Our team works in via negativa constructive logic. But we use common terms to avoid neologisms.
So for example, when we say ‘moral’ we mean ‘not immoral’, and we define immoral as irreciprocal, meaning empirically determined,by universally demonstrated retaliation.
So while individual, normative, and group variation in moral rules varies by context, this is due to personal, technological, environmental, and historical differences.
Yet retaliation against irreciprocity is a Universal.
So morality = that which will not provoke retaliation, and will continue cooperation, and the benefits of cooperation.
And the scope of morality is limited to those who you can, and wish to cooperate with at present or in the future – and not to any other.
As such immorality = violating the
Silver (PLATINUM) Rule.
And morality = not violating the
silver (PLATINUM) rule.
As such all positive morality is normative, and utilitarian only within group, and universal morality is utilitarian across groups who you wish to cooperate (trade) with.
But the moral rule of reciprocity, as a means of not violating the negative rule of irreciprocity, and thereby provoking retaliation, is still a universal
Christian ethics says that through exhaustive forgiveness of our minor differences, we will gradually seek the advantage of cooperation from each other – solving the prisoner’s dilemma of cooperation.
And this is true.
But the moment one crosses the line from forgiveness as investment in future cooperation, and instead accepts costs and harms against the self, others, the polity, our traditions and institutions – then it’s not moral forgiveness it’s immoral responsibility evasion: a crime.