The most famous, and bizarre, results of Special Relativity was the fact that two different observers may not measure space and time the same way. In other words, if someone travels past you at speeds close to the speed of light, you will observe their clocks moving very slowly. You will also observe them to be squished in the same direction that they are traveling.
This incredible result comes directly from a set of equations called the Lorentz Transformations. These equations transform the space-time of one observer into the space-time of the other. In order for the statement that "the laws of physics apply in every reference frame" to be true, we need a way to determine how the laws of physics might look in another reference frame, given that we know how they look in our own.
One of the subtleties of Special Relativity is that not only do the Lorentz Transformations exist, but they can't NOT exist! In other words, the Lorentz Transformations aren't just a happy accident, but rather a requirement in order for Special Relativity to be self consistent.
This subtlety is also present for the more generalized principle of Covariance. We therefore will apply it to the principle of Moral Covariance in the following way.
A Moral Transformation is the act of viewing an ethical problem from another Moral Observers reference frame. Moral Covariance promises that a Moral Transformation always exists.
Though a Moral Transformation must always exist, it may not always be applied correctly. In order to correctly apply a Moral Transformation, you must first understand your own reference frame. Then you must understand the reference frame of your counterpart.
When applying Moral Transformations, it is so important for each party to understand both reference frames, that any attempt to hide or mask or misrepresent a reference frame will endanger the accessibility of the Moral Transformation.
Too often when someone wants to supply a convincing argument for an ethical issue, they seek to appear "objective." In so doing, they are making an appeal to a preferred reference frame, supposedly to prove that they are somehow more capable of observing moral truth. This is a fallacy, since there is no preferred reference frame. Some people also try to misrepresent the reference frame of their opponent to make them seem less capable of understanding moral truth.
If a subscriber of Moral Covariance seeks to supply a convincing ethical argument, they must first make their own reference frame utterly transparent. This may involve a disclosure of bias, as well as a disclosure of understanding which may be lacking. They must then diligently acquire a comprehension of the reference frame of their counterpart. Only then will they be in a position to construct Moral Transformations, which lead to constructive ethical dialogue.
