But humans in order to do that often construct and reason within systems that don't include ethics in their optimization criteria.

How can something not include "ethics" in its "optimization criteria"? Do you just mean that you're looking at a being with a utility function that does not include the putative human universals?

ETA: Confusion notwithstanding, I generally agree with the parent.

EDIT: (responding to edits)

This however seems to lead towards a generalize argument against all rationality and sharing of knowledge, because all of it involves "morally constrained" agents potentially sharing the fruits of their cognitive work with less constrained agents who then out compete them in the struggle to order the universe into certain states.

I actually wasn't thinking anything along those lines.

people are generally biased against stabbing 10 people and similar unpleasant courses of action

Sure, but people do unhealthy / bad things all the time, and are biased in favor of many of them. I'm not supposing that someone might "use our power for evil" or something like that. Rather, I think we should include our best information.

A discussion of how best to ingest antifreeze should not go by without someone mentioning that it's terribly unhealthy to ingest antifreeze, in case a reader didn't know that. Antifreeze is very tasty and very deadly, and children will drink a whole bottle if they don't know any better.