Yes! And also, I would advocate reading Slate Star Codex's "A Failure, but Not of Prediction"[1] as a follow-up, which sort of resolves the "parachute paradox"

Yes! And also, I would advocate reading Slate Star Codex's "A Failure, but Not of Prediction"[1] as a follow-up, which sort of resolves the "parachute paradox" of why you should believe in the efficacy of parachutes for skydiving in the absence of RCTs, and when you should require them for a belief. I summarized the heuristic in that discussion [2]. In the case of parachutes, that heuristic would (lead you to) say that, we know (from RCTs) that parachutes slow the fall of objects, we know humans suffer greater injury the faster they hit the ground, and parachutes are inexpensive relative to the potential risk, therefore you should believe they work in the absence of an RCT. [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/04/14/a-failure-but-not-of-prediction/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/04/14/a-failure-but-not-of-p... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22908365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22908365