I agree there is huge uncertainty in the sentience-adjusted welfare rangesRethink Priorities (RP) initially presented, and the similar ones in Bob Fischerâs related book. Below are the sentience-adjusted welfare ranges proportional to âindividual number of neuronsâ^âexponentâ, and âexponentâ from 0 to 2, which covers the best guesses that I consider reasonable.
An exponent of 0.188 explains pretty well the sentience-adjusted welfare ranges in Bobâs book, as illustrated below. Here is some context about why sentience-adjusted welfare ranges might be a power law of the individual number of neurons.
Oh, wow, thatâs really interesting that you found that correlation.
One explanation of this correlation could be that the additive model focuses on the presence of different cognitive capacities, and animals may need higher neuron counts to have more cognitive capacities.
This would then center your worldview on how significant you think cognitive capacities are in determining welfare ranges.
Hi James. Thanks for the post.
I agree there is huge uncertainty in the sentience-adjusted welfare ranges Rethink Priorities (RP) initially presented, and the similar ones in Bob Fischerâs related book. Below are the sentience-adjusted welfare ranges proportional to âindividual number of neuronsâ^âexponentâ, and âexponentâ from 0 to 2, which covers the best guesses that I consider reasonable.
An exponent of 0.188 explains pretty well the sentience-adjusted welfare ranges in Bobâs book, as illustrated below. Here is some context about why sentience-adjusted welfare ranges might be a power law of the individual number of neurons.
Oh, wow, thatâs really interesting that you found that correlation.
One explanation of this correlation could be that the additive model focuses on the presence of different cognitive capacities, and animals may need higher neuron counts to have more cognitive capacities.
This would then center your worldview on how significant you think cognitive capacities are in determining welfare ranges.