society of 
Friends or the Quakers reached as high as the Jinas. See also Ethics in 
religion

In Europe, the formal study of philosophy stagnated until the era of Maimonides, 
Thomas Aquinas and others. It was in those days that the debate between ethics 
based on natural law and "divine law" gained a new importance.

Modern Western philosophy began with the work of greats such as Thomas 
Hobbes, David Hume and Immanuel Kant. Their work was followed up by the 
utilitarians, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Arthur Schopenhauer 
must be mentioned here because of his Preisschrift über die Grundlage 
der Moral. He was the first European philosopher to start out from the 
ethical achievements of Ancient India. The study of analytic ethics went 
on with G. E. Moore and W. D. Ross, followed by the emotivists, C. L. 
Stevenson and A. J. Ayer. Existentialism was developed by writers such 
as Jean Paul Sartre. Some modern philosophers who have done serious 
philosophical writing on ethics include John Rawls, Elliot N. Dorff, 
Jürgen Habermas, Christine Korsgaard, Charles Hartshorne and to a lesser 
extent Ayn Rand.


Disputes of definition

There are at least five well-recognized ways to approach this subject:

    * Philosophers sometimes call it the "science of morality" , but 
    generally emphasize its non-empirical character.
    * Theologians consider ethics a branch of theology, especially in 
    Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, Roman Catholicism and some Fundamentalist 
    Protestant sects.
    * Ethics is inseparable from economics in some theories, notably 
    Marxism and social ecology, from feminism, and from gender in 
    Queer studies. These views are said to represent workers, women, 
    and sexual outcasts who have historically been degraded by traditional 
    ethics.
    * Professionals usually use or interpret "ethics" to refer to 
    elements of professional practice that are part of dispute resolution 
    or which have some great potential for: bodily harm, urban planning, 
    medicine, law, politics and theories of civics.
    * A fifth way derives from theories of nonviolence, pacifism, 
    anarchism ,and secession as a route to peace.
    * Sometimes, ethics is simply regarded as the de-escalation and 
    mediation of conflicts.


The first social science

Assumptions about ethical underpinnings of human behaviour are reflected in 
every social science, including: economics because of its role in the 
distribution of scarce resources, in political science because of its role 
in allocating power, in sociology because of its roots in the dynamics of 
groups, in law because of its role in codifying ethical constructs like 
mercy and punishment, in criminology because of its role in rewarding 
ethical behaviour and discouraging unethical behaviour, in psychology 
because of its role in defining, understanding, and treating unethical 
behaviour.

However, hard science needs ethics too. It is also important in biology 
(as bioethics) and ecology (as environmental ethics).

As these fields become more complex, and deal with more situations, ethics, 
too, tends to become complex. But Schopenhauer stated that the first ethical 
principle was extremely simple and convincing: "Neminem laede; imo omnes, 
quantum potes, juva." (Do no harm to anyone, but give a helping hand to as 
many people as you can.)


Ethics vs. politics vs. religion vs. practice

Many questions in ethics are deeply concerned with the claiming of rights, 
especially when authority is present. The potential to invoke authority and 
force of arms lies heavy over all ethical decisions whenever they are 
available tools:

When balances between rights are considered, especially in public policy, 
ethics becomes politics. When religious concepts are considered to dominate 
over human conceptions of right and wrong, ethics are often presumed to 
derive from a moral code – usually divinely inspired or revealed. See 
Ethics in religion below.

Non-philosophers may wish to review the article simple view of ethics and 
morals, which deals with ethics in much simpler language. That article 
focuses on how people who make decisions see things, while this one 
focuses on how people who study decisions see things. The two are typically 
not the same, as much more doubt and deliberation is involved in coming to 
agreement about principles that are to apply for a long time, for a whole 
society or for mankind, and those who make decisions see things more simply.


Divisions of ethics

In analytic philosophy, ethics is traditionally divided into three fields: 
Metaethics, Normative ethics (including value theory and the theory of 
conduct) and applied ethics – which is seen to be derived, top-down, from 
normative and thus meta-ethics.


