Add new comment

...but I think you actually might wish to say the reverse.
[Friendly note: If the reader doesn't like silly semantic discussions, please feel free to ignore the rest of this message]
[/gnat straining mode on]
"James seems to use ethics, to the complete exclusion of morality.  Dr. D?  He begins with morality, of course, and tries to be aware of the ebb and flow of ethical standards around us."  -- Jemanji
It's strange, but originally, the words morality and ethics meant the following:
Morality: what 'is' at present -- in culture.  How people live/believe/behave right now.  Morality therefore fluxuates with the changing of culture depending on how the majority collectively interprets right from wrong.
Ethics: what 'should' be -- based in an unchanging standard -- but aren't necessarily reflected in the morality of the culture. 
Perhaps a reasonable picture of the difference would be the actual original meaning of the words contained in the U.S. Constitution vs. how people (not singling out any group -- just an example) choose to interpret or ignore (or perceive as anachronistic) the words in that document. 
In other words, ethics are unchanging with no ebb-and-flow, morality, unfortunately, is not. 
[/gnat straining mode off]
*grins*