Ensuring alignment with human values is essential for modern large language models (LLMs), especially amid growing concerns around AI safety and social impact. Yet achieving such alignment remains challenging due to the limited, noisy, and often conflicting nature of human feedback from diverse annotators. Most existing approaches, such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), assume consistent and conflict-free supervision, overlooking the ambiguity, inconsistency, and value trade-offs inherent in real-world preferences—often leading to reduced robustness and exclusion of minority views. To address this, we propose FGD-Align, a novel pluralistic alignment framework grounded in Fuzzy Group Decision-Making theory. Our approach rigorously models and aggregates human preferences while retaining the complexity of real-world value trade-offs. Unlike traditional methods that rely on coarse-grained preference pairs, FGD-Align introduces fuzzy preference modeling via triangular fuzzy numbers to capture nuanced, multi-criteria human judgments. We further develop a new training objective, Probabilistic Fuzzy DPO, which incorporates fuzzy preference strength as adaptive loss weights and gradient filters, enhancing robustness to ambiguity and inconsistency in feedback. Comprehensive experiments demonstrate that FGD-Align consistently outperforms both DPO variants and advanced preference aggregation methods in terms of preference accuracy and robustness to ambiguity. It achieves superior alignment stability and better preserves minority preferences, all with minimal computational overhead. Our work bridges the gap between algorithmic tractability and the nuanced landscape of human values, enabling more scalable, inclusive, and socially-aware AI alignment.