Temporal authorship as a moral right: bounded inquiry in persistent AI delegation

Existing AI ethics frameworks—focused on fairness, privacy, and accountability—do not currently provide an adequate conceptual vocabulary for the moral harm of temporal domination: the institutional foreclosure of a person’s future self by treating past algorithmic classifications as permanently authoritative. This article articulates and defends a moral right to temporal authorship, defined as the capacity to escape how one has been classified and author one’s own future. We ground this right in a diachronic conception of personhood, distinguish it from existing concepts of autonomy and epistemic injustice, and derive from it four institutional duties—intelligibility, justification, contestability, and temporal exit—that serve as necessary conditions for the morally permissible delegation of persistent, life-consequence classifications to AI systems. We demonstrate the novelty and plausibility of this framework through a comparative analysis with existing approaches and through case studies of real-world AI systems, including the Dutch childcare benefits scandal (SyRI) and recidivism risk assessment in the U.S. criminal justice system. The article concludes by outlining the governance implications of temporal authorship, including the need for temporal audits and expiration triggers for algorithmic classifications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI and Ethics
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-026-01093-4
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Temporal authorship as a moral right: bounded inquiry in persistent AI delegation

Ghassan Abukar
AI and Ethics
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Temporal authorship as a moral right: bounded inquiry in persistent AI delegation

Ghassan Abukar
article en

Abstract

Existing AI ethics frameworks—focused on fairness, privacy, and accountability—do not currently provide an adequate conceptual vocabulary for the moral harm of temporal domination: the institutional foreclosure of a person’s future self by treating past algorithmic classifications as permanently authoritative. This article articulates and defends a moral right to temporal authorship, defined as the capacity to escape how one has been classified and author one’s own future. We ground this right in a diachronic conception of personhood, distinguish it from existing concepts of autonomy and epistemic injustice, and derive from it four institutional duties—intelligibility, justification, contestability, and temporal exit—that serve as necessary conditions for the morally permissible delegation of persistent, life-consequence classifications to AI systems. We demonstrate the novelty and plausibility of this framework through a comparative analysis with existing approaches and through case studies of real-world AI systems, including the Dutch childcare benefits scandal (SyRI) and recidivism risk assessment in the U.S. criminal justice system. The article concludes by outlining the governance implications of temporal authorship, including the need for temporal audits and expiration triggers for algorithmic classifications.

AI and EthicsVol. 6(2)
Kent State University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Temporal authorship as a moral right: bounded inquiry in persistent AI delegation — Ghassan Abukar · AI and Ethics (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS