AI & The Moral Foundation of Society

Simulate how AI-driven wealth concentration affects the philosophical justifications for inequality. Watch the tension between Rawls's social contract and Nozick's self-ownership as AI transforms labor into capital.

AI Development

10%/year
5%/year
60%

Policy Intervention

Population Settings

0.35
25%

Wealth Distribution Over Time

2024
Year
0.35
Gini Index
20%
Top 1% Share
85%
Meritocracy Belief
Window for Institutional Change: OPEN

Rawls: Difference Principle Intact

Inequalities benefit the least advantaged. The social contract remains viable.

Nozick: Self-Ownership Intact

Voluntary exchanges respected. People own the fruits of their labor.

Folk Meritocracy Intact

Hard work and talent lead to success. The American Dream narrative holds.

System Legitimacy Stable

People accept inequality as fair. Social cohesion maintained.

Gini Coefficient Over Time

The Philosophical Stakes

Both Rawls and Nozick agreed that people cannot be mere means to an end. AI challenges this by extracting human creativity as training data without consent (violating Nozick) and concentrating wealth without benefiting the least advantaged (violating Rawls). Run the simulation to see how different scenarios affect these moral foundations.