Large language models offer a new perspective on justice and fairness
Justice After Identity: Large Language Models and the View from Everywhere
Artificial Intelligence
Summary
People often disagree about what is fair because their views are shaped by their own backgrounds and identities. The authors explore whether large language models (LLMs), which have no personal identity but learn from many human experiences, can provide fairer moral judgments by considering diverse perspectives all at once. They compare decisions made by humans and LLMs on classic moral problems to see how well these AI systems incorporate different identities and fairness principles. The authors discuss whether humans would trust such AI advice when fairness is debated.
What this means in practice
- •For ai ethics teams: Incorporate findings on how LLMs represent diverse identities to improve fairness evaluation in AI systems.
- •For policy advisors: Use insights from model comparisons to inform guidelines on AI-assisted decision-making in public fairness debates.
Authors
W. Russell Neuman
Abstract
The search for a common view of justice and fairness has challenged human collective activity, as our diverging judgments are unavoidably shaped by the self-interests of social position, personal benefit, cultural inheritance, and historical circumstance. John Rawls famously attempted to overcome this limitation through popularizing a philosophical tradition known by the phrase "the original position" - a thought experiment by which people select principles of justice without knowing the identities or advantages they will possess. Critics, however, have long questioned whether people can meaningfully suspend their social identities and suppress morally relevant forms of lived experience. Artificial intelligence engaged to calculate algorithmic and agentic fairness introduces a novel possibility. LLMs have no singular class, race, gender, nationality, or biography, yet their parameters encode linguistic representations of a vast range of human identities and moral traditions. Perhaps the ethical judgments of LLMs could approximate an integrative original position - a "view from everywhere" generated not by excluding social identities but by computationally incorporating their diversity.It is unlikely that humankind will "hand over the keys" to computational systems by simply delegating complete agentic control of distributive and procedural collective processes. But AI may play a role, perhaps a positive one, interacting with individual and collective human judgment as we often confront increasingly polarized views on what is fair and just. We present data comparing human, base model, and frontier/fine-tuned model judgments about classic moral dilemmas while systematically varying identity relationships and Rawlsian constraints on identity. We conclude by speculating whether, if advanced AI systems provide humans with thoughtful advice, humans would actually be likely to accept it.