Rule Morality vs. Contextual Ethics: A Better Guide to Sexual Conduct

This paper discusses the differences between rule morality and contextual ethics and which one is a better guide to sexual conduct. It highlights the importance of contextual ethics in modern society.

Running head: “RULE MORALITY” vs. “CONTEXTUAL ETHICS”
“RULE MORALITY” vs. “CONTEXTUAL ETHICS”
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1“RULE MORALITY” vs. “CONTEXTUAL ETHICS”
This paper aims to discuss about the differences between rule morality and contextual
ethics. It also illustrates which one is a better guide to sexual conduct. The moral principles
that governs a person’s behaviour or how an activity is conducted by that person is contextual
ethics. Whereas rule morality is concerned with the principles which suggests right or wrong
behaviour. Rule morality generally governs the personal interactions a person has however
contextual ethic on the other hand reflects the professional interactions.
Although the terms may be interchangeable but there are major differences such as
ethics is applicable to external sources like code of conduct in the professional arena and
morals is an internal aspect (Jennings, Mitchell & Hannah, 2015). Contextual ethics is more
of a response to a specific situation while morals are general principles set by a group of
people. Rule morality is chosen by the norms of the society but ethics is something which is
chosen by individuals that will govern their lives. In this context contextual ethics is more
adequate as a guide to sexual conduct. The modern world is no more dictated by the terms of
rule morality which traditionally existed in the societies. Every individual is free to take
decisions and make their own choices regarding their codes of conduct therefore steadfast
rule molarity no more finds importance in their lives. However individuals do retain
contextual ethics, which is regardless of any culture or creed. Contextual ethics evidently
highlights individualism and is not absolute like rule of molarity. It is a personal choice to
realise what is good. Anything imposed often has a negative impact since there is lack of
clarity as to why the action is right or wrong. Contextual ethics on the other hand is not
imposed and it helps the person to understand what a correct action is and what needs to be
done in a situation which is a novel area which is not covered by the traditional rules of the
society (S, 2018).
It has been seen that individuals who emphasise more on moral principles or norms
have a negative attitude regarding sexual conduct. These individuals judge others with

2“RULE MORALITY” vs. “CONTEXTUAL ETHICS”
respect to the moral norms they follow which is generally dictated by their religion or society.
However this should not be the correct approach of judging sexual conduct. Contextual ethics
should be the building block of one’s sexual conduct. If the person feels internally a
particular sexual behaviour is not right it is better than the society dictating the terms as to
what is right and what is wrong. In case of rule morality there is no scope of thinking or
choosing an action which is in stark contrast to conceptual ethics where on thinks and
chooses the principles, therefore acting as a better guide for proper sexual conduct. Studies
conducted by Chao, Li & Chen, (2016), showed that individuals who possess contextual
ethics are more capable of understanding and deciding on moral dilemma. The Theory of
Reasoned Action suggests a positive relation between a person’s judgement and intention.
Given the situation a person with high contextual ethics will follow the correct intention as a
precursor to their behaviour.
From the above discussions it can be concluded that, contextual ethics is definitely a
better guide for proper sexual conduct as there is education needed to practise it and not laws
for its implementation. Such a perspective could have a major impact on the welfare of the
society which can change the views of approaching a decision.

3“RULE MORALITY” vs. “CONTEXTUAL ETHICS”
References
Chao, M. C. H., Li, F., & Chen, H. (2016). Perceived ethicality of moral choice: The impact
of ethics codes, moral development, and relativism. Nankai Business Review
International, 7(2), 258-279.
Contextual Ethics. (2018). Retrieved from http://www.calresco.org/lucas/context.htm
Jennings, P. L., Mitchell, M. S., & Hannah, S. T. (2015). The moral self: A review and
integration of the literature. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1).
S, S. (2018). Difference between Morals and Ethics (with Examples and Comparison Chart) -
Key Differences. Retrieved from https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-
morals-and-ethics.html