I’m Michael Aird, a Staff Researcher at Rethink Priorities and a Research Scholar at the Future of Humanity Institute. Opinions expressed are my own. You can give me anonymous feedback at this link.
With Rethink, I’m currently mostly working on nuclear risk research. I might in future work on topics related to what I’m calling “Politics, Policy, and Security from a Broad Longtermist Perspective”.
Previously, I did longtermist macrostrategy research for Convergence Analysis and then for the Center on Long-Term Risk. More on my background here.
I also post to LessWrong sometimes.
If you think you or I could benefit from us talking, feel free to message me or schedule a call. For people interested in doing EA-related research/writing, testing their fit for that, “getting up to speed” on EA/longtermist topics, or writing for the Forum, I also recommend this post.
Error
Thanks for doing this!
Those also sound like good suggestions to me; glad to see/hear that some have already been implemented.
Another suggestion: Maybe the top part that shows the sequence name and the left and right arrows should appear on all posts that are part of sequences, even if you found your way to the post in some way other than via the sequence?
Currently, with Lukas Gloor’s anti-realism posts and Luisa Rodriguez’s nuclear posts, if I click the link to the posts from within the sequence, I see that top part. But if I get to the post some other way (via tags, their user profile, a search, another link, etc.), I don’t. This means there’s no way for someone who gets to those posts in most ways to even know they’re part of a sequence.
A downside of this suggestion is that the sequences in questions weren’t made by the users themselves, so it’s possible that the users don’t want that top part to appear. In these two cases, I’d guess the users would be happy with that, but it’d be possible for someone to make a sequence whose scope, framing, order, etc. seems weird to the authors involved (e.g., if the person strings together posts from different authors).
Another complication is that, in some cases, a post might be added to more than one sequence. Maybe if that happens, the mods should get a notification and should use their best judgement as to which sequence is used for the top part by default?
(I’m not sure if mods will look at this comment by default—maybe I should message one?)
Ah, I didn’t think to check that page. (Edit: Also, I hadn’t actually read your post, and now that I’m reading it I see that you mention this sequence in the post itself, which is a tad embarrassing, haha.)
I think it’d be nice if this showed up on Lukas’s page, as long as he’s happy with that, so might indeed be worth messaging the mods?
Ah, great, thanks!
I didn’t spot it earlier since it doesn’t show up on either your profile or Lukas’ - any idea why that is?
Error
Error
Error
Nonlinear Fund
Maybe it’s too early to make a tag for that org?
Error
I think it’s great that you’ve made these sequences!
Could you make one for this sequence: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/TwJb75GtbD4LvGiku/moral-anti-realism-sequence-1-what-is-moral-realism
(I ask partly to save myself time but mainly because I don’t actually subscribe anti-realism and I haven’t made any other sequences, so me having that as the only sequence on my profile could give the wrong impression about my own views. Whereas you’ve got lots of sequences, so it’s less likely to seem to represent your views.)
Error
Error
Error
Instrumental vs. epistemic rationality
Some brief discussion here.
These terms may basically only be used on the LessWrong community, and may not be prominent or useful enough to warrant an entry here. Not sure.
Metaethical uncertainty and/or Metanormative uncertainty
These concepts are explained here.
I think it’s probably best to instead have an entry on “Normative uncertainty” in general that has sections for each of those concepts, as well as sections that briefly describe (regular) Moral uncertainty and Decision-theoretic uncertainty and link to the existing tags on those concepts. (Also, the entry on Moral uncertainty could discuss the question of how to behave when uncertain what approach to moral uncertainty is best, which is metanormative uncertainty.) This is because I think there are relatively few posts specifically on Metaethical and Metanormative uncertainty, and some of those that there are are also relevant to other types of normative uncertainty in a broad sense.
But it’s possible that “Normative uncertainty” is best defined as uncertainty just about regular normative ethics, such that it shouldn’t be seen as covering metaethical and metanormative uncertainty. And it’s also possible that, in any case, those concepts are important enough to warrant their own entries.
Subjective vs. objective normativity
See here and here
Error
Error
Error
Error