Result or cause?

I tend toward the bigger natural philosophy picture if I concentrate on morality at all. In that perspective, the anthropocentric ("action that harms others") tends to ignore the environment that future people will need. Even if we only think in terms of humans being harmed, then what harms future humans (or future of humans) will be quantitatively more evil than something that harms present humans.

When we question human civilization's supremacy as an anomaly from natural evolution, then the picture changes to wondering if civilization (isolation from natural environments) is actually evil (harming more future people than it helps because of the disconnected (monetized) morality and damage to future environments).

Doling out justice within civilization should be an obvious function of any social structure, but city-based social structures inherently compete with ecology-based social structures.

We become comfortable with the structures that dominate our behaviors. Failure to question those structures and systems causes harm to people (present and future), so I think we still agree.