Metaethics

Metaethics is the investigation of the nature of ethical statements. It 
involves such questions as: Are ethical claims truth-apt, i.e., capable of 
being true or false, or are they, for example, expressions of emotion (see 
cognitivism and non-cognitivism)? If they are truth-apt, are they ever true? 
If they are ever true, what is the nature of the facts that they express? 
And are they ever true absolutely, or always only relative to some individual, 
society, or culture? (See moral relativism, cultural relativism.) Metaethics 
is one of the most important fields in philosophy.

Metaethics studies the nature of ethical sentences and attitudes. This includes 
such questions as what "good" and "right" mean, whether and how we know what 
is right and good, whether moral values are objective, and how ethical 
attitudes motivate us. Often this is derived from some list of moral 
absolutes, e.g. a religious moral code, whether explicit or not. Some would 
view aesthetics as itself a form of meta-ethics.

Metaethics also investigates where our ethical principles come from, and what 
they mean. Are they merely social inventions? Do they involve more than 
expressions of our individual emotions? Metaethical answers to these questions 
focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason 
in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves.


Normative ethics

Normative ethics bridges the gap between metaethics and applied ethics. It is 
the attempt to arrive at practical moral standards that tell us right from wrong, 
and how to live moral lives. This may involve articulating the good habits that 
we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our 
behavior on others.

    * One branch of normative ethics is theory of conduct; this is the study of 
    right and wrong, of obligation and permissions, of duty, of what is above 
    and beyond the call of duty, and of what is so wrong as to be evil. Theories 
    of conduct propose standards of morality, or moral codes or rules. For 
    example, the following would be the sort of rules that a theory of conduct 
    would discuss (though different theories will differ on the merit of each 
    of these particular rules): "Do unto others as you would have them do unto 
    you"; "The right action is the action that produces the greatest happiness 
    for the greatest number"; "Stealing is wrong". Theories of moral conduct 
    can be distinguished from etiquette by their concern with finding guidelines 
    for action that are not dependent entirely on social convention. For 
    example, it may not be a breach of etiquette to fail to give money to help 
    those in poverty, but it could still be a failure to act morally.

    * Another branch of normative ethics is theory of value; this looks at what 
    things are deemed to be valuable. Suppose we have decided that certain 
    things are intrinsically good, or are more valuable than other things that 
    are also intrinsically good. Given this, the next big question is what 
    would this imply about how we should live our lives? The theory of value 
    also asks: What sorts of things are good? What sorts of situations are 
    good? Is pleasure always good? Is it good for people to be equally 
    well-off? Is it intrinsically good for beautiful objects to exist? Or: 
    What does "good" mean? It may literally define "good" and "bad" for a 
    community or society. [Criticism: Theory of value is not a part of 
    normative ethics, though normative ethics presupposes some theory of 
    value. For example, there are aethetic values which may be amoral, i.e., 
    neutral in regard to conduct.]



Applied ethics or casuistry

Applied ethics applies normative ethics to specific controversial issues. 
Many of these ethical problems bear directly on public policy. For example, 
the following would be questions of applied ethics: "Is getting an abortion 
ever moral?"; "Is euthanasia ever moral?"; "What are the ethical 
underpinnings of affirmative action policies?"; "Do animals have rights?"

Without these questions there is no clear fulcrum on which to balance law, 
politics, and practice of arbitration – in fact no common assumptions of 
all participants – so the ability to formulate the questions are prior to 
rights balancing.

But not all questions studied in applied ethics concern public policy. For 
example: Is lying always wrong? If not, when is it permissible? The ability 
to make these ethical judgements is prior to any etiquette.

There are several sub-branches of applied ethics examining the ethical 
problems of different professions, such as business ethics, medical ethics, 
engineering ethics and legal ethics, while technology assessment and 
environmental assessment study the effects and implications of new 
technologies or projects on nature and society.

