= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
peter_hurford comments on What Would it Take to "Prove" a Speculative Cause? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (15)
What I want my main point to be, upon further reflection, is that If we find ourselves in a situation where we don't know enough to know what's the most effective, the proper reaction is not to pursue impact, but instead find ways to reduce our uncertainty.
So if we don't know about which has more ripple effects, we should invest in finding out, not pick at random.
I would agree that currently, we should invest in finding out, not pick at random, but we're likely to never achieve an understanding of ripple effects on par with our understanding of how well malaria nets or deworming efforts work, so if that's the bar you're setting (which you seem to be doing based on the post), then we'll never actually pick any object-level cause to support.
That's not what I'm saying. I actually intended my essay to argue/clarify against that.