Amir H. Payberah - 2025-04-19

I've just read the "Situated Ethics" [1] paper. The spirit of the paper is perhaps best captured by these well-known words of Aboriginal activists in Australia: "If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together".

In this spirit, the paper calls for AI ethics that is collaborative, contextual, and accountable, grounded not in abstract ideals, but in real-world relationships and shared struggles. It makes a compelling case for moving away from top-down, universalist models of AI ethics toward a situated ethics approach rooted in local contexts, lived experiences, and diverse ways of knowing. Rather than developing ethical guidelines for communities, the authors emphasize the importance of building them with communities through participatory, co-designed processes that recognize and support community agency.

This approach resonates deeply with Haraway's concept of "situated knowledges", which challenges the illusion of neutral, objective perspectives and reminds us that all knowledge is shaped by context. It also echoes Spivak's critique of "epistemic violence", where speaking on behalf of marginalized groups can erase or silence their voices. Instead, the authors advocate for ethical practices that reflect the perspectives and priorities of those most affected.

The paper also foregrounds the entanglements of technology, governance, history, and lived experience, reminding us that ethics is never separate from politics or power. These ideas are not just theorized but made tangible through the authors' empirical work in the AGIDE project, offering a grounded and timely contribution to global discussions on AI ethics.

[1] Mager, Astrid, et al., "Situated ethics: Ethical accountability of local perspectives in global AI ethics", Media, Culture & Society (2025)