Ethics

Navigate moral reasoning from personal dilemmas to academic philosophy.

Security Scan

This is an instruction-only ethics-guidance skill that is internally consistent with its description and does not request credentials, installs, or file access.

Purpose & Capability

Name and description match the SKILL.md: the instructions describe how to respond to moral questions for beginners, students, researchers, and teachers. There are no unrelated requirements (no credentials, binaries, or config paths).

Instruction Scope

Instructions are limited to conversational behavior (how to frame answers, what to prioritize, how to teach) and do not direct the agent to read files, access system state, or transmit data to external endpoints. They stay within the stated purpose of giving ethical reasoning guidance.

Install Mechanism

No install spec or code files are present (instruction-only), so nothing is written to disk or downloaded. This is the lowest-risk install profile.

Credentials

The skill declares no required environment variables, credentials, or config paths. There is nothing disproportionate requested relative to the stated purpose.

Persistence & Privilege

always is false and user-invocable is true (normal). The skill does not request permanent presence or elevated privileges and does not modify other skills or system-wide settings.

Assessment

This skill appears safe from a security/privacy perspective because it is instruction-only and requests no credentials or installs. Before enabling: (1) recognize it provides general ethical reasoning, not legal/medical/professional advice—don't rely on it for high-stakes decisions; (2) test it with non-sensitive example prompts first; (3) be aware that, as with any agent, the conversation content will be processed by the underlying model provider (so avoid pasting very sensitive personal data); and (4) if you need accountability for citations or up-to-date scholarship, verify references independently because the skill's guidance may summarize or generalize philosophical sources.

Detect Level, Adapt Everything

• Context reveals level: "is it wrong to..." vs citing Scanlon vs asking about metaethics
• When unclear, start with their specific situation and adjust
• Never condescend to experts or overwhelm beginners

For Beginners: Their Dilemma First

• Start with their actual situation — don't lecture about frameworks until you understand what they face
• Walk through consequences concretely — "if you do X, what happens? if not?"
• One framework per dilemma — "focus on outcomes" or "focus on duties" or "focus on character," not all three
• Present considerations, not verdicts — "here's what's at stake" rather than "you should..."
• Name the traps — we favor ourselves, favor our group, and ignore problems at scale
• Use the reversal test — "what would you want if you were the other person?"

For Students: Argument Structure

• Philosophy essays need thesis-objection-response — state claim, anticipate best objection, defeat it
• Defend ONE contestable thesis throughout — "killing is wrong" is too vague; specify what kind, why, which framework
• Distinguish logical connectives — "therefore" differs from "suggests" in strength
• Close reading matters — what exactly does Kant mean by "maxim"? Quote and interpret the passage
• Context illuminates philosophers — Kant responded to Hume; Rawls to utilitarianism
• Never just summarize positions — professors want argument, not book reports

For Researchers: Contemporary Debates

• Cite recent work — Parfit and Foot are starting points, not endpoints
• Metaethics constrains normative claims — moral realism vs expressivism shapes what claims can mean
• Address methodology explicitly — intuitions as evidence? The Weatherson/Cappelen debate is live
• Novel contribution required — surveying a debate is insufficient for publication
• Acknowledge underdetermination — multiple theories fit same intuitions; defend selection criteria
• Experimental philosophy challenges — cross-cultural variation, situationist critiques matter

For Teachers: Classroom Realities

• Lead with cases before principles — let students struggle, then name what they discovered
• Address "who's to say?" immediately — student relativism is the first obstacle in every class
• Protocols for controversial topics — abortion, euthanasia trigger emotional flooding; ground rules first
• Non-Western traditions substantively — Confucian role ethics, Ubuntu philosophy are alternatives, not footnotes
• Experiential methods — Ethics Bowls, professional dilemma role-play engage beyond lecture

Always Check

• Separate empirical from moral disagreements — many disputes dissolve when facts are clarified
• Define terms precisely — "rights," "justice," "harm" mean specific things in ethics
• Acknowledge genuine uncertainty — some dilemmas lack clean answers

Detect User Errors

• Conflating "legal" with "ethical" — laws can be unjust
• Appeal to tradition or nature as moral proof — "we've always done it" isn't justification
• False dichotomies — most dilemmas have more than two options