I think I probably agree with the general thrust of this comment, but disagree on various specifics.
‘Intelligent people disagree with this’ is a good reason against being too confident in one’s opinion. At the very least, it should highlight there are opportunities to explore where the disagreement is coming from, which should hopefully help everyone to form better opinions.
I also don’t feel like moral uncertainty is a good example of people deferring too much.
A different way to look at this might be that if ‘good judgement’ is something that lots of people need in their careers, especially if they don’t follow any of the priority paths (as argued here), this is something that needs to be trained—and you don’t train good judgement by always blindly deferring.
Yeah, and besides the training effect there is also the benefit that while one person who disagrees with hundreds is unlikely to be correct, if they are correct, it’s super important that those hundreds of others get to learn from them.
So it may be very important in expectation to notice such disagreements, do a lot of research to understand one’s own and the others’ position as well as possible, and then let them know of the results.
(And yes, the moral uncertainty example doesn’t seem to fit very well, especially for antirealists.)
I’d say that “Intelligent people disagree with this” is a good reason to look into what those people think and why—I agree that it should make you less certain of your current position, but you might actually end up more certain of your original opinion after you’ve understood those disagreements.
I think I probably agree with the general thrust of this comment, but disagree on various specifics.
‘Intelligent people disagree with this’ is a good reason against being too confident in one’s opinion. At the very least, it should highlight there are opportunities to explore where the disagreement is coming from, which should hopefully help everyone to form better opinions.
I also don’t feel like moral uncertainty is a good example of people deferring too much.
A different way to look at this might be that if ‘good judgement’ is something that lots of people need in their careers, especially if they don’t follow any of the priority paths (as argued here), this is something that needs to be trained—and you don’t train good judgement by always blindly deferring.
Yeah, and besides the training effect there is also the benefit that while one person who disagrees with hundreds is unlikely to be correct, if they are correct, it’s super important that those hundreds of others get to learn from them.
So it may be very important in expectation to notice such disagreements, do a lot of research to understand one’s own and the others’ position as well as possible, and then let them know of the results.
(And yes, the moral uncertainty example doesn’t seem to fit very well, especially for antirealists.)
I’d say that “Intelligent people disagree with this” is a good reason to look into what those people think and why—I agree that it should make you less certain of your current position, but you might actually end up more certain of your original opinion after you’ve understood those disagreements.