Hi Freek, thanks for your comment and reading recommendation. I will look into it. I’m not sure I understand what you mean by ‘what sensory experience would convince me that my current...effort’ .
Maybe I’m trying to say something along the lines of ‘because human experience is complex, often the ethics of compassion can be better captured by literature for instnace rather than by numerical economics. We understand deeply the ethics and compassion behind Dickens’ A Christmas Carol’ in a way that we might not if the approach to helping people is more rationalistic. After all, Victorian ethical rationalism brought us the poor house, which wasn’t much good, at least if one takes Dickens and others descriptions of them at face value....
What I mean by the question is: you currently seem convinced that your current intervention, the 240project, is the best use of your time and effort.
Is there any evidence that would convince you that you would do better to do something else or is that impossible? Is this a matter of faith or are you willing to update your beliefs with evidence or arguments? If so, what could you imagine that would change your mind?
I don’t know what you mean by the Victorian rationalist stuff. Is it just a feeling of aversion to rational arguments when they feel opposed to compassion or do you think EA might be making a similar mistake? How would we avoid doing that?
I found this article on caring and multiplying this morning and I think it is a nice addition to what Isaac Dunn has been saying here. It shows how to use feelings and where they fail.
Hi Freek, thanks for your comment and reading recommendation. I will look into it. I’m not sure I understand what you mean by ‘what sensory experience would convince me that my current...effort’ .
Maybe I’m trying to say something along the lines of ‘because human experience is complex, often the ethics of compassion can be better captured by literature for instnace rather than by numerical economics. We understand deeply the ethics and compassion behind Dickens’ A Christmas Carol’ in a way that we might not if the approach to helping people is more rationalistic. After all, Victorian ethical rationalism brought us the poor house, which wasn’t much good, at least if one takes Dickens and others descriptions of them at face value....
What I mean by the question is: you currently seem convinced that your current intervention, the 240project, is the best use of your time and effort. Is there any evidence that would convince you that you would do better to do something else or is that impossible? Is this a matter of faith or are you willing to update your beliefs with evidence or arguments? If so, what could you imagine that would change your mind?
I don’t know what you mean by the Victorian rationalist stuff. Is it just a feeling of aversion to rational arguments when they feel opposed to compassion or do you think EA might be making a similar mistake? How would we avoid doing that?
I found this article on caring and multiplying this morning and I think it is a nice addition to what Isaac Dunn has been saying here. It shows how to use feelings and where they fail.