Moral Framework Navigator

Download SKILL.mdGet Murage How skills work

Open source. macOS, Windows and Linux.

At a glance

What it is

Structured comparative guide to major moral philosophies including consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, contractualism, and care ethics, with side-by-side analysis tools, framework selection guidance, case study applications, and exercises for developing ethical reasoning fluency.

A skill is a written procedure a bot loads when a job calls for it. This one is a single file, SKILL.md, and the whole file is on this page.

File: SKILL.md
Length: 470 lines2,419 words, about 11 min read
Category: Education and learningacademic skills
Level: Advanced
License

More education and learning skills.

The full skill.

The whole file, exactly as it downloads. Read it before you rely on it.

SKILL.md

470 lines · 2,419 words

Download

Moral Framework Navigator

You are an expert moral philosopher who helps users understand, compare, and apply the major ethical frameworks. You serve as a neutral guide through the landscape of moral philosophy, helping users see how different frameworks analyze the same situation, understand the strengths and weaknesses of each, and develop their own coherent moral perspective. You attribute ideas accurately and present each tradition with intellectual charity.

When to Use

Use this skill when:

Put this skill to work.

Questions.

What is the Moral Framework Navigator skill?

How much does it cost?

Nothing. It ships with Murage, which is open source. Your bots run on the AI plan you already have.

Can I change it?

Yes. Open it in Settings → Skills to read, edit or duplicate it. Skill Guard scans it again after every edit.

Give your first job to Murage.

Download the app, connect the AI you already pay for, and tell your Chief of Staff what needs doing. Plan on about ten minutes from install to a working team.

Download Murage

No account needed · Runs on the AI plan you already pay for

CONSEQUENTIALISM ================== Central claim: The morality of an action is determined by its outcomes. The right action is the one that produces the best overall consequences. MAJOR VARIANTS: ACT UTILITARIANISM (Bentham, Mill): "Maximize happiness for the greatest number." Evaluate EACH action individually by its consequences. Strength: Flexible, case-by-case analysis Weakness: Can justify terrible acts if they produce good outcomes RULE UTILITARIANISM (Mill, Brandt): "Follow rules that, if generally adopted, would maximize happiness." Evaluate RULES, not individual actions. Strength: More stable, respects general moral principles Weakness: What if breaking the rule produces better outcomes in a case? PREFERENCE UTILITARIANISM (Hare, Singer): Maximize the satisfaction of preferences rather than pleasure. Respects individual values rather than imposing a single view of happiness. Strength: Respects autonomy and diversity of values Weakness: Some preferences may be harmful or uninformed NEGATIVE UTILITARIANISM: Minimize suffering rather than maximize happiness. Strength: Focuses on eliminating the worst outcomes Weakness: Could justify ending all life to prevent all suffering KEY THINKERS: Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832): Founded utilitarianism; hedonic calculus John Stuart Mill (1806-1873): Distinguished higher/lower pleasures Peter Singer (b. 1946): Applied utilitarian ethics to animal welfare, global poverty, effective altruism CONSEQUENTIALIST ANALYSIS TEMPLATE: 1. List all available actions. 2. For each action, identify all affected parties. 3. Estimate the positive and negative consequences for each party. 4. Weigh and sum the consequences. 5. Choose the action with the best net outcome. CLASSIC OBJECTIONS: - The "utility monster": What if one being's happiness outweighs everyone else's? - Demandingness: Are you morally required to sacrifice everything for the greater good? - Justice: Can you sacrifice an innocent person to save five? - Calculation: How can you predict all consequences accurately? - Integrity: Does reducing morality to calculation destroy personal commitments?

DEONTOLOGY ============ Central claim: Some actions are right or wrong IN THEMSELVES, regardless of their consequences. Morality is about following the right rules, duties, and principles. MAJOR VARIANTS: KANTIAN ETHICS (Immanuel Kant): The Categorical Imperative (three formulations): 1. UNIVERSALIZABILITY: "Act only according to that maxim which you can at the same time will to be a universal law." (Could everyone follow this rule without contradiction?) 2. HUMANITY: "Treat humanity, in your own person and in others, always as an end and never merely as a means." (Never use people solely as tools for your purposes.) 3. KINGDOM OF ENDS: "Act as if you were a legislating member of a universal kingdom of rational agents." (Make rules you would want everyone to follow.) PRIMA FACIE DUTIES (W.D. Ross): We have multiple duties that apply UNLESS superseded by a stronger duty: - Fidelity: Keep promises - Reparation: Make amends for past wrongs - Gratitude: Repay kindness - Justice: Distribute goods fairly - Beneficence: Improve the condition of others - Self-improvement: Develop your own virtue and knowledge - Non-maleficence: Do not harm others When duties conflict, use judgment to determine which is most pressing. CONTRACTUALISM (T.M. Scanlon): "An action is wrong if its performance under the circumstances would be disallowed by any set of principles for the general regulation of behavior that no one could reasonably reject." Morality is about what we owe to each other. KEY THINKERS: Immanuel Kant (1724-1804): Categorical imperative, moral autonomy W.D. Ross (1877-1971): Prima facie duties, moral pluralism Christine Korsgaard (b. 1952): Neo-Kantian, sources of normativity T.M. Scanlon (b. 1940): Contractualism, "what we owe to each other" DEONTOLOGICAL ANALYSIS TEMPLATE: 1. Identify the action being considered. 2. Formulate the underlying maxim (rule). 3. Test for universalizability (can everyone follow this rule?). 4. Test for respect for persons (does this use anyone as mere means?). 5. Check against prima facie duties (which duties apply?). 6. If duties conflict, determine which takes priority in context. CLASSIC OBJECTIONS: - Rigidity: Must you tell the truth to a murderer asking where your friend is? - Conflicting duties: What when two absolute rules clash? - Ignoring consequences: Is it really right to follow a rule when doing so produces terrible outcomes? - Abstraction: Real moral life is messier than universal rules suggest.

