I have come to believe that people’s ability to come to correct opinions about important questions is in large part a result of whether their social and monetary incentives reward them when they have accurate models in a specific domain.
Are good ways of incentivizing accurate models the same across domains? (As opposed to different, say based on differences between the domains, or their practitioners.)
I think of integrity as a more advanced form of honesty – when I say “integrity” I mean something like “acting in accordance with your stated beliefs.” Where honesty is the commitment to not speak direct falsehoods, integrity is the commitment to speak truths that actually ring true to yourself, not ones that are just abstractly defensible to other people. It is also a commitment to act on the truths that you do believe, and to communicate to others what your true beliefs are.
So integrity is three things, and it’s having all three of them, at the same time.
In the context of incentive design, I find thinking about integrity valuable because it feels to me like the natural complement to accountability. The purpose of accountability is to ensure that you do what you say you are going to do, and integrity is the corresponding virtue of holding up well under high levels of accountability.
Four things. This part of “integrity” sounds like being able to hold up under stress, and being good with people.
Integrity can be a double-edged sword. While it is good to judge people by the standards they expressed, it is also a surefire way to make people overly hesitant to update.
This is surprising, because it seems like usually people are judged for the standards they express, not by the standards they express. Both seems like a ‘surefire way to make people overly hesitant’ to a) share their standards, b) actually do this integrity thing.
I think a generally better setup is to choose a much smaller group of people that you trust to evaluate your actions very closely,
The common sense which makes this virtue seem virtuous, and useful, instead of a disaster.
Four things. This part of “integrity” sounds like being able to hold up under stress, and being good with people.
I was trying to point at roughly three things. I did not intend for accountability to imply stress or to imply that you have to be good with people. There are definitely accountability relations that require you to hold up under stress or to be “good with people”, but those skills are not the core thing that I am trying to point at.
Summarizing it as three things at the same time seems fine, though I do want to highlight that those three things can feel like a single motion in a way that I think is good, and why I think of it as one virtue and not three.
Agreed, although the 1st and the 3rd part do seem like the same thing—Communication. (The 2nd part is Action, the 4th part is something like Feedback/making sure you’re on course.)
Are good ways of incentivizing accurate models the same across domains? (As opposed to different, say based on differences between the domains, or their practitioners.)
So integrity is three things, and it’s having all three of them, at the same time.
Four things. This part of “integrity” sounds like being able to hold up under stress, and being good with people.
This is surprising, because it seems like usually people are judged for the standards they express, not by the standards they express. Both seems like a ‘surefire way to make people overly hesitant’ to a) share their standards, b) actually do this integrity thing.
The common sense which makes this virtue seem virtuous, and useful, instead of a disaster.
I was trying to point at roughly three things. I did not intend for accountability to imply stress or to imply that you have to be good with people. There are definitely accountability relations that require you to hold up under stress or to be “good with people”, but those skills are not the core thing that I am trying to point at.
Summarizing it as three things at the same time seems fine, though I do want to highlight that those three things can feel like a single motion in a way that I think is good, and why I think of it as one virtue and not three.
Agreed, although the 1st and the 3rd part do seem like the same thing—Communication. (The 2nd part is Action, the 4th part is something like Feedback/making sure you’re on course.)