I often find myself second guessing estimations of animal charity effectiveness as it feels like they might have cherry-picked their 'moral metric'. Breaking it down in this way seems like a laudable and structured approach for assessing an issue with quite so many unknown variables.
Things that excited me:
I could imagine a report where, for a given intervention, each of these is estimated, confidence weightings given and explanations of evidence, priors and reasonings for each estimation. Reading that would have given me more confidence when I was earlier in my journey re animal suffering.
Complex, intuition-challenging problems broken down into smaller, more intuition-friendly problems seems valuable.
I'd guess it's likely that making many weighted judgement calls and making gut checks from many angles will result in answers closer aligned with our values.
This looks promising!
I often find myself second guessing estimations of animal charity effectiveness as it feels like they might have cherry-picked their 'moral metric'. Breaking it down in this way seems like a laudable and structured approach for assessing an issue with quite so many unknown variables.
Things that excited me:
I could imagine a report where, for a given intervention, each of these is estimated, confidence weightings given and explanations of evidence, priors and reasonings for each estimation. Reading that would have given me more confidence when I was earlier in my journey re animal suffering.
Complex, intuition-challenging problems broken down into smaller, more intuition-friendly problems seems valuable.
I'd guess it's likely that making many weighted judgement calls and making gut checks from many angles will result in answers closer aligned with our values.