We all know about the INT (intensity, neglected-ness, tractability) framework. However, I’ve found myself having to compare problems who are very large in scale (like long-term S-risks) and seem urgent (must be solved in this century, otherwise they would create large-scale suffering that is almost impossible to revert), versus problems who could be even more important in terms of scale (even infinite, according to the theory of infinite ethics) and are very neglected but they don’t need to be tackled this century. The INT framework helps with scale and neglected-ness, but how to consider urgency in that case?
[Question] How to factor urgency when comparing problems?
We all know about the INT (intensity, neglected-ness, tractability) framework. However, I’ve found myself having to compare problems who are very large in scale (like long-term S-risks) and seem urgent (must be solved in this century, otherwise they would create large-scale suffering that is almost impossible to revert), versus problems who could be even more important in terms of scale (even infinite, according to the theory of infinite ethics) and are very neglected but they don’t need to be tackled this century. The INT framework helps with scale and neglected-ness, but how to consider urgency in that case?