• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Core Principles of Responsible AI
    • Accountability
    • Fairness
    • Privacy
    • Safety and Security
    • Sustainability
    • Transparency
  • Special Topics
    • AI in Industry
    • Ethical Implications
    • Human-Centered Design
    • Regulatory Landscape
    • Technical Methods
  • Living Dictionary
  • State of AI Ethics
  • AI Ethics Brief
  • šŸ‡«šŸ‡·
Montreal AI Ethics Institute

Montreal AI Ethics Institute

Democratizing AI ethics literacy

Towards a Feminist Metaethics of AI

February 24, 2025

šŸ”¬ Research Summary by āœļø Anastasia Siapka.

Dr Anastasia Siapka is an attorney-at-law as well as an AI law and ethics researcher affiliated with the KU Leuven Centre for IT & IP Law in Belgium.

[Original Paper by Anastasia Siapka]

šŸ“Œ Editor’s Note:Ā This Research Summary, originally written in April 2024, was part of the proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES’22) held on August 1–3, 2022, in Oxford, UK.


Overview: Despite numerous guidelines and codes of conduct about the ethical development and deployment of AI, neither academia nor practice has undertaken comparable efforts to explicitly and systematically evaluate the field of AI ethics itself. Such an evaluation would benefit from a feminist metaethics, which asks not only what ethics is but also what it should be like.


Introduction

The widespread adoption of AI has led to the growth of AI ethics as a field of study. The legitimacy of the field, however, is challenged in light of recent problematic incidents. By way of illustration, the allegations of ethics-washing against the High-Level Expert Group on AI, the launch of a Facebook-funded academic centre for AI ethics, and the departure of high-profile AI ethicists from Google urgently suggest the need for critical self-reflection within the field.

In response to this need, I seek recourse to feminist metaethics. Traditional metaethics describes and explains morality and moral judgements: it is a second-order reflection about normative enquiry that is itself non-normative. Conversely, given its origins in a movement for political change, feminist philosophy is committed to being normative. It embraces a broader metaethics, interrogating how we are and how we should (or should not) be doing ethics.

Key Insights

Considering the context of AI, I suggest four lines of enquiry that a feminist metaethics would follow. 

1. The continuity between theory and action in AI ethics:

Feminist metaethics does not assume that ethical theorising always deserves societal support. Accordingly, AI ethicists should reflect on whether AI is unique such that it warrants a distinct ethical sub-field (and thereby distinct funding or other support) or whether its ethics could instead be modelled on established sub-fields—say bioethics. They should further interrogate the alignment of such theorising with action on societal, individual, and technological levels by asking whether the principles and values of AI ethics should be mirrored in policymaking, their own personal conduct, and technology design practices.

2. The real-life effects of AI ethics:

Feminist metaethics acknowledges the practical and societal, rather than merely intellectual, import of ethics. Nonetheless, applying ethical theories to real-life cases might have unexpected or even harmful effects. A feminist metaethics of AI would thus detect, criticise, and seek to mitigate the potentially adverse effects of AI ethics discourse. Such effects include ethics-washing (using ethical language to give the appearance of ethical behaviour while justifying de-/self-regulation), ethics-shopping (picking and choosing from the ā€˜marketplace’ of ethical theories those that rationalise one’s behaviours), ethics as branding (instrumentalising ethics as a sales pitch to appease criticism and promote business uptake), and ethics-bashing (reducing the ethical discourse to instances of its misuse and fostering distrust towards it).

3. The role and profile of AI ethicists:

A feminist metaethics would explore the division of labour in AI ethics between theoretical and applied research as well as different disciplines. Feminist metaethics laments the separation between, on the one hand, theoretical ethicists who are detached from the implications of their academic theories and, on the other, applied ethicists who selectively apply the theories that best fit the practical goals at hand. Instead, AI ethics would benefit from combining theoretical insights with practical experience in AI. Moreover, philosophers, lawyers, computer scientists, business managers, and citizens all claim expertise in AI ethics. The roles, contributions, and interactions of these actors merit further clarification, as does the broader question of what constitutes ethical expertise in the first place.

