4 ms·

EA doesn't do that - it's a much smaller concept than utilitarianism. (Which also wouldn't always support that conclusion.)

giraffe_lady 4y ago
But it has very noticeably begun falling into the same traps long discovered and recognized by utilitarianism. EA now has a significant contingent that is most focused on very unlikely far future outcomes because they would be incredibly bad for an unimaginably vast number of people if they did occur eg unbounded utility. That's pascal's mugging! The movement is based on the same ideas and values and it's running into the same problems. These similarities don't inherently discredit the movement, but not having a clear awareness of these faults in their framework and a plan for avoiding them is very worrying.
- nl 4y ago
  > EA now has a significant contingent that is most focused on very unlikely far future outcomes because they would be incredibly bad for an unimaginably vast number of people if they did occur eg unbounded utility. That's pascal's mugging! Indeed! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_mugging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_mugging (Although the term itself comes from the EA community)
- _yb2s 4y ago
  I am very confused about why the rationalists, who first identified the concept of pascal's mugging seem to have a huge number of initiatives which seem to be examples of falling directly into the pascal's mugging trap. With all of these examples, and pascal's mugging itself, there is an obvious error: there should be a practical upper bound on the adverse outcome you're concerned about, at which all higher values are effectively the same to you.
  - cscurmudgeon 4y ago
    > I am very confused about why the rationalists, who first identified the concept of pascal's mugging seem to have a huge number of initiatives which seem to be examples of falling directly into the pascal's mugging trap. The original rationalists were true rationalist. And the recent ones? I am not so sure.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
cscurmudgeon 4y ago
> Which also wouldn't always support that conclusion This is a well known issue: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/ https://blog.apaonline.org/2021/03/29/is-effective-altruism-inherently-utilitarian/ https://blog.apaonline.org/2021/03/29/is-effective-altruism-... > As such, Effective Altruism is inherently Utilitarian in character, even if the views are themselves distinct. Criticisms of Effective Altruism on the basis of critiques to Utilitarianism are not only expected, but fair.

giraffe_lady 4y ago

But it has very noticeably begun falling into the same traps long discovered and recognized by utilitarianism. EA now has a significant contingent that is most focused on very unlikely far future outcomes because they would be incredibly bad for an unimaginably vast number of people if they did occur eg unbounded utility. That's pascal's mugging! The movement is based on the same ideas and values and it's running into the same problems. These similarities don't inherently discredit the movement, but not having a clear awareness of these faults in their framework and a plan for avoiding them is very worrying.

nl 4y ago
> EA now has a significant contingent that is most focused on very unlikely far future outcomes because they would be incredibly bad for an unimaginably vast number of people if they did occur eg unbounded utility. That's pascal's mugging! Indeed! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_mugging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_mugging (Although the term itself comes from the EA community)
_yb2s 4y ago
I am very confused about why the rationalists, who first identified the concept of pascal's mugging seem to have a huge number of initiatives which seem to be examples of falling directly into the pascal's mugging trap. With all of these examples, and pascal's mugging itself, there is an obvious error: there should be a practical upper bound on the adverse outcome you're concerned about, at which all higher values are effectively the same to you.
- cscurmudgeon 4y ago
  > I am very confused about why the rationalists, who first identified the concept of pascal's mugging seem to have a huge number of initiatives which seem to be examples of falling directly into the pascal's mugging trap. The original rationalists were true rationalist. And the recent ones? I am not so sure.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

cscurmudgeon 4y ago

> Which also wouldn't always support that conclusion This is a well known issue: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/ https://blog.apaonline.org/2021/03/29/is-effective-altruism-inherently-utilitarian/ https://blog.apaonline.org/2021/03/29/is-effective-altruism-... > As such, Effective Altruism is inherently Utilitarian in character, even if the views are themselves distinct. Criticisms of Effective Altruism on the basis of critiques to Utilitarianism are not only expected, but fair.