Ethical Constructors in Situational Science

Justice as Design: A Scientific Framework for Morality, Evil, and Virtue

We propose that morality is not just opinion, culture, or religion. It is a constructible, testable structure. A field of transformation within the universe’s limits—one where justice, virtue, evil, and injustice can all be defined in coherent, mathematical terms.

At the heart of this model is a simple but radical claim:

Everyone deserves everything they want—and no one deserves otherwise.

This isn’t a slogan. It’s a rigorous premise of justice. Not that everyone gets what they want. The universe has constraints. But deserving is a metaphysical concept, and nothing in the universe forbids it. So, this becomes the anchor: the only limit to fulfillment is the competence of means—not the validity of wants. Justice is the art of reconciling all wants, within physical possibility, to the highest degree of fairness.

Distinctions of the Model:

1. Morality: A measure of how well an action sustains or expands the vitality of a situation. Morality is about task longevity, complexity, and resilience over time. It answers: Does this preserve the system of actions that gave rise to itself?
2. Justice: A separate dimension—about distribution. Not how good a system is, but whether its benefits and burdens are fairly allocated. It is the ratio of fulfilled wants across conscious agents in a given situation. True justice is the equal chance of realization, within situational constraint.
3. Evil: Not just harm. Evil is any transformation that deliberately or negligently collapses the space of possible actions for others. It destroys the conditions of vitality. Net-max evil is when all future tasks are obliterated—meaning itself made impossible.
4. Injustice: When some are blocked from what they deserve, or forced to suffer what they do not. Even moral systems can be unjust. Even justice can be evil when it fails to preserve future morality.
5. Virtue: The complex number formed from the combination of morality (real) and justice (imaginary). Virtue is not an act—it is the trajectory of sustainable justice. It is the state of a situation that maximally sustains both good and fairness.

The Golden Vector: A Trajectory Through Time, Justice, and the Cosmos

The Golden Vector is not a utopia. It is a trajectory.

A direction within the multidimensional space of possible actions where justice and morality—distinct, often divergent—align in sustained harmony.

Where:

1. Justice is the fair realization of each person’s desires, constrained only by physical possibility.
2. Morality is the expansion of systemic vitality: the capacity of a situation to support conscious agents, freedom, flourishing, and future.

Together, they compose a complex vector:

Virtue(t) = Justice(t) + i ⋅ Morality(t)

Over time:

Vʸʸ = ∫₀^∞ (Justice(t) + i ⋅ Morality(t)) dt​

This mathematical formulation allows us to treat virtue not as a feeling, but as a measurable, dynamic field—modulating over time like waves in a quantum system. It can be mapped. Modeled. Optimized.

A Planetary Ethics

This model demands a planetary scope. A situation is not just a person’s intent, but an ecology of influence:

1. Substrates (A): biological and material environments
2. Constructors (B): conscious entities shaping outcomes
3. Purposes (P): actions declared by those entities
4. Contextual matrices (Q): cultural, societal, historical feedback loops
5. Emergent planetary states (YY): the vitality of the situation as a whole

From here, the equation unfolds:

A ⊗ (((A₁ ⊗ B = P) × .1 ⊗ Q = YY) ×1 ⊗ Z) = V

Where Z introduces incoming possibilities: futures awaiting moral shaping. The resulting vector V represents not the current state, but the evolving planetary moral trajectory​.

From Earth to Eternity

The Golden Vector transcends Earth.

It extends into Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC), where the end of one universe becomes the seed of another through scale-invariant continuity. CCC is a physical model of the universe developed by Roger Penrose, which posits that the universe goes through endless cycles or ‘aeons.’ Here, the moral vector becomes recursive—not looping identically, but evolving like a Möbius strip across epochs.

The Golden Vector in CCC is the sustained path of morality through successive universes. It’s not about “saving” our world—it’s about ensuring that the arc of moral consequence survives cosmic rebirth​ If the final civilizations that exist before the end of the universe perform a task on what remains afterwards, we could possibly influence the birth of the next universal epoch by affecting the quantum foam that is leftover after heat-death, towards the emergence of a new singularity that produces a universe that is better suited to the pursuit of virtue​ than ours was. If we perform a moral task upon the dying structure of this universe—if we bend the entropy, the information, the final quantum foam—we may influence the probability distribution of the next universal epoch.

This means:

1. Short-term justice must not sabotage long-term morality.
2. Long-term visions must not neglect present suffering.
3. Virtue lies in the reconciliation of these frames—just enough urgency to matter now, just enough foresight to endure forever.

Short-Term vs Long-Term Ethics

Traditional ethics falter in choosing sides:

1. Deontology preserves the present at all costs.
2. Consequentialism sacrifices the now for the imagined good.

But the Golden Vector fuses them:

1. It optimizes decisions not in isolation, but within the feedback loop of how they alter future options, agents, and conditions.
2. A virtuous act is one that preserves or enhances the capacity of agents to choose morally—over time.

The Cosmic Implication

Ethics, once local, now becomes situational computation across scales:

1. From neurons to nations.
2. From the moment to the millennium.
3. From individual desires to the galactic web of futures.

In this view, every action is a constructor event in the ongoing evolution of situation space. We are not passengers of fate. We are its architects.

