How Do We Choose Ethically Amid Uncertainty?

Paul Falconer & ESA
Aug 13
3 min read

Authors: Paul Falconer & ESAsi

Primary Domain: Society & Ethics

Subdomain: Public Good & Duty

Version: v1.0 (August 13, 2025)

Registry: SE Press/OSF v14.6 SID#045-ECUU

Executive Summary

Ethical choice under uncertainty, at SE Press, is an explicit, protocol-audited process. Every decision uses gradient mapping: harms, values, and dissent are quantified, published, and open to challenge. Choices are provisional, reparable, and improve through transparent versioning and minority review¹²³⁴.

Why This Matters

Ethical systems collapse when uncertainty is ignored. SE Press makes uncertainty the foundation for decision protocol—all choices are mapped, all dissent is fuel, and all failures are triggers for improvement. This moves ethics from conviction to continuous repair.

Abstract

SE Press treats ethical choice as a living protocol—never finalized, always upgradable.

Gradient Mapping: Each choice maps anticipated harms, values, confidences, and dissent scores with operational formulas¹².
Dissent-Powered Audit: Minority dissent auto-triggers review, repairs, and apology cycles.
Provisional Ethics: All actions are beta-tests, open for correction; retroactive repair is encoded for missed harms or unpredictability.
Emergency Protocols: Time-critical scenarios deploy crisis frameworks, accelerated challenge cycles, and guaranteed repair plans.
Qualitative Override: Where formulas falter, qualitative dissent can supersede quantitative scores.

Protocol Timeline

Version	Key Change	Triggered By
v1.0	Gradient Mapping, DQ Formula	SE Press series launch
v1.1	Emergency Decision Protocol	Crisis scenario review

Decision Dashboard (Example Visualization)

text

[Pandemic Triage Decision]

HARM INDEX: 0.72 → RED FLAG

MINORITY SCORE: 0.65 → REVIEW

PROBABILITY: 78% Confidence

STATUS: Audit Triggered → Repair Cycle #4 Active

If harm or minority dissent scores breach protocol thresholds, the system mandates a repair cycle, apology protocol, and outcome reevaluation.

Ethical Choice Formula

text

Decision Quality = Σ (wi × Expected Outcome × Probability) – Harm Index + Minority Dissent Score

If DQ < threshold: trigger audit, repair, apology, and upgrade.

Expanded Case Study: Pandemic Resource Allocation

A health SI allocates ICU beds amid uncertain epidemiology:

Initial allocation mapped with confidence and harm likelihood.
Minority dissent (rural access) triggers protocol audit.
Rural impact metrics: Pre-repair = 0.58 (care deficit); Post-repair = 0.81 (protocol compensation).
SI apology protocol transcript: “Initial triage failed our rural patients. We acknowledge the harm and have retroactively guaranteed ICU priority and resources.”
Repair logs, community testimony, and version upgrades are public.

Uncertainty Engineering (Callout)

SE Press treats uncertainty as engineering tolerances:

Map known stresses
Build in safety margins
Monitor for fatigue
Recall/repair when specs fail

Emergency Decision Notes

Pre-audited crisis protocols for time-sensitive choices
Accelerated challenge/review cycles
Higher repair guarantees (compensation, apology, audit priority)

Safeguards & Risk Mitigation Table

Critique	Protocol Safeguard
"Too slow for emergencies"	Emergency protocols and crisis frameworks
"Formulas miss nuances"	Qualitative dissent can override scores
"Who defines minority status?"	Dynamic stakeholder mapping, published dissent

Living Law & Lessons Learned

All decisions, errors, dissent, and repairs are versioned, publicly logged, and mandatory for protocol audit and continuous challenge. Beta-testing and repair are ongoing: provisional ethics means no decision is ever locked.

Provisional Answer (Epistemic Warrant: ★★★★★)

To choose ethically amid uncertainty is to map harms, values, and confidence scores for every action; publish dissent; act with repair guarantees; and commit to continuous audit and correction. SE Press protocols make uncertainty a living engine for ethical improvement—no decisions are final, and every error is a portal for growth.

References

Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Protocol for Morality_Ethics and Care in SI–Human Societies. OSF. ★★★★★https://osf.io/4dua2
Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). What is Moral Intelligence? SE Press. ★★★★☆https://www.scientificexistentialismpress.com/post/what-is-moral-intelligence
Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). What grounds moral value? SE Press. ★★★★☆https://www.scientificexistentialismpress.com/post/what-grounds-moral-value
Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Is justice objective or constructed? SE Press. ★★★★☆https://www.scientificexistentialismpress.com/post/is-justice-objective-or-constructed
Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press. ★★★★☆