I mean, my moral framework may be simple, but it's consistent, and more importantly, it makes it morally impermissible to kill and eat me. If the giant spiders

I mean, my moral framework may be simple, but it's consistent, and more importantly, it makes it morally impermissible to kill and eat me. If the giant spiders were unintelligent, they'd not be moral actors, and then eating people might be a bad thing, but it wouldn't be a morally bad (evil) thing. If their prey weren't intelligent, my moral framework doesn't (currently) include an absolute prohibition on killing and eating animals, so that would be morally acceptable. But because both the spider and their prey were intelligent, my rules kick in and it is immoral for the spiders to eat people, or vice versa. (Now, there may be a loophole in that killing people for the purposes of eating them is always unacceptable, but there are circumstances where it is at least forgivable to kill [eg, self defense], and also circumstances where it is likewise acceptable to eat already dead intelligent creatures, but you have to be careful not to create a moral hazard where the killing is done on a pretext.)