4. The topics and methods of AI ethics:

Feminist metaethics focuses on distinct topics, particularly those relevant to women. It would subsequently assess the impact of AI on individuals not in the abstract but in view of their gender and other intersectional identity markers, such as class, race, disability, and sexuality. More broadly, it makes visible power asymmetries that traditional metaethics abstracts away. In so doing, it employs distinct methods, rejecting ideal theory and pure objectivity and instead engaging with individuals’ lived experiences and contexts. This engagement could involve listening to and amplifying the testimonies of situated agents affected by AI, examining the normative implications of AI-related concepts and undertaking conceptual amelioration, and accounting for agents’ affective states and interpersonal dependencies.

Between the lines

This paper, bringing previously disparate concerns under the umbrella of a ā€˜feminist metaethics of AI,’ offers a first pass at systematising second-order reflection on AI ethics. Already at this preliminary stage, though, it aspires to encourage conversations about AI ethics that extend beyond the ivory tower into the real world.

Want quick summaries of the latest research & reporting in AI ethics delivered to your inbox? Subscribe to the AI Ethics Brief. We publish bi-weekly.

Primary Sidebar

šŸ” SEARCH

Spotlight

AI Policy Corner: Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024

AI Policy Corner: The Colorado State Deepfakes Act

Special Edition: Honouring the Legacy of Abhishek Gupta (1992–2024)

AI Policy Corner: The Turkish Artificial Intelligence Law Proposal

From Funding Crisis to AI Misuse: Critical Digital Rights Challenges from RightsCon 2025

related posts

  • The State of AI Ethics Report (Volume 4)

    The State of AI Ethics Report (Volume 4)

  • Model Positionality and Computational Reflexivity: Promoting Reflexivity in Data Science

    Model Positionality and Computational Reflexivity: Promoting Reflexivity in Data Science

  • Never trust, always verify: a roadmap for Trustworthy AI?

    Never trust, always verify: a roadmap for Trustworthy AI?

  • Adding Structure to AI Harm

    Adding Structure to AI Harm

  • AI Framework for Healthy Built Environments

    AI Framework for Healthy Built Environments

  • Survey of EU Ethical Guidelines for Commercial AI: Case Studies in Financial Services

    Survey of EU Ethical Guidelines for Commercial AI: Case Studies in Financial Services

  • Designing a Future Worth Wanting: Applying Virtue Ethics to Human–Computer Interaction

    Designing a Future Worth Wanting: Applying Virtue Ethics to Human–Computer Interaction

  • Research summary: Health Care, Capabilities, and AI Assistive Technologies

    Research summary: Health Care, Capabilities, and AI Assistive Technologies

  • LLMCarbon: Modeling the end-to-end Carbon Footprint of Large Language Models

    LLMCarbon: Modeling the end-to-end Carbon Footprint of Large Language Models

  • Research summary: The Toxic Potential of YouTube's Feedback Loop

    Research summary: The Toxic Potential of YouTube's Feedback Loop

Partners

  • Ā 
    U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute Consortium (AISIC) at NIST

  • Partnership on AI

  • The LF AI & Data Foundation

  • The AI Alliance

Footer

Categories


• Blog
• Research Summaries
• Columns
• Core Principles of Responsible AI
• Special Topics

Signature Content


• The State Of AI Ethics

• The Living Dictionary

• The AI Ethics Brief

Learn More


• About

• Open Access Policy

• Contributions Policy

• Editorial Stance on AI Tools

• Press

• Donate

• Contact

The AI Ethics Brief (bi-weekly newsletter)

About Us


Founded in 2018, the Montreal AI Ethics Institute (MAIEI) is an international non-profit organization equipping citizens concerned about artificial intelligence and its impact on society to take action.


Archive

  • Ā© MONTREAL AI ETHICS INSTITUTE. All rights reserved 2024.
  • This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
  • Learn more about our open access policy here.
  • Creative Commons License

    Save hours of work and stay on top of Responsible AI research and reporting with our bi-weekly email newsletter.