Yes, agreed that what matters for EA’s purposes is agreement on its most central practical norms, which should include norms of integrity, etc., and it’s fine to have different underlying theories of what ultimately justifies these. (+ also fine, of course, to have empirical/​applied disagreements about what we should end up prioritizing, etc., as a result..)
I’ll look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on consequentialism & collective action problems at some future point!
Yes, agreed that what matters for EA’s purposes is agreement on its most central practical norms, which should include norms of integrity, etc., and it’s fine to have different underlying theories of what ultimately justifies these. (+ also fine, of course, to have empirical/​applied disagreements about what we should end up prioritizing, etc., as a result..)
I’ll look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on consequentialism & collective action problems at some future point!