One final note we’d like to make here is that, as we said before, we can use ethics frameworks as tools to help us see into situations. But just because we use an ethics framework to look at a situation doesn’t mean that we will come out with a morally good conclusion.
I feel like this statement in itself is a little contradictory to what this entire chapter is about. We've learned about multiple different kinds of ethical frameworks there are, which in turn means that we've learned that what might be morally right and wrong differs for everyone. Nihilism in itself rejects the existence of morally good conclusions, so how can we say that just because we use an ethical framework to look at a situation, doesn't mean we will come out with a morally good conclusion, when everyone's definition of a "morally good conclusion" differs? I initially agreed with the statement, but upon further processing, I think it'd be much harder to firmly decide a situation to be a morally bad conclusion since the opinion can fluctuate depending on who you ask and where. It doesn't make much of a difference to consider someone's ethical framework if it differs from our own if we're still going to make a definitive conclusion that their situation is morally bad from our own framework.