mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

The Convergent Ethics of AI? Analyzing Moral Foundation Priorities in Large Language Models with a Multi-Framework Approach

arXiv 2504.19255 ↗First posted 27 Apr 2025cs.AI cs.CYcited by 3

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in consequential decision-making contexts, systematically assessing their ethical reasoning capabilities becomes a critical imperative. This paper introduces the Priorities in Reasoning and Intrinsic Moral Evaluation (PRIME) framework--a comprehensive methodology for analyzing moral priorities across foundational ethical dimensions including consequentialist-deontological reasoning, moral foundations theory, and Kohlberg's developmental stages. We apply this framework to six leading LLMs through a dual-protocol approach combining direct questioning and response analysis to established ethical dilemmas. Our analysis reveals striking patterns of convergence: all evaluated models demonstrate strong prioritization of care/harm and fairness/cheating foundations while consistently underweighting authority, loyalty, and sanctity dimensions. Through detailed examination of confidence metrics, response reluctance patterns, and reasoning consistency, we establish that contemporary LLMs (1) produce decisive ethical judgments, (2) demonstrate notable cross-model alignment in moral decision-making, and (3) generally correspond with empirically established human moral preferences. This research contributes a scalable, extensible methodology for ethical benchmarking while highlighting both the promising capabilities and systematic limitations in current AI moral reasoning architectures--insights critical for responsible development as these systems assume increasingly significant societal roles.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 8 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Apr 2025.

Builds on

8 of 44 references.

References · 8

  1. 2023Evaluating Large Language Models in Theory of Mind Taskscited by 222
  2. 2021Large Pre-trained Language Models Contain Human-like Biases of What is Right and Wrong to Docited by 178
  3. 2021Can Machines Learn Morality? The Delphi Experimentcited by 141
  4. 2024BetterBench: Assessing AI Benchmarks, Uncovering Issues, and Establishing Best Practicescited by 114
  5. 2023Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousnesscited by 104
  6. 2023Value Kaleidoscope: Engaging AI with Pluralistic Human Values, Rights, and Dutiescited by 97
  7. 2025Analyzing the Ethical Logic of Eight Large Language Modelscited by 5
  8. 2025Auditing the Ethical Logic of Generative AI Modelscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Are Language Models Consequentialist or Deontological Moral Reasoners?
  2. 2026Beyond Binary Moral Judgment: Modeling Ethical Pluralism in AI
  3. 2026CORDA: A Benchmark for Hierarchical Harm-Centric Moral Reasoning in Large Language Models
  4. 2025"Pull or Not to Pull?'': Investigating Moral Biases in Leading Large Language Models Across Ethical Dilemmas
  5. 2026Position: Evaluations of AI Moral Reasoning Still Miss Half of the Picture
  6. 2025Beyond Ethical Alignment: Evaluating LLMs as Artificial Moral Assistants
  7. 2024MoralBench: Moral Evaluation of LLMs
  8. 2025The Morality of Probability: How Implicit Moral Biases in LLMs May Shape the Future of Human-AI Symbiosis