[3] The robust option is the option that produces the most favorable outcome across a broad range of future scenarios. The point is to minimise the chance of failure across scenarios.
This sounds like the maxipok rule, which Bostrom has used to argue for prioritizing extinction risks (as long as we expect to do more good than bad). On the other hand, I think maximin (maximize the value of the worst outcome) or minimizing the risk of very horrible outcomes might lead us to prioritize risks of (badly) net negative futures (a subclass of s-risks, still longtermist, again as long as we expect to do more good than bad), contrary to Bostrom’s claim “maximin implies that we should all start partying as if there were no tomorrow.”
Greaves and MacAskill also argue here that risk aversion with respect to welfare should lead us to prioritize existential risks, and cite a claim that risk aversion with respect to the difference you make is contrary to impartiality, since it singles you out. Of course, risk aversion and ambiguity aversion (favouring robustness) are different, but I think many approach ambiguity aversion by focusing on worst cases, so the same argument could work.
This sounds like the maxipok rule, which Bostrom has used to argue for prioritizing extinction risks (as long as we expect to do more good than bad). On the other hand, I think maximin (maximize the value of the worst outcome) or minimizing the risk of very horrible outcomes might lead us to prioritize risks of (badly) net negative futures (a subclass of s-risks, still longtermist, again as long as we expect to do more good than bad), contrary to Bostrom’s claim “maximin implies that we should all start partying as if there were no tomorrow.”
Greaves and MacAskill also argue here that risk aversion with respect to welfare should lead us to prioritize existential risks, and cite a claim that risk aversion with respect to the difference you make is contrary to impartiality, since it singles you out. Of course, risk aversion and ambiguity aversion (favouring robustness) are different, but I think many approach ambiguity aversion by focusing on worst cases, so the same argument could work.