If you define cost-effectiveness as something close to āwhatās best in expectation according to my specific favorite among all the plausible ways of comparing welfare across individualsā, I agree.
Yes, that is how I was thinking about it, with the caveat that the specific favourite would involve weighting many ways of comparing welfare by their plausibility, at least implicitly.
I saw you already discussed this and adjacent cruxes with them. I might write something relevant to this (precise vs imprecise beliefs, etc.) in the very context of moral weights at some point. Iāll reach back to you then, and maybe weāll be able to hit finer-grained cruxes and advance this discussion. :)
I [Jim] think maybe we should be more uncertain about inter-species tradeoffs than you seem to be, here.
I agree I have underestimated the uncertainty in comparisons between the individual (expectedhedonistic) welfare per unit time of different species. I now recommend decreasing this uncertainty.
Yes, that is how I was thinking about it, with the caveat that the specific favourite would involve weighting many ways of comparing welfare by their plausibility, at least implicitly.
Thanks for letting me know!
I agree I have underestimated the uncertainty in comparisons between the individual (expected hedonistic) welfare per unit time of different species. I now recommend decreasing this uncertainty.
Interesting, thanks for the update!