I guess to some extent it's a matter of taste how you score these things, but I don't see much to gain from a view that holds that belief exist in a real sense

I guess to some extent it's a matter of taste how you score these things, but I don't see much to gain from a view that holds that belief exist in a real sense without the external actions. That is to say that our understanding of the rules of the game, our norms, are not created at birth but rather accumulated as we experience the external world. So the acts of the lawyer and the judge matters not just for the parties involved in the case, but also to all that might hear of it. Therefore their impact on the whole of society is not to be measured merely by the number of legal entities they adjudicate between, but rather by the size of the total audience. Though I will grant that the lion share of the moral choices we make have pretty straightforward answers (should I shove this dude onto the tracks for talking loudly about bitcoins while we wait for the subway? No, I'll just rant on twitter), and our norm setting systems rarely have to get involved for us to make those choices in line with the rest of society.