I didn't really intend to open that can of worms with this post. At the time I wrote it, I wasn't thinking in terms of deep philosophical questions of right and wrong. I was thinking more in terms of the tendency most of us have to assume that our own position is “right” and that anyone who disagrees with us is “wrong.” Then we often move to judging the other person's character in terms of “good” or “bad” rather than focusing on the behavior they exhibited that bothered us or created the conflict.

So, I was attempting to encourage people to learn from Lincoln's ability to separate the “rightness” or “wrongness” of a behavior from the character of the other person. He could look at something that most people would call wrong (slavery) and recognize that the people promoting its spread were not necessarily evil in character. They may have grown up and come to accept a line of thinking that led to wrong behaviors, but they were not all evil people. (I recommend the book “Mistakes Were Made: but not by me” for insights into how self-justification plays into this line of thinking.)

Now, for your question about right and wrong or moral and immoral.

I don't claim to be a philosopher. I may be wading in to water that's too deep for my current level of thinking. Still, I'll give it a shot from my perspective.

I am a recovering engineer with regard to learning how to work with and relate to people. I am still analytical by nature. So, my technical and scientific training tells me that every measurement needs some reference point to make it valid. For example, a device to measure distance (ruler, yardstick, tape measure, etc.) only works if it is based on a recognized and accepted standard. A two inch (or centimeter) measurement only means something to both of us if we are using the same reference standard for the measurement.

That being said, a moral judgement is a measurement of sorts in that it measures a behavior against some standard of acceptable (moral) behavior. I have done quite a bit of reading in the world of Christian apologetics. So, I'll use a phrase I picked-up from that reading. Pretty much every (not absolutely every, just most) cultures follow a few core ethical principles know by Christian apologeticists as the “moral law.” As I understand it, the vast majority of world cultures recognize these core ethical principles.

I don't suggest that everyone follows the core ethical principles, we just know them. For example, I think most people would agree that the way Enron handled their accounting was ethically wrong even if we don't personally know the accounting rules and laws that they were operating within.

I suppose the whole development of our legal system ultimately rests on the questions – “What is good? and What is bad?” With that, I think I should wrap this up.

With regard to this post, I hope that people reading it pause for a moment when they find themselves in conflict with a co-worker or family member to remember that other people are not necessarily wrong or evil because we disagree or miscommunicated. Further, I hope this pause helps people to move closer to resolving the conflicts that hurt team performance.

Thanks for asking Ruben, I'm guessing that I gave far more answer than you really wanted from me.

what is moral? or what is “right” and what is “wrong”?

I say it depends on what school of ethics you follow. I really like your blog. Ive just started getting into the philosophy part of ethics and its had my attention for a while. I look forward to your updates on twitter. talk soon.

- Ruben Harris

twitter.com/redstarvip