if we were to travel back in time and alter starting conditions just slightly, it seems reasonable to expect that the world today would be completely different.
a few short years after the bombs stopped falling in 1945, the world economy returned to trend as if nothing had happened.
In 1776, America rebelled in the name of freedom and democracy: the origin myth of the modern world order. And yet, somehow, unrebellious Canada ended up just as free and democratic. An unrebellious America likely would have too.
Three anecdotes from a blog post is not exactly strong evidence. I think these anecdotes do not make the case very well. The economy returned to trend in world war II, but would it have done the same if the Axis had won? It says the american revolution had no effect on the development of freedom and democracy, but is there proof of that? It certainly played a role in the french revolution, for example.
Overall, despite the weak case, there probably are some historical trends that exist, but this doesn’t mean that the world can’t be radically altered by small changes. The latter is absolutely true. There is no contradiction between the two positions.
Yeah, to be fair, I do think that the broad trend argument is probably the strongest argument for longtermism. Like, it appears that humanity has continuously expanded and grown for the past 12,000 years. If this trend continues, then it makes sense to think that eventually we’ll have the technology to start expanding into space.
This is possible, but seems pretty unclear to me. cf The Gods of Straight Lines:
Three anecdotes from a blog post is not exactly strong evidence. I think these anecdotes do not make the case very well. The economy returned to trend in world war II, but would it have done the same if the Axis had won? It says the american revolution had no effect on the development of freedom and democracy, but is there proof of that? It certainly played a role in the french revolution, for example.
Overall, despite the weak case, there probably are some historical trends that exist, but this doesn’t mean that the world can’t be radically altered by small changes. The latter is absolutely true. There is no contradiction between the two positions.
Yeah, to be fair, I do think that the broad trend argument is probably the strongest argument for longtermism. Like, it appears that humanity has continuously expanded and grown for the past 12,000 years. If this trend continues, then it makes sense to think that eventually we’ll have the technology to start expanding into space.