In the first video, we just saw how important definitions are and I explained why, but another reason is probably this one. To avoid confusion between words that look the same but they are completely different. In lectures two I believe, we made a clear distinction between innovation and creativity. It was the first example, but it should be done everywhere. Some more examples, so, danger is not a risk. Both belong to this uncertain challenge but, a risk is not a danger. Comfort is not lecturing. Yes, in a way they share similar things, but. There is a difference, there is a difference. And we have to use the words to avoid confusion. One of the best examples I have for this one is, ethics versus morality. And this opens a new world, because somehow philosophy is made of two large pieces. One is the art of thinking, and 95% maybe, 98% of this book on this one. But the other great area of philosophy is the art of living, of living. And that's another world. It may be another book, that's definitely different. This difference between ethics and morality will probably be a good entrance to this other part of philosophy, the art of living. Then before emphasizing the difference between the two, let's go back to assessment. Assessment, how do we assess things when there is no, when there are no numbers or figures? Philosophy has no numbers. But we want to achieve rigor, so how can we assess what we do? In my experience in business, very often people make decisions in fields, areas where we don't have any number. We should have a better corporate image. We should be closer to the client. We should build a better, work more as a team. All those wishes are important, but if they don't go along with the criteria to assess, I doubt of the efficiency. The real, an idea to be efficient should be combined by the criteria to asses the evolution of the idea. For example, the corporate image. Okay, we need a better corporate image. Everybody would say, yes fine, but you're in danger of wishful thinking. The only way to escape the wishful thinking is to propose a criteria together. Okay, one year, two years from now, this is the way we're going to assess if we are better in this particular field of corporate image. The use of criteria is one of the main tool of a philosopher,a dn probably the most famous of all is called The Golden Rule. The Golden Rule is don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you. This kind of rule can be found in many, many different culture. But it's a criteria between what can be done and what can not be done, is a good example. So if you go back to ethics and morality, there are way to be more professional in using the two words, because ethics everywhere, you read about ethics of the corporate world, et cetera. Again, not the definition this time, but let's try to dig a bit, to differentiate the two, the two sides of, this morality ethics axis. Probably a good place to start in the past. So, if you look at history. The beginning of ethics and beginning of morality are completely different. But maybe let's go back to entomology. Ethics and morality both means behavior, but in two different cultures. Behaviors in the Greece at the time, in Greece at time was called ethos, the way you behave. In Rome, the Latin empire, people talked about morals. Morals. So the same thing, behavior, can be translated on the Greek way, with ethos and goes to ethics, or in the Latin way, and give, gives birth to morality. So you see already, it's a big difference and it's not a coincidence. Because the way Greece was organized, nothing to do with the way Rome was organized. And Greece was, well, not a chaos, but a first attempt at democracy. It was not the anarchy but, phew, really a lot of chaos and turmoil. Latin was like this. Rome was ruled by a general, it was more an army. And so you see, they're two different worlds. So of course, ethics and morality have their main philosopher. Kant on the morality side. Say what you can do, what you cannot do. Others have studied, on the ethical side, the difference between, between what? Right versus wrong. Morality is more to differentiate good and bad. You see the difference. You see the difference. And not a surprise because in, in Greece, it, the behavior was like spontaneous, come from the bottom. In the morality side, in Rome, came much from the top. You do this, you don't do that. There is more difference, like ethics is based on values. That's why I gave a definition just now, of what's a value because ethics are based on values. And values, I just repeat myself, idea we think something should. So, there is no absolute values, so there is no absolute ethics. Morality based on principals, rules, laws. And this is a way to connect to the MOOC. Remember the next number two, when I made such a clear distinction between induction and eduction. We are back to that. In a way, morality is deduced from lows, the rule the lows. You deduce, I can do this, I can. Ethics is more induced. And that is not a coincidence, you feel like everything is connected to everything. So, let's go a bit further, and, of course it's like an immediate of consequence of the situation. Ethics is valid here and now. I'm facing a problem, I, yes I do this and I, morality is more absolute it's for everybody and it is probably everywhere. So ethics is mostly a personal affair. It's you in front of the situation. Okay, you with you. Morality is you with the community you belong to. And another thing maybe about the two differences. In terms of logic, there is a big difference between the two. Morality first is consistent, like deduction. You [SOUND]. There is a logical chain of cause and effects. Ethics is mostly in contradiction. You do something which is officially acceptable, but ethic is mostly a human challenge. Morality is more a society challenge.
