Abstract

The three main kinds of theory in normative ethics, namely, consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, are often presented as the ‘palette’ from which we may choose, or use as a starting point for an investigation. However, this way of doing ethics and philosophy, by the palette, may be leading some of us astray. It has led some to believe that all that there is to ethics, and to ethics of AI, is given in terms of these already devised petrified categories of theory. It has also led others to abandon normative ethics and philosophy altogether and to resort to descriptive methods that are then used to justify action. I wish to argue that (1) we should not abandon traditional philosophical approaches, but (2a) this does not entail that the petrified palette should constitute the beginning of our philosophical investigations. Further, (2b) I recommend a non-methodological approach in which it is instead radical questions that spur these investigations, which arise through consideration of the practical actions (potential or otherwise) of machines and their programmers.