iarwain1 comments on Deliberate Grad School - Less Wrong

22 Post author: Academian 04 October 2015 10:11AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (153)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: fowlertm 04 October 2015 04:07:43PM 4 points [-]

I think there'd be value in just listing graduate programs in philosophy, economics, etc., by how relevant the research already being done there is to x-risk, AI safety, or rationality. Or by whether or not they contain faculty interested in those topics.

For example, if I were looking to enter a philosophy graduate program it might take me quite some time to realize that Carnegie Melon probably has the best program for people interested in LW-style reasoning about something like epistemology.

Comment author: iarwain1 04 October 2015 09:08:31PM 2 points [-]

Why do you say Carnegie Mellon? I'm assuming it's because they have the Center for Formal Epistemology and a very nice-looking degree program in Logic, Computation and Methodology. But don't some other universities have comparable programs?

Do you have direct experience with the Carnegie Mellon program? At one point I was seriously considering going there because of the logic & computation degree, and I might still consider it at some point in the future.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 04 October 2015 11:48:16PM *  4 points [-]

Confirmed, re: CMU phil. Email me for details (ilyas at cs.jhu.edu), I know a few people there. I think Katja Grace went there at one point (?)

Comment author: fowlertm 12 October 2015 03:56:48PM 1 point [-]

I mentioned CMU for the reasons you've stated and because Lukeprog endorsed their program once (no idea what evidence he had that I don't).

I have also spoken to Katja Grace about it, and there is evidently a bit of interest in LW themes among the students there.

I'm unaware of other programs of a similar caliber, though there are bound to be some. If anyone knows of any, by all means list them, that was the point of my original comment.