If by ‘overall bad’ you’re referring to long-term cosmic consequences, then sure—they’re called the virtues of cluelessness in part because they are virtues conditional on us being currently clueless (overall I’m exploring what follows if you accept the sequence’s argument). If I believed that these virtues systematically led to bad long-term consequences I would have to believe I’m not clueless about those consequences.
If you meant something weaker than that, e.g. near-term overall bad, or just that the virtues typically led to misguided research results—then still probably yes, since those seem like the kinds of things that would be relevant to me assessing them as virtues. (Even a non-consequentialist theory of virtue can accept that consequences are sometimes relevant to assessing virtue.)
Jonah Wilberg
Karma: 41
Again—I’m exploring what follows if you accept the sequence’s argument, and not trying to propose a ‘solution’ to cluelessness. So I think I’m not bothered by your point.