While it is true that the multi-stage fallacy can lead to an argument effectively having a probability of 1 in 2^n, this does not necessarily mean that Carlsmith’s report is an exercise in deploying this fallacy. The report provides a detailed discussion of the current state of AI technologies and their potential implications for our future, as well as arguments for why they may or may not constitute an existential risk. It is possible to analyze the arguments presented in the report without utilizing multi-stage-type probabilistic reasoning. Furthermore, the report does not necessarily draw any definitive conclusions about the potential of AI technologies to pose an existential risk.
Rather than arguing that Carlsmith’s report is an exercise in deploying the multi-stage fallacy, it would be more accurate to say that the author of the post is concerned about the potential for multi-stage-type probabilistic reasoning to be used when considering the risks posed by AI technologies. This is a valid concern, as it is important to be aware of any potential biases or logical fallacies that could lead to inaccurate conclusions being drawn. However, it is important to note that multi-stage-type probabilistic reasoning is not the only tool available for assessing the risk of AI technologies, and it is possible to draw valid conclusions without relying on it.
While it is true that the multi-stage fallacy can lead to an argument effectively having a probability of 1 in 2^n, this does not necessarily mean that Carlsmith’s report is an exercise in deploying this fallacy. The report provides a detailed discussion of the current state of AI technologies and their potential implications for our future, as well as arguments for why they may or may not constitute an existential risk. It is possible to analyze the arguments presented in the report without utilizing multi-stage-type probabilistic reasoning. Furthermore, the report does not necessarily draw any definitive conclusions about the potential of AI technologies to pose an existential risk.
Rather than arguing that Carlsmith’s report is an exercise in deploying the multi-stage fallacy, it would be more accurate to say that the author of the post is concerned about the potential for multi-stage-type probabilistic reasoning to be used when considering the risks posed by AI technologies. This is a valid concern, as it is important to be aware of any potential biases or logical fallacies that could lead to inaccurate conclusions being drawn. However, it is important to note that multi-stage-type probabilistic reasoning is not the only tool available for assessing the risk of AI technologies, and it is possible to draw valid conclusions without relying on it.