Allow me to outline the observed process and three hypothetical examples below. For the sake of keeping the samples simple, I will ignore prior moral or religious convictions that a regular person would hold.
A person is confronted with an issue or approach to be judged. The person places themselves in the hypothetical situation and evaluates the implications for themselves according to their beliefs and convictions. The outcome of the evaluation determine the person's stance on the issue.
What is the term for this decision mechanism?
I figured "empathy" at first but that would require emotional transference with a real or hypothetical individual which is not given in this case. "Reverse Projection" came to mind as well, but it is a very loose fit and projection usually implies the unawareness of the person projecting while the process above is not influenced by the person's awareness.
Examples of mechanism in use:
Issue: Is killing good or bad?
If someone were to kill me, it would end my life which is bad. --> Killing is bad.
Issue: Should a government provide free healthcare financed by taxation to everyone without restriction?
Person A (history of health issues, low income job, insecure):
If I become sick again, I may not be able to afford the treatment myself. The added taxation will not concern my income bracket. The added security net thus increases chances of my survival at no or little expense to me. --> Yes, a government should provide free healthcare financed by taxation to everyone without restriction.
Person B (health freak, high income job, arrogant):
I take care of my health which is why I am not sick. The added taxation would take away from the money I make while providing no additional benefit to me. --> No, a government should not provide free healthcare financed by taxation to everyone without restriction.