Edit to add: I think you might mean something different by ârobust goodnessâ than what I had in mind. From a quick look at your link, youâre considering a range of different decision theories, risk-weightings, etc., and noting that chickens do at least moderately well on a wide range of theoretical assumptions.
I instead meant to be talking about empirical robustness: roughly, âhelping the long-term via methods that are especially likely to do some immediate good, and with less risk of proving long-term counterproductive.â Or, more concisely, âlongtermism via nearterm goods with positive ripple effectsâ. And then assessing what does best via this particular theoretical standard (to make up one bucket in our portfolio).
Since your report doesnât consider ripple effects, it doesnât address the kind of ârobust longtermismâ bucket I have in mind.
Ok, thanks for clarifying!
Edit to add: I think you might mean something different by ârobust goodnessâ than what I had in mind. From a quick look at your link, youâre considering a range of different decision theories, risk-weightings, etc., and noting that chickens do at least moderately well on a wide range of theoretical assumptions.
I instead meant to be talking about empirical robustness: roughly, âhelping the long-term via methods that are especially likely to do some immediate good, and with less risk of proving long-term counterproductive.â Or, more concisely, âlongtermism via nearterm goods with positive ripple effectsâ. And then assessing what does best via this particular theoretical standard (to make up one bucket in our portfolio).
Since your report doesnât consider ripple effects, it doesnât address the kind of ârobust longtermismâ bucket I have in mind.