Each branch to characterize common issues and problems that arise in the 
ethical codes of the professions, and define their common responsibility 
to the public, e.g. to preserve its natural capital, or to obey some social 
expectations of honest dealings and disclosure.

    * Abortion, legal and moral issues
    * Animal rights
    * Bioethics
    * Business ethics
    * Criminal justice
    * Environmental ethics
    * Feminism
    * Gay rights
    * Just war theory
    * Medical ethics
    * Utilitarian ethics
    * Utilitarian Bioethics

Ethics has been applied to economics, politics and political science, 
leading to several distinct and unrelated fields of applied ethics, 
including Business ethics and Marxism.

Ethics has been applied to family structure, sexuality, and how society 
views the roles of individuals; leading to several distinct and unrelated 
fields of applied ethics, including feminism.

Ethics has been applied to war, leading to the fields of pacifism and 
nonviolence.

Ethics has been applied to analyze human use of Earth's limited resources. 
This has led to the study of environmental ethics and social ecology. A 
growing trend has been to combine the study of both ecology and economics 
to help provide a basis for sustainable decisions on environmental use. 
This has led to the theories of ecological footprint and bioregional 
autonomy. Political and social movements based on such ideas include 
eco-feminism, eco-anarchism, deep ecology, the green movement, and ideas 
about their possible integration into Gaia philosophy.

Ethics has been applied to criminology leading to the field of criminal 
justice.

There are several sub-branches of applied ethics examining the ethical 
problems of different professions, such as business ethics, medical 
ethics, engineering ethics and legal ethics, while technology assessment 
and environmental assessment study the effects and implications of new 
technologies or projects on nature and society. Each branch characterizes 
common issues and problems that may arise, and define their common 
responsibility to the public, e.g. to preserve its natural capital, or 
to obey some social expectations of honest dealings and disclosure.


Ethics by cases

By far the most common way to approach applied ethics is by resolving 
individual cases. This is, not coincidentally, also the way business 
and law tend to be taught. Casuistry is one such application of 
case-based reasoning to applied ethics. Almost all American states have 
tried to discourage dishonest practices by their public employees and 
elected officials by establishing an Ethics Commission for their state.


Bernard Crick in 1982 offered a more socially-centered view, that politics 
was the only applied ethics, that it was how cases were really resolved, 
and that "political virtues" were in fact necessary in all matters where 
human morality and interests were destined to clash. This and other views 
of modern universals is dealt with below under Global Ethics.

The lines of distinction between metaethics, normative ethics, and applied 
ethics are often blurry. For example, the issue of abortion is an applied 
ethical topic since it involves a specific type of controversial behavior. 
But it also depends on more general normative principles, such as the right 
of self-rule and the right to life, which are litmus tests for determining 
the morality of that procedure. The issue also rests on metaethical issues 
such as, "where do rights come from?" and "what kind of beings have rights?"


Descriptive ethics

Some philosophers rely on descriptive ethics and choices made and 
unchallenged by a society or culture to derive categories, which typically 
vary by context. This leads to situational ethics and situated ethics. 
These philosophers often view aesthetics and etiquette and arbitration 
as more fundamental, percolating 'bottom up' to imply, rather than 
explicitly state, theories of value or of conduct. In these views ethics 
is not derived from a top-down a priori "philosophy" (many would reject 
that word) but rather is strictly derived from observations of actual 
choices made in practice:

    * Ethical codes applied by various groups. Some consider aesthetics 
    itself the basis of ethics – and a personal moral core developed 
    through art and storytelling as very influential in one's later 
    ethical choices.

    * Informal theories of etiquette which tend to be less rigorous and 
    more situational. Some consider etiquette a simple negative ethics, 
    i.e. where can one evade an uncomfortable truth without doing wrong? 
    One notable advocate of this view is Judith Martin ("Miss Manners"). 
    In this view, ethics is more a summary of common sense social decisions.

