Yes, I only have what I consider to be educated suspicion about where current human civilization might fall in the range of possible civilizations. However, in terms of felicific calculus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felicific_calculus), weak evidence is still valid. If it is all we have to go by, we should still go by it, especially considering the graveness of the potential consequences. Lack of strong evidence is not an argument for the status quo; this would be an example of status quo bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_bias).
“Educated suspicion” = wild guess. Making existential choices on such a basis is always a bad idea. What is needed is better information. Would you commit suicide if you thought that it was 60% likely that your life would be of negative value?
Your second line is an emotional appeal.
You say that as if it’s a bad thing. I take it you’re talking about the all-caps part. Ignore the emphasis if you like. I stand by all of it.
“Making existential choices on such a basis is always a bad idea. What is needed is better information” Regardless of the choice you make, the choice is being made with weak data. Although strong data is the ideal, going with a choice weak data suggests against is worse than going with the choice it favors. Of course, if there is a way to get better information, we should do that first if we have time.
”Would you commit suicide if you thought that it was 60% likely that your life would be of negative value?” Not necessarily. However, if I exhausted all potential better alternatives like investigating further, then in principle yes as I’m a utilitarian. That said, this question has a false premise; I control the impacts of my life, and can make them positive. Not so with civilization.
That said, this question has a false premise; I control the impacts of my life, and can make them positive.
I agree (although there’s plenty on LessWrong and elsewhere who wouldn’t).
Not so with civilization.
Civilisation changes according to the choices of all of us, some of them big, most of them small. Do you decline to take part in any cooperative effort when your own part is a small one?
Yes, I only have what I consider to be educated suspicion about where current human civilization might fall in the range of possible civilizations. However, in terms of felicific calculus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felicific_calculus), weak evidence is still valid. If it is all we have to go by, we should still go by it, especially considering the graveness of the potential consequences. Lack of strong evidence is not an argument for the status quo; this would be an example of status quo bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_bias).
Your second line is an emotional appeal.
“Educated suspicion” = wild guess. Making existential choices on such a basis is always a bad idea. What is needed is better information. Would you commit suicide if you thought that it was 60% likely that your life would be of negative value?
You say that as if it’s a bad thing. I take it you’re talking about the all-caps part. Ignore the emphasis if you like. I stand by all of it.
“Making existential choices on such a basis is always a bad idea. What is needed is better information” Regardless of the choice you make, the choice is being made with weak data. Although strong data is the ideal, going with a choice weak data suggests against is worse than going with the choice it favors. Of course, if there is a way to get better information, we should do that first if we have time.
”Would you commit suicide if you thought that it was 60% likely that your life would be of negative value?” Not necessarily. However, if I exhausted all potential better alternatives like investigating further, then in principle yes as I’m a utilitarian. That said, this question has a false premise; I control the impacts of my life, and can make them positive. Not so with civilization.
I agree (although there’s plenty on LessWrong and elsewhere who wouldn’t).
Civilisation changes according to the choices of all of us, some of them big, most of them small. Do you decline to take part in any cooperative effort when your own part is a small one?