I suspect you want a mix of both, and fundamental research helps inform what kind of intervention research is useful, but intervention research also helps inform what kind of fundamental research is useful. Given a long-term effect, you can try to find a lever which achieves that effect, or given a big lever that’s available for pulling, you can and try to figure out what its long-term effect is likely to be.
Yeah, I’d agree with this. This post is just about what to generally prioritise on the margin, not what should be prioritised completely and indefinitely.
fundamental research helps inform what kind of intervention research is useful, but intervention research also helps inform what kind of fundamental research is useful
Also, while I agree with that sentence, I do think it seems likely:
that fundamental research will tend to guide our intervention research to a greater extent than intervention research guides our fundamental research
that it’d often make sense to gradually move from prioritising fundamental research to prioritising intervention research as a field matures. (Though at every stage, I do think at least some amount of each type of research should be done.)
(Here it’s probably worth noting again that I’m classifying research as fundamental or intervention research based on what its primary aim is, not things like how high-level vs granular it is.)
I suspect you want a mix of both, and fundamental research helps inform what kind of intervention research is useful, but intervention research also helps inform what kind of fundamental research is useful. Given a long-term effect, you can try to find a lever which achieves that effect, or given a big lever that’s available for pulling, you can and try to figure out what its long-term effect is likely to be.
Yeah, I’d agree with this. This post is just about what to generally prioritise on the margin, not what should be prioritised completely and indefinitely.
That sentence reminded me of a post (which I found useful) on The Values-to-Actions Decision Chain: a lens for improving coordination.
Also, while I agree with that sentence, I do think it seems likely:
that fundamental research will tend to guide our intervention research to a greater extent than intervention research guides our fundamental research
that it’d often make sense to gradually move from prioritising fundamental research to prioritising intervention research as a field matures. (Though at every stage, I do think at least some amount of each type of research should be done.)
This also reminds me of the post Personal thoughts on careers in AI policy and strategy, which I perhaps should’ve cited somewhere in this post.
(Here it’s probably worth noting again that I’m classifying research as fundamental or intervention research based on what its primary aim is, not things like how high-level vs granular it is.)