it’s very important that those of us who aspire to epistemic rationality incorporate a significant element of “I’m the sort of person who engages in self-doubt because it’s the right thing to do” into our self-image
I think most of us do. Your argument for this is compelling. However, I think Eliezer was just claiming that it’s possible to overdo it—at least, that’s the defensible core of his insight.
I’ve wondered if I’m obsessed with Eliezer’s writings, and whether I esteem him too highly. Answers: no, and no.
Anything that has even a slight systematic negative impact on existential risk is a big deal.
Probably true. But it’s sometimes easy to be on the wrong side of an argument over small differences (of course sometimes you can be certain). I guess such “there’s no harm” statements (which I’ve also made) are biased by a desire to be conciliatory. I don’t trust people to behave well when they’re annoyed at each other, so I sometimes wish they would minimize the stakes.
Eliezer appears to be deviating so sharply from leading a genuinely utilitarian lifestyle
I think most of us do. Your argument for this is compelling. However, I think Eliezer was just claiming that it’s possible to overdo it—at least, that’s the defensible core of his insight.
I’ve wondered if I’m obsessed with Eliezer’s writings, and whether I esteem him too highly. Answers: no, and no.
Probably true. But it’s sometimes easy to be on the wrong side of an argument over small differences (of course sometimes you can be certain). I guess such “there’s no harm” statements (which I’ve also made) are biased by a desire to be conciliatory. I don’t trust people to behave well when they’re annoyed at each other, so I sometimes wish they would minimize the stakes.
I doubt I know any utilitarians.
Thanks for correcting my typos.
You’re welcome—I’ve redacted my comment so it no longer mentions them.