Oxford college choice from EA perspective? 2020-11-23T15:38:51.599Z


Comment by wuschel on What are you grateful for? · 2020-11-27T20:16:12.795Z · EA · GW

I am grateful for all the people in the community, who are always happy to help with minor things. Everytime I ask someone for training advice at a conference, or for a, explanation of any word on Dank EA Memes, or for career advice in the Forum, I always got really nice and detailed answers. I feel really excepted through that, especially considering, how rare these things are on the internet.

Comment by wuschel on Competitive Ethics · 2020-11-24T14:54:28.653Z · EA · GW

Interesting Idea. Although I fear we might not like what we find....

Comment by wuschel on Competitive Ethics · 2020-11-24T14:52:06.722Z · EA · GW

I do find that interesting.  Research projects that come to mind:

Gene sequence 200 Philosophy grad students. 100 consequentialists, 100 deontologists. See if you find any trends.

Than take 100 14 year olds. Gene sequence them, and try predicting utilitarian leaning, and deontologist leaning. 

Than confront thee 14 year olds with arguments for and against Consequentialism and Deontology. 

See if you predicted correctly significantly. 

Comment by wuschel on Five New EA Charities with High Potential for Impact · 2020-11-02T10:27:58.686Z · EA · GW

I really like this accessible format. However, I think it would be helpful, if there would at least be footnotes to the course of your information, whenever something is an interesting claim (for example "One in three children has dangerous levels of lead in their bloodstream").
I fear that without a tractability of information within official EA contexts, a lot of half true hear say seeps through the cracks.
I don't expect any of the  information in this post to be false, however. 

Comment by wuschel on How much does a vote matter? · 2020-10-31T10:29:03.874Z · EA · GW

I completely agree with you. This whole reasoning seems to heavily depend on using causal decision theory instead of its (in my opinion) more sensible competitors.

Comment by wuschel on The Fable of the Bladder-Tyrant · 2020-10-01T08:14:25.377Z · EA · GW

I am not sure, if no one is getting the joke, or just down voting, because they don't wand irony-jokey content on the EA Forum..

Comment by wuschel on AMA or discuss my 80K podcast episode: Ben Garfinkel, FHI researcher · 2020-07-16T07:24:46.536Z · EA · GW

Would you rather be one or two dogs?

Comment by wuschel on Is it suffering or involuntary suffering that's bad, and when is it (involuntary) suffering? · 2020-06-22T17:16:19.537Z · EA · GW

Interesting questions. Although I don't think i know the answer to any of them better than you do, I have another possible reason, why the suffering in your situation might not be bad:

You could argue through the lens of personal identity, that if you would self-modify, not to feel pain via sympathy anymore, that the person you would turn into would not be you anymore in the morally relevant sense.

This reasoning however would only apply, if you have ethics, that care about personal Identity (for example, by caring about you or your loved ones surviving in some sense). Having preferences like that seems to be pretty intuitive, but before embracing this view I would recommend having a look at the counter arguments by Derek Parfit ( ).

Comment by wuschel on Are we living at the most influential time in history? · 2020-04-27T18:25:14.575Z · EA · GW

Imagine you play cards with your friends. You have the deck in your hand. You are pretty confident, that you have shuffled the deck. Than you seal the deck, and give yourself the first 10 cards. And what a surprise: You happen to find all the clubs in your hand!

What is more reasonable to assume? That you just happen do dray all the clubs, or that you where wrong about having suffeld the cards? Rather the latter one.

Compare this to:

Imagine, thinking about the HoH hypothesis. You are pretty confident, that you are good at long term-forecasting, and you predict, that the most influential time in history in: NOW?!

Here to, so the argument goes, it is more reasonable to assume, that your assumption of being good in forecasting the future, is flawed.