AI 中文总结
本文针对AI时代出现的“AI自身的伦理学”相关元伦理学问题，提出条件性方法论框架，区分四类探究领域，探讨主流元伦理学理论的适用性，指出现有框架需大幅修正。
AI 中文摘要
随着人工智能（AI）的发展，以人类伦理为核心的元伦理学领域面临着可能对其产生重大重构的压力。具体而言，如果未来的AI系统具备足够整合的道德推理、道德意向性与道德反思能力，就会出现我所说的“AI自身的伦理学”相关的新型元伦理学问题，这类问题与人类设计者强加给AI的伦理原则截然不同。本文提供了一个条件性的方法论框架，用于识别这类AI系统出现后会产生的问题。在此基础上，本文区分了人工智能时代元伦理学探究的四个领域：从人类视角出发的关于人类伦理本质的问题、从人类视角出发的关于AI自身伦理本质的问题、从AI视角出发的关于人类伦理本质的问题，以及从AI视角出发的关于AI自身伦理本质的问题。随后，本文探讨了部分现有主流元伦理学理论（如认知主义、非认知主义、错误理论、成功理论、相对主义、客观实在论）如何阐释这些领域，同时指出，这些理论的许多熟悉的人类中心主义表述若要直接应用于AI场景，可能需要大幅修正。总体结论是，AI自身伦理学的出现将对当前框架施加重大压力，可能需要对其进行大幅完善、重构或重新概念化。
英文摘要
With the development of artificial intelligence (AI), the landscape of meta-ethics, which has largely centred on human ethics, faces pressures that may significantly reconfigure it. In particular, if future AI systems were to exhibit sufficiently integrated capacities for moral reasoning, moral intentionality, and moral reflection, novel meta-ethical questions would arise concerning what I call "AI's own ethics", as distinct from ethical principles merely imposed on AI by human designers. This paper offers a conditional and methodological framework for identifying the questions that would emerge if such AI systems were to arise. On that basis, the paper distinguishes four domains of meta-ethical inquiry in the era of AI: questions about the nature of human ethics from the human perspective; questions about the nature of AI's own ethics from the human perspective; questions about the nature of human ethics from the AI perspective; and questions about the nature of AI's own ethics from the AI perspective. The paper then considers how some existing mainstream meta-ethical theories (such as cognitivism and non-cognitivism, error theory and success theory, relativism, and objective realism) might illuminate these domains, while arguing that many familiar human-centred formulations of those theories may not transfer straightforwardly to AI cases without substantial revision. The overall conclusion is that the emergence of AI's own ethics would place significant pressure on current frameworks and may require substantial refinement, reconstruction, or reconceptualisation.
Journal refAI and Ethics (2026), 6, Article 281
DOI：10.1007/s43681-026-01134-y
