Some extra thoughts: Part of why various longtermist priorities are neglected by society is arguably that peopleās moral circles donāt fully/āadequately include (far) future generations of humans. (See also Moral circles: Degrees, dimensions, visuals.)
I think this has two interesting implications.
Firstly, this implies that another way in which these research projects might inform longtermists is by providing evidence about the extent to which various actions might have the positive side effect of expansion moral circles to include (far) future humans. E.g., if these research projects suggest that work on farmed animals is likely to also strongly expand moral circles to artificial sentience and wild animals, this is weak evidence that such āspilloversā are common and thus that various actions aimed at causing MCE to humans could also have substantial benefits in terms of increasing the resources allocated to extinction risk reduction or similar things. (See also Extinction risk reduction and moral circle expansion: Speculating suspicious convergence.)
Secondly, this implies that it might be valuable to pursue research projects similar to those proposed in this post, but with a specific focus on expanding moral circles to (far) future humans. For example, one could conduct expert interviews that include questions about how advocacy related to farm animals, wild animals, or āall sentient beingsā might or might not affect attitudes towards (far) future humans.
Some extra thoughts: Part of why various longtermist priorities are neglected by society is arguably that peopleās moral circles donāt fully/āadequately include (far) future generations of humans. (See also Moral circles: Degrees, dimensions, visuals.)
I think this has two interesting implications.
Firstly, this implies that another way in which these research projects might inform longtermists is by providing evidence about the extent to which various actions might have the positive side effect of expansion moral circles to include (far) future humans. E.g., if these research projects suggest that work on farmed animals is likely to also strongly expand moral circles to artificial sentience and wild animals, this is weak evidence that such āspilloversā are common and thus that various actions aimed at causing MCE to humans could also have substantial benefits in terms of increasing the resources allocated to extinction risk reduction or similar things. (See also Extinction risk reduction and moral circle expansion: Speculating suspicious convergence.)
Secondly, this implies that it might be valuable to pursue research projects similar to those proposed in this post, but with a specific focus on expanding moral circles to (far) future humans. For example, one could conduct expert interviews that include questions about how advocacy related to farm animals, wild animals, or āall sentient beingsā might or might not affect attitudes towards (far) future humans.