You suggested it could be difficult knowing that harm has been done. Not acknowledging it. I agreed. Please don't redefine the subject of the discussion.
I agree with you that people know they are doing harm. I am just asking the question, wondering why some people do harm and don't believe they are being harmful. I think its part of finding the truth as to how people think about morality.
Then it is plainly and obviously necessary to determine if it has or has not been done.
Yes and I think part of that is investigating the facts around the moral issue. What is classed as harm, was harm actually done and is the harm justified. The question is how do we determine that.
Yes, often it is subjective. So I said quite a few posts ago that if there is disagreement on whether it has been done then we ask the person who says they've been harmed.
But surely just asking the person is not enough. People can be misleading, take advantage, be controlling, be overly sensitive. We see this happening today where people are walking on egg shells to scared to say boo for offending people when it comes to rights.
You'd definitely be aware that some Australian terms don't translate well when used with someone who isn't Australian. If an American said he was upset about something I said, even if you wouldn't be, then I'd naturally accept that he's been harmed. So we then have a problem with morality. And I have to decide if I'm justified using that language.
I think thats more to do with etiquette (manners, being curteous ect) than morality. A cultural word or a practice may have different meaning in the culture and as you say may be offensive to a different culture. So when engaging we put aside those cultural norms to be polite. But the cultural norms are not immoral in themselves.
I would suspend my use of the word or practice to be polite but I would not give them, what it prepresents to me. If the American came to live in Australia he would have to get use to that word being used rather than people having to give up that word to accommodate the new arrival.
In fact as the American and I got to know each other then we should be able to be ourselves more. Each person should allow the other to be themselves. That means accepting stuff about the other person even if it may be uncomfortable. If the American knew what the word or idea or belief means to me and respects me he too should be accommodating. I don;t think people should have to give up their language, beliefs, culture in the end. It certainly depends on the situation.
What if the Australian is giving a lecture or speech and uses that word because its part of their presentation in the US. What if most people in the audience don't mind the word or idea but theres a few that do. Should we then delete the word or idea to not offend the few. I think that is when it starts to matter morally what exactly harm is on a group or societal level. Whether that can be applied society wide.