mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Diagnosing Moral Reasoning Acquisition in Language Models: Pragmatics and Generalization

arXiv 2502.16600 ↗First posted 23 Feb 2025cs.CLcited by 6

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Ensuring that Large Language Models (LLMs) return just responses which adhere to societal values is crucial for their broader application. Prior research has shown that LLMs often fail to perform satisfactorily on tasks requiring moral cognizance, such as ethics-based judgments. While current approaches have focused on fine-tuning LLMs with curated datasets to improve their capabilities on such tasks, choosing the optimal learning paradigm to enhance the ethical responses of LLMs remains an open research debate. In this work, we aim to address this fundamental question: can current learning paradigms enable LLMs to acquire sufficient moral reasoning capabilities? Drawing from distributional semantics theory and the pragmatic nature of moral discourse, our analysis indicates that performance improvements follow a mechanism similar to that of semantic-level tasks, and therefore remain affected by the pragmatic nature of morals latent in discourse, a phenomenon we name the pragmatic dilemma. We conclude that this pragmatic dilemma imposes significant limitations on the generalization ability of current learning paradigms, making it the primary bottleneck for moral reasoning acquisition in LLMs.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 15 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Feb 2025.

Builds on

15 of 59 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Are Rules Meant to be Broken? Understanding Multilingual Moral Reasoning as a Computational Pipeline with UniMoral19 Feb

Other references · 14

  1. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  2. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  3. 2020Aligning AI With Shared Human Valuescited by 723
  4. 2024Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deepcited by 472
  5. 2019Social Bias Frames: Reasoning about Social and Power Implications of Languagecited by 380
  6. 2021Can Machines Learn Morality? The Delphi Experimentcited by 141
  7. 2022State-of-the-art generalisation research in NLP: A taxonomy and reviewcited by 98
  8. 2022The Moral Integrity Corpus: A Benchmark for Ethical Dialogue Systemscited by 93
  9. 2023Moral Foundations of Large Language Modelscited by 85
  10. 2024Beyond Preferences in AI Alignmentcited by 49
  11. 2024Moral Alignment for LLM Agentscited by 39
  12. 2022Does Moral Code Have a Moral Code? Probing Delphi's Moral Philosophycited by 31
2 more
  1. 2023ValueDCG: Measuring Comprehensive Human Value Understanding Ability of Language Modelscited by 4
  2. 2024SaGE: Evaluating Moral Consistency in Large Language Modelscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 3.

6 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025One Model, Many Morals: Uncovering Cross-Linguistic Misalignments in Computational Moral Reasoning
  2. 2025Structured Moral Reasoning in Language Models: A Value-Grounded Evaluation Framework
  3. 2025"Pull or Not to Pull?'': Investigating Moral Biases in Leading Large Language Models Across Ethical Dilemmas
  4. 2026Reasoning or Rhetoric? An Empirical Analysis of Moral Reasoning Explanations in Large Language Models
  5. 2026Unsupervised Elicitation of Moral Values from Language Models
  6. 2026Understanding Moral Reasoning Trajectories in Large Language Models: Toward Probing-Based Explainability
  7. 2026The Fragility Of Moral Judgment In Large Language Models
  8. 2025The Convergent Ethics of AI? Analyzing Moral Foundation Priorities in Large Language Models with a Multi-Framework Approach