Moral Psychology

What Cotometism is Not

Clarifies what Cotometism rejects—identity-based, conflict-driven, or coercive ideologies—and why distinguishing it from them preserves its focus on Life Autonomy and Reciprocity.

Defines Cotometism by contrast—showing what it is not. Rejects identity-based, zero-sum, paternalistic, utopian, and authoritarian ideologies to preserve the framework’s commitment to Life Autonomy, Reciprocity, and adaptive cooperation.

What Cotometism Shares with Other Approaches

Cotometism converges with several philosophical traditions while maintaining its distinctive focus on Life Autonomy sustained through Reciprocity.

Situates Cotometism in the wider philosophical landscape, showing how it converges and diverges from related traditions—capability theory, positive liberty, relational autonomy, non-domination, and mutual-advantage social contract thought—while maintaining a single evaluative axis: Life Autonomy sustained through Reciprocity

The Righteousness Trap: How Ideologies Create a “Permission Structure” for Coercion

Conviction can liberate—or it can license domination. Examining how moral certainty can become coercion, and how Cotometism offers a safeguard.

Movements that begin with noble ideals can drift into violence, not because their goals are wrong, but because of ideologies that grant moral authority to dominate. This essay explores that coercive ‘permission structure’—and shows how the principles of Cotometism can prevent conviction from turning into control.