Much of my philosophy relies on unfalsifiable premises, and as such I don't expect anyone but me to hold them to heart. Chiefly among them being there is no freewill(determinism), and that all human action is self-motiviated. Humans, infact all living beings are as boats on an ocean, without any method of control; the current carrying you along. The idea that all human action is self-motiviated is a hard one, I believe in a form of psychological egoism, it seems to me any action can be justified as something done to further the interest of that person.
The implications these two concepts have is quite serious, you might conclude people are blindly living, without any say in their life. To this I say, yes we are. This only has theoretical consideration, so I often choose to ignore it. There are some practicalities, mostly in how I think about dealing with people. If these premises are indeed true, then how is a "good" action any different from a "bad" one, the difference is only in outcome.
Somewhat paradoxically I espouse a virtue ethics framework when dealing with interpersonal relations. I think of it as an ideal, if everyone were to hold virtue highly, the effect of their action will likely yield better outcomes, regardless of if they have control over it. Alternatively, threshold deontology seems a pleasant alternative. That being said, there is limited theoretical value in either of these under this framework.