However, we should not take this question so lightly. A yes answer would “complete the circuit” of the enthusiast’s argument—“turn it on” as a live concern. A no answer would leave the argument in limbo until more evidence comes in.
So, let’s assess the state of the evidence.
Such a weird reason (to me) for not taking a question lightly. Are different standards of evidence are required for conclusions who we care about? The bayesian math of probability theorem does not have a term for expected utility.
Of course, it makes sense to invest more into getting a robust answer to an important question like this, but still, I think lightness is a core rationalist virtue, and shouldn’t be abandoned because a question is important.
Such a weird reason (to me) for not taking a question lightly. Are different standards of evidence are required for conclusions who we care about? The bayesian math of probability theorem does not have a term for expected utility.
Of course, it makes sense to invest more into getting a robust answer to an important question like this, but still, I think lightness is a core rationalist virtue, and shouldn’t be abandoned because a question is important.