The Myth of Moral Neutrality

The universe discloses the Absolute Truth, Absolute Goodness and Absolute Beauty that is its Creator, Whose Attributes are identical among themselves and with the His Essence. Therefore, nothing can be true which is not both good and beautiful, nothing can be good which is not both true and beautiful, and nothing can be beautiful which is not both good and true, the standards being eternal and known by divine illumination of the human mind, illumination that is always mediated within time and space, the human mind itself being temporally and spatially constrained, and thus ultimately finite in its capabilities.

That there is a logically investigable order in the universe, as that the universe is beautiful, is that there is a moral order in the universe. Not only would the "laws of economics", even were they to exist at all, not be "morally neutral, like those of natural science", but the laws of natural science, which really do exist, are not morally neutral, either. Nothing is, or ever can be.

For the Divine Attributes are identical, not only among themselves, but with the Divine Essence; epistemology, ethics and aesthetics are not only identical among themselves (and yes, that does mean that nothing which is not morally edifying can have aesthetic, including literary, merit), but they are identical with ontology. To say that something is "morally neutral" is to say that it does not and cannot exist objectively. So in that sense, those who claim "moral neutrality" for the "laws of economics" are right. But certainly not in the sense that they mean.