Modern debates on ethics invariably return to a fundamental question: what determines our ability to make moral choices?

Human Freedom versus Algorithmic Logic

Modern debates on ethics invariably return to a fundamental question: what determines our ability to make moral choices?

Based on a deep analysis of traditional perspectives, the current understanding of ethics is firmly linked to the unique freedom of the individual and his spiritual values. This view asserts that a genuine moral choice only emerges when a person can independently assess life situations, relying on a profound sense of inner freedom rather than solely on external norms or predetermined algorithms.

Unlike human beings, computers, even with modern computational power, operate exclusively within the framework of predefined logic and rules. Technologies can analyze and support decision-making, but they cannot achieve the fullness of spirit that enables a person to perform a truly free moral act. Thus, despite their efficiency in solving practical problems, technologies are incapable of replacing the inner uniqueness that underpins ethical decisions.

In summary, it is worth noting that the ability to make moral choices is not merely a result of processing information or executing algorithmic instructions, but rather a reflection of deeply personal experience, spiritual freedom, and a conscious attitude toward life. It is precisely these qualities that make humans the sole bearers of true ethics, which cannot be mechanically reproduced in the world of technology.
Can computers make ethical decisions, or is this ability unique to humans?
Based on the sources presented, traditional understanding of ethics is associated with human freedom and spiritual values that underpin the ability for independent moral assessment. For example, one excerpt emphasizes:
"Ethics encompasses everything related to human freedom, i.e., the differentiation and evaluation produced by freedom. A free moral act can be performed not only in relation to what is called moral life, but also in relation to the entirety of human life. The moral act, which is performed in relation to the entire life and all its values, relates to the fullness of a person’s spiritual life. Ethics is the cognition of the spirit, not the cognition of nature; it is concerned only with what is related to spiritual freedom, and not with natural necessity. Moreover, the ways of knowing the spiritual world are different from the ways of knowing the natural world." (source: link txt)

This demonstrates that the ability to make ethical decisions is largely determined by the inner freedom and spiritual essence inherent to humans. Computers, despite their high computational capabilities and capacity to process huge amounts of information, are algorithmic systems that operate within predetermined rules. Their actions reflect only programmed logic, not autonomous moral judgment or free moral choice. In other words, although technologies can be used to support or analyze situations where ethical evaluation is necessary, the genuine moral act implied in the source is exclusively characteristic of humans.

Thus, the presented materials confirm that the capacity to make ethical decisions is closely related to the unique human freedom and spiritual life, which cannot be fully transferred to computer systems.

Supporting citation(s):
"Ethics encompasses everything related to human freedom, i.e., the differentiation and evaluation produced by freedom. A free moral act can be performed not only in relation to what is called moral life, but also in relation to the entirety of human life. The moral act, which is performed in relation to the entire life and all its values, relates to the fullness of a person’s spiritual life. Ethics is the cognition of the spirit, not the cognition of nature; it is concerned only with what is related to spiritual freedom, and not with natural necessity. Moreover, the ways of knowing the spiritual world are different from the ways of knowing the natural world." (source: link txt)

"Ethics is the study of universally binding norms of behavior, the study of what is proper, of imperative values. In both ontology and the field of ethics, there is no single consensus among philosophers on the nature of morality, the content of the moral law, or the origin and significance of morality. However, our task is not to provide a history of ethics or a detailed classification of the existing ethical systems. Similarly, our task does not involve a sociological examination of the moral codes of various peoples and cultures. Such research can provide valuable material for constructing ethics, but in themselves, they cannot justify ethics. For history of ethics is not ethics itself." (source: link txt)