when you do come into a debate with people who hold these views. The fact that you’ve considered the question beforehand, imagined some answers and actively extended your imagination to consider how the person your debating may think, should make the debate more constructive.
It seems potentially counter productive to assume you have already thought about the other person’s view point
When I have these conversations, they are not at all in the format of [this is the opinion of the other person --> here’s my pitch]
The format is “debugging the other person”
As a naive example, for the person based on evidence based intervention, I may ask:
If an astroid was heading to earth and we estimate a 70% probability it would hit (but not certain), would you want to do something about it?
How about 1%?
Ah ok, so the question is if AGI has over 1%?
Ok, good questions, how do we get our priors for this at all? tough one, do you have ideas?
Part of my concern from reading this post is
It seems potentially counter productive to assume you have already thought about the other person’s view point