Paper Detail

Can Generative AI help people navigate Radical Moral Disagreements? The CONSIDER prototype

William Hohnen-Ford, Sarah Chen, Kathryn B. Francis, Madeline G. Reinecke, Ilina Singh, David Lyreskog

arxiv Score 7.8

Published 2026-05-29 · First seen 2026-06-01

General AI

Abstract

Radical Moral Disagreements (RMDs) are highly polarising topics that are increasingly censored in everyday life, with growing evidence suggesting that this polarisation carries measurable costs to public mental health. To address these challenges, some researchers have proposed Large Language Models (LLMs) as a means to support more democratic deliberation and better moral reasoning. Yet existing tools are poorly calibrated to help people navigate RMDs, because of their intense and divisive characteristics. This paper introduces CONSIDER, a prototype for a one-to-one AI tool for RMD navigation. Drawing on Mill's account of the epistemic value of disagreement, CONSIDER aims at value clarification through structured disagreement with an opposing LLM-generated opinion. We describe CONSIDER's design logic and analyse potential risks posed by such tools to guide future development.

Workflow Status

Review status
pending
Role
unreviewed
Read priority
soon
Vote
Not set.
Saved
no
Collections
Not filed yet.
Next action
Not filled yet.

Reading Brief

No structured notes yet. Add `summary_sections`, `why_relevant`, `claim_impact`, or `next_action` in `papers.jsonl` to enrich this view.

Why It Surfaced

No ranking explanation is available yet.

Tags

No tags.

BibTeX

@article{hohnenford2026can,
  title = {Can Generative AI help people navigate Radical Moral Disagreements? The CONSIDER prototype},
  author = {William Hohnen-Ford and Sarah Chen and Kathryn B. Francis and Madeline G. Reinecke and Ilina Singh and David Lyreskog},
  year = {2026},
  abstract = {Radical Moral Disagreements (RMDs) are highly polarising topics that are increasingly censored in everyday life, with growing evidence suggesting that this polarisation carries measurable costs to public mental health. To address these challenges, some researchers have proposed Large Language Models (LLMs) as a means to support more democratic deliberation and better moral reasoning. Yet existing tools are poorly calibrated to help people navigate RMDs, because of their intense and divisive char},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.31574},
  keywords = {cs.HC},
  eprint = {2605.31574},
  archiveprefix = {arXiv},
}

Metadata

{}