Thanks for the example. I agree that there’s something here which comes apart from cause-agnosticism, and I think I now understand why you were using “cause-general”.
This particular example is funny because you also switch from a cause-general intervention (talking about EA) to a cause-specific one (talking about AP), but you could modify the example to keep the interventions cause-general in all cases by saying it’s a choice between giving a talk on EA to (1) top meat scientists, (2) an array of infectious disease scientists, or (3) random researchers.
This makes me think there’s just another distinct concept in play here, and we should name the things apart.
Thanks for the example. I agree that there’s something here which comes apart from cause-agnosticism, and I think I now understand why you were using “cause-general”.
This particular example is funny because you also switch from a cause-general intervention (talking about EA) to a cause-specific one (talking about AP), but you could modify the example to keep the interventions cause-general in all cases by saying it’s a choice between giving a talk on EA to (1) top meat scientists, (2) an array of infectious disease scientists, or (3) random researchers.
This makes me think there’s just another distinct concept in play here, and we should name the things apart.