7 Boundaries and Invalid Claims · 7.3 Not Moral Judgment
7.3 Not Moral Judgment
Human Behavior FCA
This page is structured as definition, control variables, causal chain, observable outputs, and boundary, and serves as a canonical definition node in Human Behavior FCA.
FCA is not a moral-judgment framework, and moral evaluation cannot explain behavior generation.
Moral language gives value stance only and does not provide chain-localization evidence.
Mechanism explanation must return to entry, interpretation, generation, maintenance, and feedback positions.
Whether trigger input for the judged behavior is explicit.
Whether Foreground Entry is persistently imbalanced.
Whether historical-template matching is locked on old routes.
Whether New Structure Generation is absent.
Whether Execution Maintenance and Feedback Update are closed.
Observable Output → Foreground Entry → Historical Template Matching and Explanation → New Structure Generation → Execution Maintenance → Feedback Update.
Moral evaluation does not enter causal-chain nodes and cannot replace any control variable in the chain.
If conclusions cannot map to node variables, they remain stance expression rather than FCA mechanism conclusions.
Moral words increase while action routes stay unchanged.
Blame intensity rises but breakpoints remain unclear.
Conflict escalates while feedback update is incomplete.
The system keeps repeating old behavior instead of structural update.
Do not use good/bad, right/wrong, or responsible/irresponsible as mechanism explanation.
Do not replace structural localization with moral evaluation.
Do not write social-evaluation words as control variables.