Why repeat what you already said with more words, as if I can't read, only to leave out the bit that I responded to?
> we’re never going back.
As a prediction, this is worthless. If everybody thinks as you do, we won't, if nobody does, we will. So yes, this is purely about morality.
It's not just about collective agreement, there's a prisoner's dilemma in there.
If some segment of engineers uses agents and outperforms engineers who don't use agents, market forces will push all other engineers to use it over time. The only way we're going back is if we get concrete evidence that engineers using agents perform worse than engineers that don't, and that evidence isn't invalidated by improved models.