I see—so people make various assumptions. One, that the sum total of pragmatic, self-interested decision-making is the correct way to arrive at an “ethical” answer (by definition, as if it were humanity’s algorithm for finding the answer, i.e. ethics doesn't exist, and self-interest determines what is "right"). Two, that such pragmatic self-interest, even if it isn't the definition of ethical correctness, is nevertheless the most efficient way to approximate and spit out an ethical answer. Three, that it is what we are going to do anyway because we are too busy for ethical discussions. Four, that we had better not cancel our busy plans and pause to do philosophy because bad things will happen to us if we do (like our Sworn Enemies overtaking us and the State of Nature swallowing us). I see the distinctions. It also seems to me that, for some people, these understandings/reasons/excuses might easily collapse into each other and manifest at different times as aspects of the same attitude.