Throughout the history of moral philosophy, the theoretical postures have been privileged. Modern ethics is no exception and is indeed characterized by the predominance of voluntarist and universalist frameworks (Maesschalck, 2010), which are primarily concerned with the actions of the moral agent, with no real regard for the conditions of possibility necessary for the effective realization of moral actions (Fletcher, 1966). Recent developments in applied ethics, such as biomedical ethics, environmental ethics, or business ethics, have shown that an integral application of classical ethical frameworks does not adequately and satisfactorily address the new moral dilemmas emerging from our different spheres of activity (van den Hoven, 2017). Artificial intelligence (AI) ethics, which is now a as a full-fledged field of applied ethics, is once again demonstrating the inadequacy of traditional ethical frameworks to deal with the many ethical issues related to the growing presence of AI systems in most of our spheres of activity. Indeed, the three dominant theories in ethics, namely deontologism, consequentialism and virtue ethics, being agent-oriented frameworks, fail to take account of the shared responsibility that characterizes the moral obligations we have toward the design, development, and use of AI systems. The particularity of pragmatist ethics, as developed by John Dewey in the wake of the work of Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is that it is a “discourse of effectuation” (Maesschalck, 2010), which aims at a practical intervention without however renouncing the conceptual clarifications necessary for such an intervention. The objective of our presentation will be to demonstrate how the characteristics of pragmatist ethics (Keulartz, et al., 2002), a discourse that is situated between knowledge and action, allows it to avoid certain pitfalls in AI ethics and provides a conceptual framework that is particularly well suited to address the pressing ethical issues related the increasing use of AI systems in our informational societies.