Now that I look at it...
It's possible that "ethically advanced" wasn't the phrase I was looking for. A rational ethics permits self-defense, even at the cost of lives if necessary.
Maybe "ethically paralyzed" is a better term. It would fit in well with the idea of thought as process, rather than a means of arriving at a conclusion, and its corollary, the inability to form real value judgments.
This kind of perceptual thinking is what makes many people believe that success in a war is simply when the shooting stops, rather than achieving a victory. In fact, the word "victory" annoys them.
Look at how many people see a "cease fire" in the Middle East as an end, not part of the continuing and unresolved situation.