    * Practices in arbitration and law, e.g. the claim by Rushworth 
    Kidder that ethics itself is a matter of balancing "right versus 
    right", i.e. putting priorities on two things that are both right, 
    but which must be traded off carefully in each situation. This view 
    many consider to have potential to reform ethics as a practice, but 
    it is not as widely held as the 'aesthetic' or 'common sense' views 
    listed above.

    * Observed choices made by ordinary people, without expert aid or 
    advice, who vote, buy and decide what is worth fighting about. This 
    is a major concern of sociology, political science and economics.

Those who embrace such descriptive approaches tend to reject overtly 
normative ones. There are exceptions, such as the movement to more 
moral purchasing.


The analytic view

The descriptive view of ethics is modern and in many ways more empirical. 
But because the above are dealt with more deeply in their own articles, the 
rest of this article will focus on the formal academic categories, which 
are derived from classical Greek philosophy, especially Aristotle.

First, we need to define an ethical sentence, also called a normative 
statement. An ethical sentence is one that is used to make either a 
positive or a negative (moral) evaluation of something. Ethical sentences 
use words such as "good," "bad," "right," "wrong," "moral," "immoral," and 
so on. Here are some examples:

    * "Sally is a good person."
    * "People should not steal."
    * "The Simpson verdict was unjust."
    * "Honesty is a virtue."
    * "One ought not to break the law."

In contrast, a non-ethical sentence would be a sentence that does not 
serve to (morally) evaluate something. Examples would include:

    * "Sally is a tall person."
    * "Someone took the stereo out of my car."
    * "Simpson was acquitted at his trial."
    * "Many people are dishonest."
    * "I dislike it when people break the law."



Is ethics futile?

The whole assumption of the field of ethics is that agreement is 
possible. And since agreement is possible, ethics is possible.

The term ethics is actually derived from the ancient Greek ethos, 
meaning moral character. Mores, from which morality is derived, meant 
social rules or etiquette or inhibitions from the society. In modern times, 
these meanings are often somewhat reversed, with ethics being the "science" 
and morals referring to one's conduct and character. But it is significant 
that the origins of the words reflect the tension between an inner-driven 
(character) and an outer-driven (conduct) view of what constitutes morality.


Ethics in religion


Ethics in medicine

One of the major areas where ethics and ethicists practice is in the field 
of medicine. Example issues are euthanasia, medical experiments, genetic 
modification of organisms and humans, vaccine trials, triage and others.


Ethics in psychology

By the 1960s there was increased interest in moral reasoning. Psychologists 
such as Lawrence Kohlberg and Carol Gilligan developed theories which are 
based on the idea that moral behaviour is made possible by moral reasoning. 
Their theories subdivided moral reasoning into so-called stages, which refer 
to the set of principles or methods that a person uses for ethical judgement. 
The first and most famous theory of this type was Kohlberg's theory of moral 
development..

Another group of influential psychological theories with ethical implications 
is the humanistic psychology movement. One of the most famous humanistic 
theories is Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Maslow argued that the 
highest human need is self-actualization, which can be described as 
fulfilling one's potential, and trying to fix what is wrong in the world. 
Carl Rogers's work was based on similar assumptions. He thought that in 
order to be a 'fully functioning person', one has to be creative and accept 
one's own feelings and needs. He also emphasized the value of 
self-actualization. A similar theory was proposed by Fritz Perls, who assumed 
that taking responsibility of one's own life is an important value.

A third group of psychological theories that have implications for the nature 
of ethics are based on evolutionary psychology. These theories are based on 
the assumption that the behaviour that ethics prescribe can sometimes be seen 
as an evolutionary adaptation. For instance, altruism towards members of one's 
own family promotes one's inclusive fitness.


Ethics in politics

Often, such efforts take legal or political form before they are understood 
as works of normative ethics. The UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights 
of 1948 and the Global Green Charter of 2001 are two such examples. However, 
as war and the development of weapon technology continues, it seems clear 
that no non-violent means of dispute resolution is accepted by all.

The need to redefine and align politics away from ideology and towards 
dispute resolution was a motive for Bernard Crick's list of political 
virtues.