identifying moral violations is an Aesthetic issue.

solving moral violations is an Etiquette issue.

due to the introduction of Etiquette into this argument, there’s an implication in here that moral violations can only occur in a social setting. I find this implication to be reasonable and (at least in general) true. do morals exist outside of social dynamics? I don’t think so, but I haven’t thought much about that question specifically. anyway.

when you’re going about your day and you see something and you think to yourself, “that just isn’t Right. that’s not Correct. that’s not Good.”, what you’re identifying is some sort of aesthetic misalignment between what you’re experiencing and how the world works. I’m sure there’s some sort of label for this kind of bias, I don’t care; I’m speaking in plain terms here.

this sort of aesthetic moral violation perceived by the perceiver by identifying a variety of features in the composition of the experience. I would say anywhere from 3-7 features of an experience are identified and honed-in on in order for a perceiver to make such aesthetic judgements.

now, what to do about these perceived moral violations? that’s where Etiquette comes in. etiquette usually appears in the form of “how do I fix it this thing, if at all?”, and usually comes after the above statement of “that just isn’t right…”.

whereas identifying what is wrong is aesthetics, figuring out how to fix it is etiquette. just like you wouldn’t use a sledgehammer on a finishing nail, it would behoove one to go through life using the right tools for the job. to exercise etiquette is to utilize the appropriate tactics for the situation at hand.

aesthetics is what you do.

etiquette is how you do it.

aesthetics is what it is.

etiquette is how it behaves.

something to think about next time you pass judgment, or similarly, feel affected by the judgment of something.