given that you are an incompatibilist, your self-awareness is completely seperate from the deterministic process. self-awareness is a freedom. to be aware of something, one must be able to escape that something of which it is aware. whatever it contemplates, the awareness contemplating it is not that thing (subject-object). and here lies the main problem with determinism; how can someone identify something as determinite without its counterpoint; an idea of freedom? in a determinite universe, where does this idea of freedom come from? self-awareness is freedom. it is something that is not what it is aware of (ie. Sartres 'Néant' (lit.: "non-being")
the incompatibilist saves his position by way of one-way causality. it just passes through this self-awareness and its notions of freedom, it floats completely passively above this material, deterministic universe. it cannot have a truly active position from within self-awareness. for that is its (free) will! given that there is no free will, there is no way to actually seperate this awareness as such from the body, ie. the universe could actually perfectly go without. one can only be aware of his own self-awareness. there is no real way to tell if another human being is self-aware, for if there was, it would have to play an active role. it cannot react as a self-awareness, for that would entice bringing in elements of its fundamental freedom. its recorded reaction can only be resulting from and come trough the deterministic processes. in that case we cannot distinguish self-awareness from them. thus we have no way of knowing there actually is one there. you see, you need a closed system to seperate your self awareness (=freedom) from the deterministic world; to prevent there from being a free will, and maintain only the 'will' (if you can call it that) or laws of the deterministic system. as such, you can only have an influx into this self-awareness, but no outgoing connections. any actions of a 'self' cannot be, for this would mean a 'free will' ( the will of a self as opposed to the deterministic laws of the universe) going from that 'self'. Thus, you cannot trace any of the determinist processes entering your self-awareness back to another self-awareness, since this self-awareness cannot have any influence on the deterministic processes. as such there is no way of discerning the existence of another self. you can only 'believe there are' by virtue of their similary to you. the self has to be completely passive in your position.
as for morality, your self-awareness may be able to judge determined processes happening to it as good or bad. but it would be a degenerate subjectivism. you can only judge pertaining your own relative position. you can only say this is good or bad, insofar as what is happens to do to me alone. you see, a deterministic event is not good or bad by itself, intrinsically. it just is. when a certain building collapses in such a way due to causal laws that it crushes someone, you cannot say "that is one mean, bad building" Given that you do not have acces to others' self-awareness, your ethical judgement of their actions becomes meaningless. they have no personal influence on their actions, therefor no intention, and as such, their actions remain morally neutral causal consequences. furthermore, given that the self has no willful action whatsoever, how can you hold anyone responsable for his deeds? is it ethically responsable to punish some presumably there awareness for a deed that is not his own, but rather a consequence of the determinism of the universe? you would punish him just for being born in the wrong place? can you blame yourself for any action the deterministic universe undertakes through yourself when you do not have any say whatsoever over it?