[JamesLeonis]

There is a distinction between Ethics and Morals. Morals are the things you value, like liberty and happiness. Ethics are decision-making systems that you configure with morals. They are designed to aid you in situations where two or more of your morals/values are in conflict.

Before talking about Utilitarianism, we first must talk about it's parent Consequentialism. The basics are this; Consequentialists state that the outcomes of an ethical decision should leave the outcome in a superior moral position. This is opposite of such systems like Kantian Virtue Ethics that state a more a priori value on the decision, even if the outcome is negatively affected. Honor might be a Virtue Ethic, since you would always act honorably even if the situation makes that a bad course of action.

Utilitarianism is a balance point between two Consequentialist children: Ethical Egoism and Ethical Altruism. Both (respectively) examine the outcome based on the individual making the decision, and the rest of the situation outside of the individual. Combining both Utilitarianists examine the outcomes of both the individual and the surrounding environment when determining which course of action to take.

tl;dr: Ethics are amoral systems of decision making that tell you where and how to apply your morals.

[tisdy]

> Morals are the things you value, like liberty and happiness

I disagree, the conventional and I think the more widely understood meaning of 'morals' would be 'principles' or 'standards of right and wrong'. I think the term 'values' would do just fine.

[noir-york]

Not sure why your comment was downvoted. Its an informed comment that adds to the discussion.