To give a different example (and one we have discussed before), I’m fairly optimistic about the impact of journalistic pieces like this one, and would be very excited if more people were exposed to it. From an in-the-weeds research perspective, this article has a number of problems, but I basically don’t care about them in this context.
Personally, I currently feel unsure whether it’d be very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, or somewhat negative for people to be exposed to that piece or pieces like it. But I think this just pushes in favour of your overall point that “What products and cluster of ideas work as ‘stepping stones’ or ‘gateways’ toward (full-blown) EA [or similarly ‘impactful’ mindsets]?” is a key uncertainty and that more clarity on that would be useful.
(I should also note than in general I think Kelsey’s work has remarkably good quality, especially considering the pace she’s producing things at, and I’m very glad she’s doing the work she’s doing.)
In case any readers are interested, they can see my thoughts on that piece here: Quick thoughts on Kelsey Piper’s article “Is climate change an “existential threat” — or just a catastrophic one?”
Personally, I currently feel unsure whether it’d be very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, or somewhat negative for people to be exposed to that piece or pieces like it. But I think this just pushes in favour of your overall point that “What products and cluster of ideas work as ‘stepping stones’ or ‘gateways’ toward (full-blown) EA [or similarly ‘impactful’ mindsets]?” is a key uncertainty and that more clarity on that would be useful.
(I should also note than in general I think Kelsey’s work has remarkably good quality, especially considering the pace she’s producing things at, and I’m very glad she’s doing the work she’s doing.)