. . . or are the two semantically equivalent?
I am aware that in popular usage the word "amoral" generally connotes a much more cold-blooded attitude towards ethics. Beyond that, though, can anyone come up with a clear method for defining an act or person as "immoral" vs. "amoral"?
One possibility I can come up with is that an immoral person will transgress against a moral system in a specific way while accepting the overall validity of the system and considering their actions to be "wrong." An immoral person, on the other hand, rejects the validity of the moral system and refuses to label their actions as "right" or "wrong."
Thoughts?
I am aware that in popular usage the word "amoral" generally connotes a much more cold-blooded attitude towards ethics. Beyond that, though, can anyone come up with a clear method for defining an act or person as "immoral" vs. "amoral"?
One possibility I can come up with is that an immoral person will transgress against a moral system in a specific way while accepting the overall validity of the system and considering their actions to be "wrong." An immoral person, on the other hand, rejects the validity of the moral system and refuses to label their actions as "right" or "wrong."
Thoughts?
-
Unsu...
I think "amoral" refers to one who acknowledges no moral claims. I think sociopaths are regarded as "amoral" rather than "immoral."
-
Drat, my post has a typo. The second paragraph should read:
One possibility I can come up with is that an immoral person will transgress against a moral system in a specific way while accepting the overall validity of the system and considering their actions to be "wrong." An *amoral* person, on the other hand, rejects the validity of the moral system and refuses to label their actions as "right" or "wrong."
