What is the moral status of unconscious passive aggression? Consistent destructiveness that is not directly volitional, but still stemming from correctable perceptual flaws?
And is the core moral question what is right and wrong, which is a philosophical question; or is it how to build up individual psyches such that they are capable of coherent and consistently constructive moral decisions, which is a practical and actionable question?
I lean towards the latter. I don’t think it is useful to try and decide what will be right in the future, or what was right in the past, except as exercises in perceptual enlargement. Nor is it particularly useful for me to have firm ideas about what is right for other people, except to the extent that their own decisions affect me directly in some way.
In a world of good people, we would need no rules at all. We could work everything out as we go.
And I will never believe in Plato’s Philosopher King, except to the extent such a king is working hard to make himself unnecessary.