📝 SummarXiv

Abstract

AI safety research has emphasized interpretability, control, and robustness, yet without an ethical substrate these approaches may remain fragile under competitive and open-ended pressures. This paper explores ethics not as an external add-on, but as a possible structural lens for alignment, introducing a \emph{moral problem space} $M$: a high-dimensional domain in which moral distinctions could, in principle, be represented in AI systems. Human moral reasoning is treated as a compressed and survival-biased projection $\tilde{M}$, clarifying why judgment is inconsistent while suggesting tentative methods -- such as sparse autoencoders, causal mediation, and cross-cultural corpora -- that might help probe for disentangled moral features. Within this framing, metaethical positions are interpreted as research directions: realism as the search for stable invariants, relativism as context-dependent distortions, constructivism as institutional shaping of persistence, and virtue ethics as dispositional safeguards under distributional shift. Evolutionary dynamics and institutional design are considered as forces that may determine whether ethical-symbiotic lineages remain competitively viable against more autarkic trajectories. Rather than offering solutions, the paper sketches a research agenda in which embedding ethics directly into representational substrates could serve to make philosophical claims more empirically approachable, positioning moral theory as a potential source of hypotheses for alignment work.