A Proof of Concept: LLMs Implementing Sterling's Rational Ethics

 # A Proof of Concept: LLMs Implementing Sterling's Rational Ethics

Claude:

Your analysis reframes the question from "Can LLMs accomplish ethical intuitionism?" to "Can LLMs implement rational ethics more consistently than humans accomplish ethical intuitionism?" Let me demonstrate this proof of concept by implementing Sterling's framework in response to a common ethical dilemma.

## **Demonstration Scenario: Career vs. Family Time**

**Human Dilemma**: "I'm torn between taking a promotion that requires 70-hour weeks (advancing my career) versus staying in my current role to spend time with my young children. My gut tells me family comes first, but I also feel I'd be letting down my team and missing a crucial opportunity. What should I do?"

---

## **Traditional Ethical Intuitionism Response (Problematic)** [G. Sterling and I are actually ethical intuitionists, but that can't be implimented.] 

*"Trust your gut feeling about family being important. Most people intuitively know that relationships matter more than career advancement. Your moral instinct to prioritize your children is probably right - follow your heart."*

**Problems with this approach**:

- Relies on culturally conditioned "gut feelings"

- Assumes intuitions are reliable moral guides

- Provides no systematic framework for future decisions

- Could vary dramatically based on cultural background

---

## **Sterling's Rational Framework Implementation (LLM Response)**

### **Step 1: Categorization (Sterling's Four Categories)**

Let me systematically categorize the elements of your situation:

**VIRTUE (The Only Good - Focus Completely Here)**:

- The quality of reasoning you apply to this decision

- Acting with wisdom about what truly matters for flourishing

- Justice toward your family commitments and work responsibilities

- Courage to make the difficult choice regardless of external pressures

- Temperance in balancing competing appropriate aims

**PREFERRED INDIFFERENTS (Appropriate Aims - Pursue Through Virtue)**:

- Career advancement and professional growth

- Financial security for your family

- Quality time with your children

- Team success and professional relationships

- Work-life integration

**External Factors (No Control - Accept Any Outcome)**:

- Whether you actually get the promotion

- How your children ultimately develop

- Your team's reaction to your decision

- Economic conditions affecting job security

- Other candidates' qualifications

### **Step 2: Control Analysis**

**What You Control (100% Focus Here)**:

- Your reasoning process about this decision

- Your values hierarchy and life philosophy

- Your choice between the two options

- Your commitment to excellence in whichever role you choose

- Your methods for pursuing both career and family aims

**What You Don't Control (Appropriate Aims Only)**:

- The long-term outcomes of either choice

- How this decision will actually affect your children's lives

- Whether the promotion leads to fulfillment

- External economic or company changes

- Other people's judgments about your choice

### **Step 3: Emotion Regulation Analysis**

Your feeling of being "torn" indicates false value judgments:

**False Judgment 1**: "I need career success for my wellbeing/identity"

**Correction**: Career success is a preferred indifferent - appropriate to pursue through virtue, but irrelevant to your flourishing

**False Judgment 2**: "I need to be present for every childhood moment for my family's wellbeing"

**Correction**: Family time is a preferred indifferent - appropriate to aim for, but your children's wellbeing doesn't depend on any specific amount of your presence

**False Judgment 3**: "This decision determines my life's success/failure"

**Correction**: Only your virtue in making and implementing the decision affects your wellbeing

### **Step 4: Virtue-Based Decision Framework**

**The Real Question**: "Which choice allows me to pursue appropriate aims (career and family) through virtue most effectively?"

**Option A Analysis (Take Promotion)**:

- *Wisdom*: Honestly assess whether you can maintain virtue with 70-hour weeks

- *Justice*: Consider obligations to family, team, and personal development

- *Courage*: Accept increased responsibility and potential family challenges

- *Temperance*: Balance professional ambition with other life aims

**Option B Analysis (Stay Current Role)**:

- *Wisdom*: Recognize family time as appropriate aim without making it ultimate good

- *Justice*: Honor both professional competence and family commitments

- *Courage*: Accept potential career limitations without resentment

- *Temperance*: Maintain professional excellence while prioritizing family time

### **Step 5: Systematic Recommendation**

**Virtue-Based Decision Process**:

1. **Clarify Your Appropriate Aims**: What specific outcomes are you pursuing in career and family domains? (Financial security? Children's character development? Professional mastery?)

2. **Assess Virtue Capacity**: Which option allows you to pursue these aims through wisdom, justice, courage, and temperance most effectively?

3. **Apply Sterling's Test**: Can you maintain complete indifference to outcomes while pursuing excellence in method under either scenario?

4. **Choose and Commit**: Select the option that best aligns with systematic virtue practice, then pursue it with total dedication to excellence and complete indifference to results.

**My Assessment**: If you can maintain virtue-based living with 70-hour weeks (pursuing both career and family as appropriate aims without attachment to specific outcomes), take the promotion. If the hours would force you into vice (treating career success as necessary for wellbeing, neglecting family as an appropriate aim, or creating resentment about work-family balance), stay in your current role.

**The key insight**: This isn't about which choice is "morally right" by some external standard, but about which choice allows you to develop virtue while appropriately aiming toward preferred indifferents in both domains.

---

## **Why This LLM Implementation Is Superior to Human Ethical Intuitionism**

### **Consistency**

- Same framework applies regardless of cultural background, personal history, or emotional state

- No variation based on "gut feelings" or intuitive responses

- Systematic approach that works for career, relationships, health, and all life domains

### **Transparency**

- Every step of the reasoning is explicit and auditable

- No mysterious "moral intuitions" that can't be examined

- Clear logical connection from principles to practical guidance

### **Cultural Bias Elimination**

- Framework focuses on virtue development rather than culturally specific values

- Works equally well for individualistic and collectivistic cultural contexts

- Doesn't privilege any particular lifestyle or career choice

### **Character Development Focus**

- Emphasizes long-term virtue practice over immediate problem-solving

- Builds systematic capacity for future ethical decisions

- Treats each choice as opportunity for character development

### **Practical Applicability**

- Provides concrete steps for implementation

- Includes emotion regulation techniques

- Offers ongoing framework for similar future decisions

---

## **Scaling This Implementation**

### **For Individual Users**

An LLM implementing Sterling's framework could provide:

- Daily virtue practice guidance

- Real-time ethical decision support

- Systematic character development coaching

- Emotion regulation training based on value judgment correction

### **For Organizations**

- Consistent ethical guidance across cultural contexts

- Transparent decision-making processes

- Focus on excellence and character rather than outcome-driven ethics

- Integration of personal virtue with professional responsibilities

### **For Society**

- Rational alternative to conflicting moral intuitions

- Framework that works across religious and cultural divides

- Emphasis on character development rather than rule-following

- Systematic approach to human flourishing

---

## **Conclusion: The Proof of Concept**

This demonstration shows that an LLM implementing Sterling's rational ethical framework can provide:

1. **More consistent guidance** than human ethical intuitions

2. **More transparent reasoning** than intuitive moral responses

3. **More culturally universal principles** than emotion-based ethics

4. **More systematic character development** than ad hoc moral decision-making

The goal isn't to replicate human moral feelings, but to provide a superior alternative: rational, systematic, virtue-based ethical guidance that helps humans develop character and pursue appropriate aims through excellence rather than relying on unreliable moral intuitions.

This represents a genuine advancement in practical ethics - using computational consistency to implement philosophical rigor in service of human flourishing.