Rethinking the Ethics of GenAI in Higher Education: A Critique of Moral Arguments and Policy Implications.
This article critically examines the moral arguments for restrictive policies regarding student use of generative AI in higher education. While existing literature addresses various concerns about AI in education, there has been limited rigorous ethical analysis of arguments for restricting its use....
| Published in: | Journal of Applied Philosophy Vol. 42; no. 4; pp. 1317 - 1338 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Aug2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=187574587&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 187574587 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 02643758 BQ0 jtl: Journal of Applied Philosophy issn: 02643758 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Aug2025 vid: 42 iid: 4 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 187574587 10.1111/japp.70026 ppf: 1317 ppct: 21 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 338KB tig: atl: Rethinking the Ethics of GenAI in Higher Education: A Critique of Moral Arguments and Policy Implications. aug: au: de Fine Licht, Karl affil: Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden su: Generative artificial intelligence Higher education Moral reasoning Ethics Privacy Participation Environmental degradation Ethical problems sug: subj: Generative artificial intelligence Higher education Moral reasoning Ethics Privacy Participation Environmental degradation Ethical problems ab: This article critically examines the moral arguments for restrictive policies regarding student use of generative AI in higher education. While existing literature addresses various concerns about AI in education, there has been limited rigorous ethical analysis of arguments for restricting its use. This article analyzes two main types of moral arguments: those based on direct difference‐making (where individual university actions have measurable impacts) and those centered on non‐difference‐making participation (where symbolic participation in harmful systems matters regardless of direct impact). Key concerns examined include environmental harm from AI energy consumption, exploitative labor practices in AI development, and privacy risks. Through careful analysis, the article argues that these arguments face significant challenges when examined in depth. The difference‐making arguments often fail to establish that individual university actions meaningfully contribute to claimed harms, while the non‐difference‐making arguments lead to impractical conclusions when applied consistently across university operations. Rather than supporting blanket restrictions, the analysis suggests universities should focus on fostering responsible AI engagement through ethical guidelines, licensed tools, and education on responsible use. The article concludes that a balanced approach considering both moral and practical factors is more effective than restrictive policies in addressing ethical concerns while preserving educational benefits. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Journal of Applied Philosophy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Journal of Applied Philosophy holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2025 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|