They definitely do not consider people who work in other cause areas less smart or quantitative. They are passionate about their cause so these conversations come up, but the conversations are very respectful and display deep open-mindedness.
I think this is an empirical question, and likely varies between communities, so “definitely do not...” seems too strong. For example, here’s Gregory Lewis, a fairly senior and well-respected EA, commenting on different cause areas (emphasis added):
Yet I think I’d be surprised if it wasn’t the case that among those working ‘in’ EA, the majority work on the far future, and a plurality work on AI. It also agrees with my impression that the most involved in the EA community strongly skew towards the far future cause area in general and AI in particular. I think they do so, bluntly, because these people have better access to the balance of reason, which in fact favours these being the most important things to work on.
I wouldn’t be surprised if other people shared this view.
Thanks for sharing! Yeah I meant that only to refer to the people I know well enough to know their opinions and the general vibe I’ve gotten in the biggest EA AI safety hub. Mine is just anecdotal evidence and leaves a lot of room for other perspectives. Sorry I didn’t say that well enough.
I think this is an empirical question, and likely varies between communities, so “definitely do not...” seems too strong. For example, here’s Gregory Lewis, a fairly senior and well-respected EA, commenting on different cause areas (emphasis added):
I wouldn’t be surprised if other people shared this view.
Thanks for sharing! Yeah I meant that only to refer to the people I know well enough to know their opinions and the general vibe I’ve gotten in the biggest EA AI safety hub. Mine is just anecdotal evidence and leaves a lot of room for other perspectives. Sorry I didn’t say that well enough.
Oh I see! My mistake, I misunderstood what you were referring to, thanks for clarifying!