Subjective Morality?

[DLJ]

...
Just out of curiosity, what IS the proper term for someone (who when presented with a scientific fact) says "Why should I care?" I mean, there is no doubt that such people exist. What shall we call them?
...

I'm agnostic on this but ... apathists? Maybe.

...
Moral statements are beliefs.
...
Are moral judgments beliefs?

I don't accept that 'statements' and 'judgements' are the same thing.

Judgements can be in statement-form but can also be in thought-form.

A statement (whether opinion, judgement, scientific fact or whatever; whether in the form of data, information, knowledge or wisdom) may or may not be registered as an 'event' (i.e. having significance) with the corresponding sensation of 'something's up'.

The significance weighting of the event (the 'something's up'-ness) will of one of the three types:
- informational
- warning
- exception

If it's an exception it will be processed as an 'incident' and mentally registered (logged) accordingly then classified (categorised and prioritised).  Priority is based upon 'impact x urgency' and the incident may or may not be tagged as being in the 'moral' category.

All this will happens so swiftly that the processor (the brain) will have had no to time for conscious analysis (rational discernment or judgement) or for root cause analysis or interpretation at the governance level or at the 'social-world' layer of information processing.

However, early on in the process, 'event correlation' has taken place which first assigns a significance (information, warning, exception) and later compares the event with a set of criteria or rules.  These criteria or rules could be loosely described as 'beliefs'.

Given that all of this needs to be explainable in terms of the ones and zeros of brain chemistry it can be thought of in terms of capacity thresholds.

For this one needs a baseline and two thresholds (all three of which change over time, with mood and personal development).  The two thresholds are the boundaries between three zones:
- Comfort Zone
- Learning Zone
- Panic Zone.

'Beliefs' can be described as "the overriding concept describing the maintenance conditions that arise from events.  The strength (stronghold-ness) of a belief depends on the value of the payoff in maintaining that belief for an individual."

In general then, we can think of the beliefs that we hold to be our Comfort Zone.

Note that early on in the process we are dealing with sensations of discomfort (and even dissonance) which have not yet been articulated.  Thus any judgement being made will be in the form of an auto-response rather than a considered rationale.

This is why it makes sense to distinguish two pathways of the Morality System:
1. The activities, workflows, controls and processes involved in the Moral Event/Incident part of the equation and
2. The activities, workflows, controls and processes involved in the creation of the criteria and rules that form both individual and group (social/organisational) ethics (e.g. our Code of Ethics).

Those are the goal posts on my side of the field.  I was wondering whether we were playing different sports on different fields.