Denise_Melchin comments on Why I am probably not a longtermist

[Denise_Melchin]

Thanks for trying to summarise my views! This is helpful for me to see where I got the communication right and where I did not. I’ll edit your summary accordingly where you are off:

1. You have person-affecting tendencies which make you unconcerned less concerned with reducing extinction risks than longtermists, although you are still concerned about the nearterm impacts and put at least some value on the loss of future generations (which also depends on how long/​big we can expect the future to be)

2. You are suffering-focused [Edit: I would not have previously described my views that way, but I guess it is an accurate enough description]

3. You don’t think humanity is very good now nor that it is likely to be in the future under a sort of ‘business as usual’ path, which makes you unenthusiastic want to prioritise about making the future good over making it long or big

4. You don’t think the future will be long (unless we have totalitarianism) which reduces the scope for doing good by focusing on the future

5. You’re sceptical clueless whether there are lock-in scenarios we can affect within the next few decades, and don’t think there is much point of trying to affect them beyond this time horizon

[JackM]

Thanks for that. To be honest I would say the inaccuracies I made are down to sloppiness by me rather than by you not being clear in your communication. Having said that none of your corrections change my view on anything else I said in my original comment.