12.4 Ethical Synergy 213 good” dichotomous decision making, but also the ability to develop moral decision networks which do not require that all situations be solved through resolution of a dichotomy. When more than one person is being affected by an ethical decision, making a decision based on reducing two choices to a single decision can often lead to decisions of dubious ethics. How- ever, a sufficiently complex uncertain inference network can represent alternate choices in which multiple actions are taken that have equal (or near equal) belief weight but have very different particulars — but because the decisions are applied in different contexts (to different groups of individuals) they are morally equivalent. Though each individual action appears equally be- lievable, were any single decision applied to the entire population one or more individual may be harmed, and the morally superior choice is to make case-dependent decisions. Equal moral treatment is a general principle, and too often the mistake is made by thinking that to achieve this general principle the particulars must be equal. This is not the case. Different treatment of different individuals can result in morally equivalent treatment of all involved individuals, and may be vastly morally superior to treating all the individuals with equal particulars. Simply taking the largest population and deciding one course of action based on the result that is most appealing to that largest group is not generally the most moral action. Uncertain inference, especially a complex network with high levels of resource access as may be found in a sophisticated AGI, is well suited for complex decision making resulting in a multitude of actions, and of analyzing the options to find the set of actions that are ethically optimal particulars for each decision context. Reflexive cognition and post-commitment moral understanding may be the goal stages of an AGI system, or any intelligence, but the other stages will be