How does writing a substantive post on x-risk give Thorstad a free pass to cast aspersions when he turns to discussing politics or economics?
Iām criticizing specific content here. I donāt know who you are or what your grievances are, and Iād ask you not to project them onto my specific criticisms of Thorstad and Crary et al.
Thorstad acknowledged that many of us have engaged in depth with the critique he references, but instead of treating our responses as worth considering, he suggests it is āworth considering if the social and financial position of effective altruists might have something to do withā the conclusions we reach.
It is hardly āmud-slingingā for me to find this slimy dismissal objectionable. Nor is it mud-slinging to point out ways in which Crary et al (cited approvingly by Thorstad) are clearly being unprincipled in their appeals to āsystemic changeā. This is specific, textually-grounded criticism of specific actors, none of whom are you.
How does writing a substantive post on x-risk give Thorstad a free pass to cast aspersions when he turns to discussing politics or economics?
Iām criticizing specific content here. I donāt know who you are or what your grievances are, and Iād ask you not to project them onto my specific criticisms of Thorstad and Crary et al.
Thorstad acknowledged that many of us have engaged in depth with the critique he references, but instead of treating our responses as worth considering, he suggests it is āworth considering if the social and financial position of effective altruists might have something to do withā the conclusions we reach.
It is hardly āmud-slingingā for me to find this slimy dismissal objectionable. Nor is it mud-slinging to point out ways in which Crary et al (cited approvingly by Thorstad) are clearly being unprincipled in their appeals to āsystemic changeā. This is specific, textually-grounded criticism of specific actors, none of whom are you.