I think a case should be made for important intersections with the various cause areas before CEA commits to pushing potentially distracting discussion onto others, and I don’t think CEA is the right organization to do this research, because they don’t focus on research. I think Open Phil and/or Rethink Priorities (maybe others, too) could do this kind of research, because they research AI safety as well as global health and development and animal welfare.
More research would definitely be useful to help us make these decisions and I suppose it would be hard to run such a course without high quality content to include in it. So it might be better to focus on the other ideas for now.
One point I want to raise though: some of these discussions seem like discussions that should be happening in EA anyway and I don’t think we should only start having these discussions once we have all of the answers.
It’s also less of a commitment if CEA were only to adopt it as the first “yearly theme”.
Rather than a course, a single (maybe optional) meeting in a standard EA course seems like it would make more sense to me at this point. Group discussion events or talks at EAG(x) could also make sense.
I’d probably lean towards suggesting that CEA leaves the standard EA course as is and just organising some talks/discussion online or at EAGs or creates some materials for local EA groups to potentially run such a discussion themselves.
I think a case should be made for important intersections with the various cause areas before CEA commits to pushing potentially distracting discussion onto others, and I don’t think CEA is the right organization to do this research, because they don’t focus on research. I think Open Phil and/or Rethink Priorities (maybe others, too) could do this kind of research, because they research AI safety as well as global health and development and animal welfare.
More research would definitely be useful to help us make these decisions and I suppose it would be hard to run such a course without high quality content to include in it. So it might be better to focus on the other ideas for now.
One point I want to raise though: some of these discussions seem like discussions that should be happening in EA anyway and I don’t think we should only start having these discussions once we have all of the answers.
It’s also less of a commitment if CEA were only to adopt it as the first “yearly theme”.
Rather than a course, a single (maybe optional) meeting in a standard EA course seems like it would make more sense to me at this point. Group discussion events or talks at EAG(x) could also make sense.
I’d probably lean towards suggesting that CEA leaves the standard EA course as is and just organising some talks/discussion online or at EAGs or creates some materials for local EA groups to potentially run such a discussion themselves.