I have major reservations about your conclusion (in part because I embrace anti-fanaticism, in part because I see big challenges and some downsides to outsourcing moral reflection and decision-making to another person). However, I really appreciate how well you outlined the problem and I also appreciate that you don’t shy away from proposing a possible solution, even while retaining a good measure of epistemic humility. Thanks for posting!
I would definitely see an issue with a society which told people than when considering how to impact the world, “leave it to people who are smarter than you.”
At the same time, I think that when dealing with such complex issues that one doesn’t have the time or intelligence to satisfyingly understand, to responsibly defer to a relative expert with similar values to you, seems safer.
And I don’t think this is a unique problem to fanaticism, though dealing with infinity always complicates things. Incorporating stochastic dominance into one’s moral framework can also introduce major confusion. Furthermore, for people less inclined towards hard totalist utilitarianism (valuing community and the present, holding the person-affecting view, opposing exploitation regardless of suffering caused, etc.) it can also be very hard to find the initiatives that optimize based on a balance of different values.
I have major reservations about your conclusion (in part because I embrace anti-fanaticism, in part because I see big challenges and some downsides to outsourcing moral reflection and decision-making to another person). However, I really appreciate how well you outlined the problem and I also appreciate that you don’t shy away from proposing a possible solution, even while retaining a good measure of epistemic humility. Thanks for posting!
Thanks for responding!
I would definitely see an issue with a society which told people than when considering how to impact the world, “leave it to people who are smarter than you.”
At the same time, I think that when dealing with such complex issues that one doesn’t have the time or intelligence to satisfyingly understand, to responsibly defer to a relative expert with similar values to you, seems safer.
And I don’t think this is a unique problem to fanaticism, though dealing with infinity always complicates things. Incorporating stochastic dominance into one’s moral framework can also introduce major confusion. Furthermore, for people less inclined towards hard totalist utilitarianism (valuing community and the present, holding the person-affecting view, opposing exploitation regardless of suffering caused, etc.) it can also be very hard to find the initiatives that optimize based on a balance of different values.