I agree that there’s a tension in how we’re talking about it. I think that Greaves+MacAskill are talking about how an ideal rational actor should behave—which I think is informative but not something to be directly emulated for boundedly rational actors.
Ah yes thank you Owen. That helps me construct a sensible positive charitable reading of their paper.
There is of course a risk that people take their paper / views of longtermism and expected value approach to be more decision guiding than perhaps they ought.
(I think it might be an overly charitable reading – the paper does briefly mention and then dismiss concerns about decision making under uncertainty, etc – although it is only a draft so reasonable to be charitable.)
I agree that there’s a tension in how we’re talking about it. I think that Greaves+MacAskill are talking about how an ideal rational actor should behave—which I think is informative but not something to be directly emulated for boundedly rational actors.
Ah yes thank you Owen. That helps me construct a sensible positive charitable reading of their paper.
There is of course a risk that people take their paper / views of longtermism and expected value approach to be more decision guiding than perhaps they ought.
(I think it might be an overly charitable reading – the paper does briefly mention and then dismiss concerns about decision making under uncertainty, etc – although it is only a draft so reasonable to be charitable.)