In reading someone's livejournal this morning, I ran across the term "ethical neutrality"; what could this imply? Is ethical neutrality a form of apathy, or perhaps is apathy the result of ethical neutrality? Is it a form of moral relativism or a different beast entirely? While moral relativism seeks to approve of everything, being ethically neutral seems to imply that you wouldn't even go that far. Rather than approve or disapprove of anything, one would simply refuse to make any kind of judgement call at all. An action is not good or bad. It merely is. And then, aren't "ethically neutral" people legally termed psychopaths? I'm positively negative about the idea of ethical neutrality.