When you’re in a position of authority, such as a group leader, it can be tempting to project an aura of (over)-confidence. EA ideas are really complicated, and virtually nobody knows everything going on at the forefront. Beyond virtue and norm considerations, it is really difficult to reliably represent yourself to very smart people (or anyone, for that matter) as understanding something you really don’t.
Furthermore, the most promising potential EAs are likely to think of questions that nobody has adequately posed or addressed yet; telling them you just don’t know the answer[4] will likely signal that you are trustworthy and increase the chances that valuable lines of inquiry survive. We think being very honest has a positive selection effect and will attract better people. You are not a teacher. You are a fellow explorer.
However, if you don’t seem like you know anything you are also likely to put off these people. After all, what do they get out of spending time with your group if you don’t know what you are talking about? That is one of the reasons why we think it is incredibly important to…
Honestly my (very limited) impression is that CBers err too much in the direction of humility, and should be (more) willing to make strong claims if they’re well-substantiated and presented in an epistemically fair/accurate manner.
I think a lot of time newbies who ask “what about X?” are really trying to learn “what does EA have to say about X,” and there often times is a pretty loud and clear answer! For instance, maybe:
New group member: “Isn’t biodiversity important, though?”
Group leader: “In general, neither I nor EA in general generally thinks that preserving the natural order of an ecosystem or increasing the number of different species is intrinsically valuable [+ additional disclaimers about instrumental value and why individual welfare is the thing one might care about]
I wouldn’t call this answer particularly humble, but I do think it’s more helpful, honest, and genuine than something like “EA respects a plurality of values, and preventing environmental destruction is super important...”
Honestly my (very limited) impression is that CBers err too much in the direction of humility, and should be (more) willing to make strong claims if they’re well-substantiated and presented in an epistemically fair/accurate manner.
I think a lot of time newbies who ask “what about X?” are really trying to learn “what does EA have to say about X,” and there often times is a pretty loud and clear answer! For instance, maybe:
I wouldn’t call this answer particularly humble, but I do think it’s more helpful, honest, and genuine than something like “EA respects a plurality of values, and preventing environmental destruction is super important...”