English

ClarityEthic: Explainable Moral Judgment Utilizing Contrastive Ethical Insights from Large Language Models

Computers and Society 2025-04-10 v2 Artificial Intelligence Social and Information Networks

Abstract

With the rise and widespread use of Large Language Models (LLMs), ensuring their safety is crucial to prevent harm to humans and promote ethical behaviors. However, directly assessing value valence (i.e., support or oppose) by leveraging large-scale data training is untrustworthy and inexplainable. We assume that emulating humans to rely on social norms to make moral decisions can help LLMs understand and predict moral judgment. However, capturing human values remains a challenge, as multiple related norms might conflict in specific contexts. Consider norms that are upheld by the majority and promote the well-being of society are more likely to be accepted and widely adopted (e.g., "don't cheat,"). Therefore, it is essential for LLM to identify the appropriate norms for a given scenario before making moral decisions. To this end, we introduce a novel moral judgment approach called \textit{ClarityEthic} that leverages LLMs' reasoning ability and contrastive learning to uncover relevant social norms for human actions from different perspectives and select the most reliable one to enhance judgment accuracy. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in moral judgment tasks. Moreover, human evaluations confirm that the generated social norms provide plausible explanations that support the judgments. This suggests that modeling human moral judgment with the emulating humans moral strategy is promising for improving the ethical behaviors of LLMs.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2412.12848,
  title  = {ClarityEthic: Explainable Moral Judgment Utilizing Contrastive Ethical Insights from Large Language Models},
  author = {Yuxi Sun and Wei Gao and Jing Ma and Hongzhan Lin and Ziyang Luo and Wenxuan Zhang},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.12848},
  year   = {2025}
}

Comments

We have noticed that this version of our experiment and method description isn't quite complete or accurate. To make sure we present our best work, we think it would be a good idea to withdraw the manuscript for now and take some time to revise and reformat it

R2 v1 2026-06-28T20:38:45.632Z