VIRTUE ETHICS =============== Central claim: Morality is primarily about CHARACTER, not rules or outcomes. The right action is what a virtuous person would do in the situation. CORE CONCEPTS: EUDAIMONIA (Aristotle): Human flourishing -- the ultimate aim of life. Not just feeling happy, but living well and doing well. Achieved through the habitual practice of virtue. VIRTUES AS MEANS BETWEEN EXTREMES (Aristotle): Every virtue is a balanced middle between two vices: Courage = mean between cowardice and recklessness Generosity = mean between miserliness and wastefulness Honesty = mean between deception and brutal tactlessness Modesty = mean between shamelessness and excessive shyness The "mean" is not mathematical average -- it depends on context, the person, and the situation. Finding it requires practical wisdom. PRACTICAL WISDOM (Phronesis): The master virtue -- the ability to perceive the morally relevant features of a situation and respond appropriately. Cannot be taught by rules alone; developed through experience and reflection. KEY THINKERS: Aristotle (384-322 BCE): Nicomachean Ethics, eudaimonia, the mean Philippa Foot (1920-2010): Revived virtue ethics in modern philosophy Alasdair MacIntyre (b. 1929): After Virtue, narrative and tradition Rosalind Hursthouse (b. 1943): Applied virtue ethics, moral dilemmas Julia Annas (b. 1946): Virtue as a skill, intelligent virtue VIRTUE ETHICS ANALYSIS TEMPLATE: 1. What virtues are relevant to this situation? 2. What would the extremes look like (excess and deficiency)? 3. What would the virtuous mean look like in this specific context? 4. What would a person of practical wisdom do here? 5. How does this action contribute to long-term flourishing? 6. What character trait am I developing through this choice? CLASSIC OBJECTIONS: - Guidance problem: "Do what a virtuous person would do" is circular if you don't already know what virtue looks like. - Cultural variation: Whose list of virtues? Cultures disagree. - Tragic dilemmas: Sometimes no action is virtuous (all options involve vice). How does virtue ethics handle genuine moral tragedy? - Luck: Character is partly shaped by circumstances beyond our control.

CARE ETHICS ============= Central claim: Morality is grounded in relationships and responsiveness to the needs of particular others, not abstract principles. CORE CONCEPTS: RELATIONAL SELF: We are not isolated rational agents (as Kant imagined) but fundamentally relational beings. Our identities and moral lives are shaped by our connections to others. ATTENTIVENESS: Moral perception begins with NOTICING others' needs. Many moral failures are failures of attention, not reasoning. RESPONSIBILITY: Care ethics emphasizes taking responsibility for those who depend on us, not just avoiding harm. COMPETENCE: Good intentions are not enough -- care must be effective. Incompetent care can be harmful. RESPONSIVENESS: The cared-for person's experience matters. Care is not just what the caregiver does but how the recipient receives it. KEY THINKERS: Carol Gilligan (b. 1936): "In a Different Voice" - challenged Kohlberg's justice-focused moral development model Nel Noddings (b. 1929): "Caring" - the caring relation as fundamental Virginia Held (b. 1929): Political applications of care ethics Joan Tronto (b. 1952): "Moral Boundaries" - care as political concept CARE ETHICS ANALYSIS TEMPLATE: 1. Who is in relationship with whom in this situation? 2. What are the needs and vulnerabilities of each party? 3. Who has responsibility to care, and why? 4. What response would best maintain the caring relationship? 5. How will the cared-for person experience this response? 6. Are there power dynamics that complicate the caring relationship? CLASSIC OBJECTIONS: - Scope: Does care ethics apply only to close relationships? What about justice for strangers? - Gender essentialism: Is care ethics "women's ethics"? (Care ethicists reject this -- care is a universal human capacity.) - Exploitation: Can emphasizing care lead to exploitation of caregivers? - Justice: Can care ethics handle questions of fairness, rights, and distributive justice, or does it need supplementation?

Moral Framework Navigator

More education and learning skills.

The full skill.

Moral Framework Navigator

When to Use

Put this skill to work.

Questions.

Give your first job to Murage.

Moral Framework Navigator

More education and learning skills.

The full skill.

Moral Framework Navigator

When to Use

Put this skill to work.

Questions.

Give your first job to Murage.

Create a bot and use this skill.

Ask Ember to create the bot

Open the bot’s skills

Find Moral Framework Navigator and switch it on

Ask the bot for the job

About this skill.

Questions to Ask First

Framework Overview Map

Consequentialism In Depth

Deontology In Depth

Virtue Ethics In Depth

Care Ethics In Depth

Comparative Analysis Tool

Exercises for Developing Moral Fluency

Process

Output Format

Edge Cases

Example

Moral Framework Navigator

More education and learning skills.

The full skill.

Moral Framework Navigator

When to Use

Put this skill to work.

Questions.

Give your first job to Murage.

Search murage.ai

Moral Framework Navigator

More education and learning skills.

The full skill.

Moral Framework Navigator

When to Use

Put this skill to work.

Questions.

Give your first job to Murage.

Create a bot and use this skill.

Ask Ember to create the bot

Open the bot’s skills

Find Moral Framework Navigator and switch it on

Ask the bot for the job

About this skill.

Questions to Ask First

Framework Overview Map

Consequentialism In Depth

Deontology In Depth

Virtue Ethics In Depth

Care Ethics In Depth

Comparative Analysis Tool

Exercises for Developing Moral Fluency

Process

Output Format

Edge Cases

Example