Morality always differs from person to person, according to time, place, situation — and convenience.

Understanding the simple fact that morality differs around the world, and even within societies, is the first step toward understanding your righteous mind.

What is morality in any given time or place? It is what the majority then and there happen to like, and immorality is what they dislike.

Morals consist of political morals, commercial morals, ecclesiastical morals, and morals.

It comes down to this. There are certain forms of conduct which at any given place and epoch are commonly accepted under the combined influence of reason, practice and tradition, as moral or immoral. … Law accepts as the pattern of its justice the morality of the community whose conduct it assumes to regulate. In saying this, we are not to blind ourselves to the truth that uncertainty is far from banished. Morality is not merely different in different communities. Its level is not the same for all the component groups within the same community. A choice must still be made between one group standard and another. We have still to face the problem, at which one of these levels does the social pressure become strong enough to convert the moral norm into a jural one? All that we can say is that the line will be higher than the lowest level of moral principle and practice, and lower than the highest. The law will not hold the crowd to the morality of saints and seers. It will follow, or strive to follow, the principle and practice of the men and women of the community whom the social mind would rank as intelligent and virtuous.

There is no such thing as morality—only varingly expedient conventions. What to one race is a crime, is virtue to another; crime in one era is virtue in another; even a crime in one class of society is at the same time and in the same society virtue in another class . . . It makes no difference whether people are called good or bad; we are all here; now; there is only one world in existence, and in it there prevail either expedient or inexpedient conditions for those who are alive.

Moral: It all depends.

The difference between ethics and morality is quite essential. What is beneficial for one people is the ethics. Morality is the matter of intention, when I say I believe something is good and I will do it because my motivation is right. The fact that in the end it will be a disaster, is not my fault, I did it for good reasons. I despise that. I think that it is the excuse of the weaker. I am not interested in intentions. I am interested in consequences. Any one can have good intentions, which I believe is the matter of decency. I do not discuss others’ intentions. I assume that anyone has good intentions. But it is so trivial, that I am not interested in it. I am interested in what comes next. If I will not benefit from the outcome, I am not interested in good intentions.

We have, in fact, two kinds of morality side by side; one which we preach but do not practise, and another which we practise but seldom preach.

I often reflect upon the word “morality,” the most troublesome and confusing word of all.
There is no single or supreme morality; there are many, each defining the mode by which a system of entities optimally interacts.
The eminent entomologist Fabre, observing a mantis in the act of devouring its mate, exclaimed: “What an abominable custom!”
The ordinary man, during a day’s time, may be obliged to act by the terms of a half dozen different moralities. Some of these acts, appropriate at one moment, may the next moment be considered obscene or opprobrious in terms of another morality.
The person who, let us say, expects generosity from a bank, efficient flexibility from a government agency, open-mindedness from a religious institution will be disappointed. In each purview the notions represent immorality. The poor fool might as quickly discover love among the mantises.

Morality, as well as the sense of taste, is relative.’

There are two kinds of Christian morals, one private and the other public. These two are so distinct, so unrelated, that they are no more akin to each other than are archangels and politicians.

There are no lower or higher or median moralities. There is only one morality, and it is precisely the one that was given to us during the time of Jesus Christ and that stops me, you and Barantsevich from stealing, offending others, lying etc.

About morals, I know only that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after.