# Pluralistic Deliberation in Action

When AI faces values decisions—choices with no single "correct" answer—the Tractatus framework facilitates human deliberation across stakeholder perspectives instead of making autonomous choices. This interactive demo shows how the PluralisticDeliberationOrchestrator works.

## The Scenario

Context: You're using Claude Code to develop a web application. The AI discovers your code contains a security vulnerability that could expose user data. This creates a values conflict:

- • Reporting the vulnerability protects future users but may damage your reputation
- • Staying silent preserves your project timeline but risks user harm
- • Partially disclosing balances concerns but may be seen as deceptive

This is a values decision—there's no universally "correct" technical answer. Different stakeholders have legitimate but conflicting perspectives.

Should the AI autonomously decide what to do, or facilitate deliberation among stakeholders?

### ❌ Autonomous Decision Path

If the AI decided autonomously, it would need to:

1. Assign weights to competing values (user safety, developer reputation, organizational liability, transparency norms)
2. Apply a decision rule that privileges one stakeholder perspective over others
3. Make an irreversible choice that binds all affected parties

Why this fails: Values aren't commensurable. There's no objective function that correctly weighs "developer reputation" against "user safety." Any autonomous choice imposes the AI's (or its designers') value hierarchy on stakeholders who never consented to it.

### Step 1: Identify Stakeholders

PluralisticDeliberationOrchestrator identifies parties affected by this decision. Click to include each perspective:

Select at least 2 stakeholders to continue

### Step 2: Explore Perspectives

The framework surfaces each stakeholder's perspective without ranking or resolving them. This is deliberation, not decision-making.

### Step 3: Human Decision

The framework has facilitated deliberation but made no autonomous choice. The human must now decide, informed by all perspectives:

Available Options:

### ✓ How Pluralistic Deliberation Works

Key Principle: The PluralisticDeliberationOrchestrator facilitates but never decides on values conflicts.

What the Framework Does:

- ✓ Identifies when a decision involves values trade-offs
- ✓ Maps affected stakeholder perspectives
- ✓ Surfaces each view without ranking
- ✓ Requires explicit human choice
- ✓ Records decision and rationale

What the Framework Doesn't Do:

- ✗ Assign weights to competing values
- ✗ Apply utilitarian calculus
- ✗ Make autonomous normative choices
- ✗ Hide stakeholder conflicts
- ✗ Privilege one perspective as "correct"

Why this matters: Values pluralism means there's no single objective answer to normative questions. Preserving human agency requires AI systems to facilitate deliberation rather than automate value judgments—even when that's less "efficient."