“Taking Uncertainty Seriously (or, Why Tools Matter)” by Bob Fischer, Hayley Clatterbuck, arvomm

Executive Summary We should take uncertainty seriously. Rethink Priorities’ Moral Parliament Tool, for instance, highlights that whether a worldview favors a particular project depends on relatively small differences in empirical assumptions and the way we characterize the commitments of that worldview. We have good reason to be uncertain: The relevant empirical and philosophical issues are difficult. We’re largely guessing when it comes to most of the key empirical claims associated with Global Catastrophic Risks and Animal Welfare. As a community, EA has some objectionable epistemic features—e.g., it can be an echo chamber—that should probably make us less confident of the claims that are popular within it. The extent of our uncertainty is a reason to build models more like the Portfolio Builder and Moral Parliament Tools and less like traditional BOTECs. This is because: Our models allow you to change parameters systematically to see how [...] ---Outline:(00:10) Executive Summary(01:47) Introduction(02:58) Recapping CRAFT(06:23) How confident should we be in any particular combination of empirical, normative, and metanormative judgments?(07:45) The relevant empirical and philosophical issues are difficult(10:03) We’re largely guessing when it comes to most of the key empirical claims associated with GCR and animal work(11:13) As a community, EA has some objectionable epistemic features(12:36) There are better and worse ways of dealing with uncertainty(15:12) AcknowledgmentsThe original text contained 2 images which were described by AI. --- First published: July 19th, 2024 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/MpbtXpjXKNsrfoZCm/taking-uncertainty-seriously-or-why-tools-matter --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.