The Alignment Discourse and the Locus of Responsibility

Contemporary discussions of AI alignment frequently employ normative language that attributes to technical systems properties commonly associated with moral agency, such as values, intentions, or goals. This paper argues that such usage, in some cases, involves a misattribution of moral agency and a corresponding mislocation of responsibility. By treating systems as the primary bearers of normative obligations, parts of the alignment discourse risk obscuring the human and institutional responsibility involved in the design, deployment, and use of these artifacts. The paper offers a strictly conceptual clarification: it outlines minimal criteria for moral agency,distinguishes instruments, systems, and agents, and examines how a shift from functional to moral vocabulary contributes to a displacement of responsibility. The central claim is modest: clarifying the locus of responsibility improves the coherence of ethical discussions surrounding accountability, governance, and responsible use of AI systems.