
How a Secular View of Morality Creates Challenges for Ethical A.I.
Artificial Intelligence is increasingly making decisions that impact our lives.
From the social media algorithms that decide what you see on social media (and thus, shape what you’re likely to believe) to artificial intelligence systems aiding medical diagnoses, these technologies all have ‘built-in’ moral and ethical values influencing how they work. (For more on this, see the book by Tim Challies, The Next Story: Life and Faith After The Digital Explosion.)
However, as we continue to develop and use these technologies, we must consider the ethical implications of A.I. systems making moral choices. Will these technologies make decisions that ultimately harm or help humanity? Will these technologies lead to ethical human flourishing, or will they dehumanise us?
While the ethics driving Western societies – and thus many A.I. designers – have been based on a loosely Christian framework, this is eroding and being replaced with a more secularised view of ethics.
And this secular view of ethics will cause increasing challenges in developing ethical A.I.
Here’s why:
1) The dominant secular view is that morality is made up and subjective
Historian Yuval Harari captures the widespread secular view of morality in his bestselling book Sapiens:
“Hammurabi and the American Founding Fathers alike imagined a reality governed by universal and immutable principles of justice, such as equality or hierarchy. Yet the only place where such universal principles exist is in the fertile imagination of Sapiens, and in the myths they invent and tell one another. These principles have no objective reality.”
(New York: HarperCollins, 2015, p. 108. Quoted in John Lennox, “2084 – Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Humanity”, Zondervan: Grand Rapids, 2020, p. 147.)
In this view, there is no objective moral code that transcends time and culture. It’s like any other arbitrary rule, like road rules: we make them up to give order to our societies.
2) But if we make up morality, how can we say one view of morality is ‘better’ than any other?
This raises an urgent question for the future of A.I. ethics: if morality is purely subjective, how can we determine whether one view of morality is superior to another? In his book 2084 – Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Humanity (Zondervan: Grand Rapids, 2020, p. 147) Oxford mathematician and author John Lennox points out the disturbing implications of this view:
“However, if morality, if our ideas of right and wrong, are purely subjective, we should have to abandon any idea of moral progress (or regress), not only in the history of nations, but in the lifetime of each individual. The very concept of moral progress implies an external moral standard by which not only to measure that a present moral state is different from an earlier one, but also to pronounce that it is ‘better’ than the earlier one.”
He continues:
“Without such a standard, how could one say that the moral state of a culture in which cannibalism is regarded as an abhorrent crime is any ‘better’ than a society in which it is an acceptable culinary practice?”
And this view will impact A.I. design:
3) This will have real implications for ethical A.I.: What does ethical A.I. look like if ethics are purely subjective?
If morality is purely subjective, how do we decide what is right and wrong? Without an objective framework, what moral principles will A.I. have, whether autonomous weapons or autonomous cars?
Companies will likely make these decisions in the short term (hello, Facebook!). And sadly, such companies are often driven by the almighty dollar rather than by Almighty God. After all, if ethics is just made up, who’s to say that loving money is any worse than loving your neighbour?
However, as the government starts regulating A.I., the question of morality becomes even more crucial. Regulation is expected to grow, and at that point, we citizens get a direct say in the ethics that guides the development of these technologies.
We must recognise the need for an objective moral framework to evaluate and compare different ethical perspectives. Doing so can pave the way for a future where A.I. systems are efficient, innovative, compassionate, and ethical.
___
Originally published at AkosBalogh.com. Photo by Kindel Media.
One Comment
Leave A Comment
Recent Articles:
2 November 2026
1.6 MINS
If “love is love”, as we were told during the same-sex marriage campaign, then why would a paedophile's attraction towards children be any different? That’s where the Albanese Government has come to, and it’s pure evil.
2 November 2026
7.1 MINS
Too many conservative students, too many Christians, too many Australians are oppressed by the leftist monoculture on university campuses. I could have walked away quietly — but here's why I couldn't do that.
2 November 2026
6 MINS
Sometimes Christians ignore elections and who to vote for, because there are no perfect candidates. But this thinking is unrealistic. When we avoid voting for the lesser of two evils, it only helps elect the greater of two evils.
2 November 2026
5.4 MINS
An Aboriginal elder in Western Australia has called for abused children to be taken away from “bad parents”, asking why responses of neglect and abuse of children differ across Australia. There is no place for a “hands-off culture” when children’s lives are at stake.
31 October 2026
3.8 MINS
Awakening begins when we remember the love that awakened our hearts in the first place.
30 October 2026
4.5 MINS
A Tasmanian Christian reflects on 42 years of faith, warning that proposed conversion practices laws could threaten prayer, parenting and religious freedom, while reaffirming his hope in Christ.
30 October 2026
3.7 MINS
Christian leaders who deny the persecution of their own communities can obscure the truth, distort Western perceptions of Islam and leave vulnerable believers without a voice.






Akos, thank you for cutting across the algorithm and bringing us this piece that was not part of our ‘feed’ today. You seem to imply that AI is a given, it has to come, it will come. And our job is to be awake and make sure we have a say in ‘how’ it comes.
I pray that this will not be the story of AI. I pray it will find a way to ‘self destruct’ when ‘it’ realizes what it has made for itself. I pray that AI will be atop of the modern day Babel, and come crashing down to earth very soon. Call me a Luddite, I don’t mind.