I thought this author--and anyone reading this article--might find interesting an ethic I have developed that involves no belief, intuition, assumption, etc. Rather, like the findings of science, it follows from an observation within material existence (which I got from Warren J. Samuels): human beings have no choice but to effect choices (i.e., choose among perceived alternatives and take action to bring that choice to fruition).

[I am an amateur philosopher who has 'done my reading'--over the course of forty years of seriously studying the problem of justice; anyone can well imagine the disdain academic philosophers have for my ideas on the subject--even though my efforts included an M.A. in political economy (where philosophy and economics intersect) with a Thesis that contained a Review of the Literature of the academic debate concerning 'distributive justice' that was initiated by the publication of A Theory of Justice, by John Rawls, in 1971.]

That observation is the determinant of this ethic; actions undertaken to effect a choice that involve any other human being(s) in any way are the referents of this ethic. Thus, the whole of this ethic--both its derivation and its implications for human beings--is contained within material existence. That legitimately de-legitimates any person's going 'outside' or 'beyond' material existence to any kind of immaterial truth, such as a belief (whether sacral/theological or secular/ideological), to deny the applicability of this ethic--its protections or its obligations--to anyone, including oneself.

The problem of ethics derives from our propensity as human beings to live together in groups. That forces the issue of governance upon us--for individuals and the group as an entity in itself (which as an entity also has no choice but to effect choices: I realized that effecting choices for the community as a whole is what the political process is). At the same time, we are each of us our own being. Reconciling those two aspects of our existence as human beings is the penultimate challenge for an ethic to govern governance. This ethic accomplishes that with what can be termed an other-centered individualism--which should make postmodernists happy (if anything could).

if curious for more: "Alright, Already" (here in Medium, but not behind the paywall)