I agree with the first half of your comment. Do you think that the EA community (or the EA Forum) should solely focus on cause prioritisation though?
I feel excited about scope sensitive decision-making and evidence-based prioritisation being used at various levels of abstraction/concreteness, e.g. cause prioritisation, intervention prioritisation, organisation prioritisation.
I welcome/encourage this being done carefully and well (and discussed on the Forum) even if I disagree with someone’s prioritisation at another level of abstraction, and I don’t think we should expect someone to justify their prioritisation at other levels.
I.e. I think this is a cool post, even though I don’t prioritise biodiversity and the post doesn’t explain why the authors prioritise it.
I agree with the first half of your comment. Do you think that the EA community (or the EA Forum) should solely focus on cause prioritisation though?
I feel excited about scope sensitive decision-making and evidence-based prioritisation being used at various levels of abstraction/concreteness, e.g. cause prioritisation, intervention prioritisation, organisation prioritisation.
I welcome/encourage this being done carefully and well (and discussed on the Forum) even if I disagree with someone’s prioritisation at another level of abstraction, and I don’t think we should expect someone to justify their prioritisation at other levels.
I.e. I think this is a cool post, even though I don’t prioritise biodiversity and the post doesn’t explain why the authors prioritise it.