Norms = social expectations = psychological pressure. If you donât want any social pressure to take the 10% pledge (even among EAs), what youâre saying is that you donât want it to be a norm.
Now, I donât think the pressure should be too intense or anything: some may well have good reasons for not taking the pledge. The pressure/âencouragement from a username icon is pretty tame, as far as social pressures go. (Nobody is proposing a âwalk of shameâ where we all throw rotten fruit and denounce the non-pledgers in our midst!) But I think the optimal level of social pressure/ânorminess is non-zero, because I expect that most EAs on the margins would do better to take the pledge (that belief is precisely why I do want it to become more of a normâif I already trusted that the social environment was well-calibrated for optimal decisions here, we wouldnât need to change social norms).
So thatâs why I think itâs good, on the Forum and elsewhere, to use the diamond to promote the 10% pledge.
To be clear:
(1) I donât think the audience âbeing familiarâ with the pledge undercuts the reasons to want it to be more of a norm among EAs (and others).
(2) The possibility that something âmight not be the right decisionâ for some people does not show that it shouldnât be a norm. You need to compare the risks of over-pledging (in the presence of a norm) to the risks of under-pledging (in the absence of a norm). I think we should be more worried about the latter. But if someone wants to make the comparative argument that the former is the greater risk, that would be interesting to hear!
Norms = social expectations = psychological pressure. If you donât want any social pressure to take the 10% pledge (even among EAs), what youâre saying is that you donât want it to be a norm.
Now, I donât think the pressure should be too intense or anything: some may well have good reasons for not taking the pledge. The pressure/âencouragement from a username icon is pretty tame, as far as social pressures go. (Nobody is proposing a âwalk of shameâ where we all throw rotten fruit and denounce the non-pledgers in our midst!) But I think the optimal level of social pressure/ânorminess is non-zero, because I expect that most EAs on the margins would do better to take the pledge (that belief is precisely why I do want it to become more of a normâif I already trusted that the social environment was well-calibrated for optimal decisions here, we wouldnât need to change social norms).
So thatâs why I think itâs good, on the Forum and elsewhere, to use the diamond to promote the 10% pledge.
To be clear:
(1) I donât think the audience âbeing familiarâ with the pledge undercuts the reasons to want it to be more of a norm among EAs (and others).
(2) The possibility that something âmight not be the right decisionâ for some people does not show that it shouldnât be a norm. You need to compare the risks of over-pledging (in the presence of a norm) to the risks of under-pledging (in the absence of a norm). I think we should be more worried about the latter. But if someone wants to make the comparative argument that the former is the greater risk, that would be interesting to hear!