mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Beyond Binary Moral Judgment: Modeling Ethical Pluralism in AI

arXiv 2605.28707 ↗First posted 27 May 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Critical decision-making in socially consequential spaces is increasingly involving AI systems at varying capacities. Yet, despite the ubiquity of autonomous systems, most approaches to handling autonomous moral decision-making resort to scalar or binary judgments. These methods are insufficient for acceptable moral reasoning, as they provide little explanation, leaving out imperative contextual and theoretical information that must be included to support accountability. For this, we propose a framework to model moral reasoning as a distribution over normative ethical theories or ethical pluralism. We introduce a normative ethics simplex that integrates these theories. A benchmark of 450 cases across 15 fine-grained subtheories was also prepared for the purposes of stacked ensemble learning. These cases describe ethical dilemmas in natural language and have associated extracted contextual features. The implementation of the simplex was achieved via a two-stream normative-semantic architecture. This is followed by the fusion of normative information and a sequential, stacking ensemble to learn the best fit of the three broad theories: consequentialism, virtue ethics, and deontology, and the 15 subcategories. Our experiments demonstrate that the integration of contextual and normative priors with the semantic embeddings significantly improves the performance of the classification, displaying an accuracy of 88.89%. We conducted ablation studies to show that structured ethical representations contribute beyond analogical reasoning, and the chosen stacking architecture gives the best results due to the gradual learning of granularity. Ethical pluralism is also analyzed through entropy, confidence, and visualization. Thus, modeling ethical pluralism as a probabilistic normative distribution supports human-like moral reasoning, ethical disagreement analysis, and future alignment in AI systems.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2026.

Builds on

3 of 26 references.

References · 3

  1. 2018UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reductioncited by 2,841
  2. 2020Aligning AI With Shared Human Valuescited by 706
  3. 2023Ethical Reasoning over Moral Alignment: A Case and Framework for In-Context Ethical Policies in LLMscited by 64

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025The Convergent Ethics of AI? Analyzing Moral Foundation Priorities in Large Language Models with a Multi-Framework Approach
  2. 2026Position: Evaluations of AI Moral Reasoning Still Miss Half of the Picture
  3. 2023Hybrid Approaches for Moral Value Alignment in AI Agents: a Manifesto
  4. 2025MoReBench: Evaluating Procedural and Pluralistic Moral Reasoning in Language Models, More than Outcomes
  5. 2025Are Language Models Consequentialist or Deontological Moral Reasoners?
  6. 2025Auditing the Ethical Logic of Generative AI Models
  7. 2026Unsupervised Elicitation of Moral Values from Language Models
  8. 2025Beyond Ethical Alignment: Evaluating LLMs as Artificial Moral Assistants