Blurts & Spasms

From Quora discussion "What is the real connotation of Habermas's distinction between ethics and morality?"

Hopefully someone with greater expertise can refine an answer, but my understanding of Habermas's differentiation goes something like this:

1) "Morals" are fundamental conceptions of what is universally good or right for all people; they are both intuitively understood and can be arrived at through rational discourse between any and all parties.

2) "Ethics" are pragmatic, facilitative rules that define efficacious choices within limited spheres of interaction (an institution with its own unique charter, a group with a shared ideology, a cooperative process that aims for specific outcomes, etc.). So such "ethics" will be framed by the cultural milieu of a given sphere.

For Habermas "morals" are universal, but "ethics" are situational - and in fact may contradict the ethics operating in another sphere.

I hope this was helpful.