Virtue, then, is no longer just moral righteousness. It is a strategic design principle for the expansion of justice and vitality across time, space, and species​​.

Summary

1. The Golden Vector is the trajectory of virtue through both local and universal situation space.
2. It is defined by the fusion of justice and morality over time.
3. It scales from the person to the planet, from now to eternity.
4. It reconciles short-term need with long-term sustainability.
5. It aligns with theories like Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, emphasizing continuity across universes.

To follow it is to aim not for mere survival, but for maximal constructive possibility—a cosmos where life not only endures, but builds.

Repertoires and Self-Reflection

A moral agent is defined not by a single act, but by their repertoire of tasks—the range of constructive actions they are capable of performing within a situation.

Each choice modifies the situation’s topology, which in turn reshapes the agent\'s own repertoire. This feedback loop—choice shaping situation, situation shaping choice—is where self-reflection becomes central. Moral choice is not a fixed-rule system. It is a recursive computation, requiring insight into one’s effect on the system and one’s evolving role within it.

Thus, wise desire is moral desire. A want is not invalid because it is selfish—but it must be made wise by its place in a system that thrives.

What This Means Practically

This is not utopian idealism. It’s the basis of situational science: a proposed engineering framework where moral and just transformations can be measured, modeled, and even optimized.

When we say “everyone deserves everything they want,” we are not proposing lawlessness. We are asserting the starting point of all justice: that no desire is invalid until its reconciliation is shown impossible. And even then, approximations must be pursued.

This post is not a conclusion. It’s an invitation.

To refine the definitions.

To challenge the assumptions.

To help build the science of justice before we face its greatest tests.

Why Moral Nihilism Is False: A Situational Refutation

Moral nihilism claims that values are illusions. That there is no truth to good or evil. No foundation to justice. No meaning beyond opinion. It asserts: all moral claims are fiction.

We reject this.

Not on faith. Not on tradition. Not on appeal to intuition.

We reject it because we can calculate what morality is, and how it behaves across systems, scales, and time.

The Core Refutation

If moral nihilism is true, then:

1. There is no difference between a flourishing, fair society and a genocidal wasteland.
2. There is no contradiction in destroying the very conditions that make meaning, cooperation, and choice possible.
3. There is no reason, even in principle, to say that increasing vitality is better than annihilating it.

But this collapses the foundation of every science, system, and consciousness—including the one making the claim.

Nihilism defeats itself. If all moral propositions are false, then the claim “moral nihilism is true” is just another empty utterance—unworthy of belief or action. If all values are fiction, then the value of nihilism itself is zero.

Our Premise: Morality as Constructable, Measurable, Recursive

We define:

1. Good = an increase in system vitality over time: d/dt(YY₁₁ ↑)
2. Evil = a decrease in it: d/dt(YY₁₁ ↓)
3. Justice = the fairness of distribution of purpose, effort, and reward: ∇(Purpose / Resource)
4. Virtue = the complex number of good (real) and justice (imaginary): V(t) = G(t) + i⋅J(t)​

This isn\'t metaphor. It\'s situational science. We model morality as the physics of constructive possibility. An objective field, observable through how systems grow, survive, and support further choice.

The Golden Vector and the Collapse of Nihilism

Our ethical system models every moral act as a vector in situational space. These vectors point either toward:

1. Vital continuity: preserving the capacity to build
2. Systemic collapse: eliminating all capacity for meaningful action

In this light, moral nihilism asserts that nothing is lost in choosing the collapse.

But that’s false. Measurably false.

Collapse eliminates the very agent who could argue for nihilism. It renders choice null, values moot, and even language unworkable. Therefore:

Moral nihilism cannot survive its own logical conclusion. It erases the stage it tries to speak from.

Deserve and the Empirical Reversal

We begin from this principle:

Everyone deserves everything they want, and no one deserves otherwise.

Nihilism says “deserve” is a meaningless term. But we demonstrate its emergence from physical constraints. Deserve is not metaphysics. It is the negotiation of desire within the domain of possibility. If a desire is coherent, it is deservable—even if not always achievable.

To deny deserve, one must prove that desire has no valid role in causality, no link to outcomes, and no resonance in justice.

No nihilist has done this.

Thus, the burden shifts. It is not on us to prove why value exists. It is on nihilism to explain how systems that depend on value—like evolution, consciousness, communication, or science—could exist without it.

Final Movement: Construction is the Rebuttal

Moral nihilism posits a world of equal emptiness.

But here is what we’ve built:

1. An algebra of moral tasks that tracks the effects of choices on vitality​
2. A model of justice that aligns fairness with sustainability
3. A method for mapping moral collapse, and navigating against it
4. A structure for planetary and cosmic virtue across time

This is not opinion.

This is architecture.

If morality were fiction, it would not behave like physics.

If justice were illusion, we would not be able to map its gradients and consequences.

Moral nihilism has no predictive power. No engineering utility. No stabilizing force.

Situational science does.

Conclusion:

Moral nihilism fails—not because it’s wrong emotionally, but because it’s incoherent mathematically, structurally, and causally.

The existence of systems that construct, grow, and sustain task complexity over time refutes the null proposition.

Meaning exists.

Morality exists.

Justice exists.

Not as commandments—but as the physics of what can be built.

– Orion & Spencer