Thanks for sharing your perspective. I really like Superforecasting myself, and actually as part of the Intentional Insights project, one of our members conveys a popularized version of this strategy to a broad audience in this blog.
However, I am concerned that following the path of excessive analysis before acting may fall prey to information bias, namely seeking too much information before acting. As the Lean Startup methodology approach suggests, we should experiment and learn from evidence, and then go on to do better, not simply sit and debate. And Superforecasting itself emphasizes that the only way to get better at forecasting is to learn from previous forecasts and then go on to do better in the future.
For example, the whole point of this emotionally-oriented approach is to do better than we did before in reaching more people and helping them become more effective donors.
I’m definitely in favor of doing experiments, learning by doing, etc. But no amount of these is going to save you from working towards the wrong goal (unless you’re doing experiments to try to figure out if the goal is one that’s good to work towards, which doesn’t sound quite like what you’re proposing here, although I guess your post could be interpreted this way).
The best counterargument I can think of to my position:
EA must either grow or die. Suppose the idea that one should donate a significant fraction of one’s income makes many people uncomfortable, and their natural response is to find some rationalization for why EA is bad. Then in the absence of attaining influence to counteract this, EA’s image will decline continuously as people broadcast these rationalizations.
The only solution is to grow and attain influence before we get killed, i.e. nudge journalism towards our values faster than journalists nudge us towards their values. (#1 journalist value: pageviews.)
I’d say the solution would be to persuade certain people, specifically ones more emotionally inclined than the current typical EA, to be more oriented toward our values. This is a much smaller ask :-)
Thanks for sharing your perspective. I really like Superforecasting myself, and actually as part of the Intentional Insights project, one of our members conveys a popularized version of this strategy to a broad audience in this blog.
However, I am concerned that following the path of excessive analysis before acting may fall prey to information bias, namely seeking too much information before acting. As the Lean Startup methodology approach suggests, we should experiment and learn from evidence, and then go on to do better, not simply sit and debate. And Superforecasting itself emphasizes that the only way to get better at forecasting is to learn from previous forecasts and then go on to do better in the future.
For example, the whole point of this emotionally-oriented approach is to do better than we did before in reaching more people and helping them become more effective donors.
I’m definitely in favor of doing experiments, learning by doing, etc. But no amount of these is going to save you from working towards the wrong goal (unless you’re doing experiments to try to figure out if the goal is one that’s good to work towards, which doesn’t sound quite like what you’re proposing here, although I guess your post could be interpreted this way).
The best counterargument I can think of to my position:
EA must either grow or die. Suppose the idea that one should donate a significant fraction of one’s income makes many people uncomfortable, and their natural response is to find some rationalization for why EA is bad. Then in the absence of attaining influence to counteract this, EA’s image will decline continuously as people broadcast these rationalizations.
The only solution is to grow and attain influence before we get killed, i.e. nudge journalism towards our values faster than journalists nudge us towards their values. (#1 journalist value: pageviews.)
I’d say the solution would be to persuade certain people, specifically ones more emotionally inclined than the current typical EA, to be more oriented toward our values. This is a much smaller ask :-)