Moralithic source method

Is it a source? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a source. (experimentation). if it is a source then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic statement method

Is it a statement? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a statement. (experimentation). if it is a statement then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic value method

Is it a value? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a value. (experimentation). if it is a value then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic displayment method

Is it a displayment? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a displayment. (experimentation). if it is a displayment then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic non-interactor method

Is it a non-interactor? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a non-interactor. (experimentation). if it is a non-interactor then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic enforcer method

Is it an enforcer? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of an enforcer. (experimentation). if it is an enforcer then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic mean method

Is it a mean? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a mean. (experimentation). if it is a mean then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic repeater method

Is it a repeater? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a repeater. (experimentation). if it is a repeater then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic rejecter method

Is it a rejecter? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of a rejecter. (experimentation). if it is a rejecter then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

Moralithic accepter method

Is it an accepter? (hypothesis), test it against the moralithic definition of an accepter. (experimentation). if it is a accepter then go down its respective flowchart until you reach a moralithic end-category and check afterwards if it fits the moralithic end-category it landed in and if it does not perfectly fit in the moralithic end-category then go down the flowchart until it does land in the moralithic end-category it perfectly fits in.

The moralithic methods of comparing 

The moralithic method of comparing is a moralithic method where you compare for one of the following reasons: 

1. moralithic consistency comparison with objective morality. 

With this form of comparison, it's about testing a subjective moral statement to objective morality (the sum of all objective moral statements). If there is a conflict between any moralithically proven objective moral statement and the statement in question then it means 1 of the 2 things: the statement in question is objective moral and the moralithically proven supposed objective statement is actually not an objective moral statement or the more likely option is that the statement in question is a subjective moral statement that conflicts the moralithically proven objective moral statement.

Example 1: statement x has values y and z. values y and z conflict with the values of statement r which has been already moralithically proven to come from the objective moral source. This means that statement x is categorized as a subjective moral statement unless it has been proven that statement x is from the objective moral source and that statement r has been incorrectly categorized as an objective moral statement.

Example 2: statement x has values y and z. These values do not conflict with any values of any objective moral statement which makes it morallithically consistent with objective morality. But becauce the source of statement x is not the objective moral source, statement x is categorized as a subjective moral statement.

1. structural consistency comparison between statements from the same source or of that of a system.

This form of comparison is about the moralithic consistency of a source and or to test the consistency of a system. This moralithic method is one of the ways to make sure that a supposed objective moral source to be proven as a subjective moral source if it has conflicting statements and if there is no application of abrogation or anything else where one of the conflictory statements replaces the other.

Example 1: source x has 2 statements: statement one has the value y while the other statement has the value z. value y and z are conflictory and the source has not replaced one statement with other statement and thus this source is structurally inconsistent.

Example2: source x has 2 statements: statement one has the value y while the other statement has the value z. value y and z are not conflictory and the source has not replaced one statement with other statement and thus this source is structurally consistent until it sources a statement that conflicts its previous statements without replacing one with the other.

1. comparison between objectivity vs subjectivity

Like other sciences, moralithics is focused on objectivity and objectivity alone. This means that even if moralithics categorizes subjectivity that does not mean that subjectivity is on the same level as objectivity in moralithics. This is why if you compare two of the same kind processed moralithic bases where one is objective, and the other is subjective then evidently the one that is objective will be scientifically superior to its subjective counterpart.

Example 1: statement x is an objective moral statement and statement y is a subjective moral statement which means that statement x is systematically superior to statement y.

Example 2: source x is the objective moral source and source y is a subjective moral source which means that statement x is systematically superior to statement y.

1. Moralithic statistics where you only focus on the differences between two or more of the same processed moralithic bases.

This form of comparison is all about moralithic statistics alone. It's about comparing what amount of a source's statements are enforced/not enforced, what amount is stated externally/internally and what amount of displayments a source has used were stationary/moving, what amount of those who are aware of the statement have interacted with it and so on.

Example 1: statement x, y and z from source q are enforced moral statements, statements a, b and c from the same source are non-enforced statements. This means that source q has half of its statements enforced.

Example 2: statement x, y and z from the source q which is a subjective moral authoritative source are externally stated subjective moral authoritative statements, statements a, b and c from the same source are internally stated subjective moral authoritative statements. This means that source q has half of its statements externally stated.

The moralithic method of hierarchical ranking

Hierarchical ranking in moralithics is only done for 1 specific reason: to hierarchically rank statements of the same source according to how that source itself has ranked them. Basically, this is about putting all statements in a hierarchy in accordance with how the source has ranked them. To do this you take all the relevant information about each individual moral statement about if they are in a hierarchy with other moral statements from the statements and if that is true then you research the hierarchy of those statements and their moralithic chains. This information can be direct or indirect, but the information must state a hierarchical difference between moral statements. If the source does not give any information directly or indirectly on the hierarchy of its moral statement's importance, then this method can't be applied to those moral statements.

The moralithic method of processing systems/text

The moralithic method of processing systems/text is an moralithic method where you first break down systems/text into individual statements and then you put every single statement into a moralithic chain. This makes moralithics capable of completely understanding the relation between each statement in a system/text. Also, with this moralithic method it is possible to utilize other moralithic methods like the moralithic methods of comparing and the moralithic method of ranking. Basically, with this moralithic method you can understand systems and text to their core in the scientific way.

How is the weight of any moral statement calculated?

Moralithics has a specific form of algebra that is used to calculate the weight of a moral statement in a set of reverse moralithic chains. The weight calculation is the following: the moral statement with the most weight in the entire statemionary of an entity is always assigned with the weight of 1.00. This means that any other moral statement in the same entire statemionary will always be less than 1.00. to calculate the others weight there is a simple formula: 

W1: weight of the most weighted moral statement.

W2: unknown weight of moral statement 1 of the same entire statemionary.

W3: unknown weight of moral statement 2 of the same entire statemionary.

W1 <=> W2 + W3.

If testing shows that W2 + W3 are more weighted than W1 then that means that the sum of W2 and W3 are more weighted than a weight of 1.00.

If testing shows that W2 + W3 are less weighted than W1 then that means that the sum of W2 and W3 are less weighted than a weight of 1.00.

If testing shows that W2 + W3 are exactly weighted as W1 then that means that the sum of W2 and W3 is equal to the weight of 1.00.

Applying this formula across all of the moral statements in an entity’s entire statemionary will narrow down each moral statement’s weight.