many things to say concerning God. Hume states that our notions of do not entitle us to ascribe to God our own moral code. He taught that our moral thinking is due to our biological nature and our desire to survive. He further attacks the rational Plato and Socrates. Hume states that reason has no causality to the effect of morals. Reason will not motivate him to be moral. Furthermore, the only true motivator comes in the form of desires, sentiments, and the possibility of joy or pain.This brings us to Hegel and the belief in the State as a source of moral authority. In Hegels belief, there is no moral authority above the state. He felt that we owe everything to the society in which we live. He states that all ethics find their base in society. There can be no elevation of religion, laws or morals above the good of the state. In addition, the moral authority of one state need not be the same as that of another. Each society forms its own set of ethics to which all members must subscribe. Of course, this leaves little room for civil disobedience.Through my discussions with several other people, I have come to the conclusion that morality and ethics are closely interrelated. I propose the idea that a person can be moral and ethical. I further believe that a person can be moral and unethical. I think, however, that a person can not be immoral and ethical. I believe that ethical behavior is a direct result of morality. I will restate my definition of morals and ethics: morals are perfect and unachievable, and ethics are imperfect and achievable. It may seem odd that a person must first be perfect (moral), before he can be imperfect (ethical).I posed several questions to my friends and family. They included the question Can a lecherous president who performs all his political duties be considered moral and/or ethical? Each person interviewed felt that neither was possible. Cited examples were that this president could propose laws concernin...
