Proving What We Already "Know"

[Angrboda]

Some people don't agree that destruction is part of moral content or of moral import, even if it (as in destruction) is real, and I guess that would seem like an equivocation to them - but obviously not to me.

It would seem that if there were a mountain, and someone dynamited that mountain, there would be (and is) a great deal of differentiation between those two states of mountain - and not mountain, regardless of whether or not this was (or what you, or what I) would take to be an item of moral import.

Learn what a vector is.

It's equivocation regardless of moral import. Utility is teleological and without a loss in utility, there is no destruction. You simply don't get it from the universe herself.