Topic 2: Moral versus Non-Moral Standards

Introduction

Moral Standards are principles, norms or models an individual or a group has about
what is right or wrong, what is good or bad. It is an indication of how human beings ought
to exercise their freedom. Norms are expressed as general rules about our actions or
behaviors. Some examples are: “Take responsibility for your actions”; “Always tell the
truth”; “Treat others as you want to be treated”; “It is wrong to kill innocent people”. Values
are underlying beliefs and ideals that are expressed as enduring beliefs or statements
about what is good and desirable or not. Some examples are: “Honesty is good”; “Injustice
is bad.” Moral Standards are a combination of norms and values. They are the norms
about the kinds of actions believed to be morally right or wrong, as well as, the values
placed on what we believe to be morally good and morally bad. In other words, they point
us towards achievable ideals (De Guzman, 2018).

What moral standards do? First, they promote human welfare or well-being;
second, they promote the “good” (animals, environment, and future generations); and
third, they prescribe what humans ought to do in terms of a.) Rights (responsibilities to
society); and b.) Obligations (specific values/virtues).

Non-Moral or Conventional Standards are standards by which we judge what is

good or bad and right or wrong in a non-moral way. Some examples are: good or bad
manners, etiquettes, house rules, technical standards in building structures, rules of
behavior set by parents, teachers, other authorities, the law, standards of grammar or
language, standards of art, rules of sports, and judgments on the way to do things. Hence,
we should not confuse morality with etiquette, law, and aesthetics or even with religion.
As we can see, non-moral standards are matters of taste or preference. Hence, a
scrupulous observance of these types of standards does not make an individual a moral
person. Violation of said standards also does not pose any threat to human well-being.

Some individuals may have heard the term “Amoral” (n.d). What makes this word
different from the descriptions above? It means not influenced by right and wrong. If a
person who is immoral acts against his conscience, a person who is amoral does not
have a conscience to act against in the first place. Infants could be said to be amoral
since they have not yet developed a mature mind to understand right and wrong. Some
extreme sociopaths are also amoral, since they lack a conscience as a result of a
cognitive disorder. In other words, an immoral person has a sense of right and wrong but
fails to live up to those moral standards. An amoral person has no sense of right and
wrong and does not recognize any moral standard.

Another word that needs clarification is the adjective “Unmoral” (n.d.). It refers to
something to which right and wrong are not applicable, such as animals, forces of nature,
and machines. For example, Typhoons cause damages to properties and loss of lives but
they are unmoral, since they are formed by unconscious natural processes that exist
outside the bounds of morality. When talking about non-moral agents, such as animals
or weather patterns, we use unmoral.

“Moral norms” (n.d.) have different forms. They can be expressed as principles,
dispositions, character traits, and even through the life of a person. These are different
ways of specifying criteria for moral judgments.