Morality in Nature

[Whateverist]

Nope. The cart is firmly behind the horse. Without the knowledge that an action causes harm, giving a shit about it would not be possible. Ofcourse, that assumes that causing harm is the primary consideration in morality and there is no reason to assume that. The actual awareness of moral quality of an action is not required for it to have a moral dimension - the capacity for such awareness is. Any reflection on the subject of morality presumes a capacity for such reflection and the existence of that capacity results in that action having a moral dimension - whether the agent acknowledges it or not.

I wonder how you conceptualize this difference-making knowledge. Is it the reasoned categorization of the action, or is it an empathetic wince? Does an empathetic wince imply the presence of knowledge? Or does the knowledge have to be consciously held to be the sort you have in mind? I would be willing to concede the body contains knowledge which is actionable without my conscious participation - as when my hand jumps off the hot pan. Or when I wince in empathy for another's pain. Not sure what difference any of this makes in regard to morality .. but as you know that is not a concept I am invested in propping up.