Author: David Thorstad
-
Exaggerating the risks (Part 10: Biorisk: More grounds for doubt)
Continuing my treatment of existential biorisk, I give four further reasons to suspect that existential biorisk may be lower than many claim it to be.
-
Mistakes in the moral mathematics of existential risk (Part 3: Population dynamics)
I discuss a third mistake in the moral mathematics of existential risk: neglecting population dynamics. I show that the value of existential risk mitigation is sharply reduced in standard population models.
-
Epistemics: (Part 5: The value of cost-effectiveness analysis)
The declining role of cost-effectiveness analysis comes with significant practical, symbolic, philosophical, and leadership-based costs. Spelling out these costs in detail will allow us to assess whether they are worth paying.
-
Epistemics: (Part 4: The fall of cost-effectiveness analysis)
This post chronicles the declining role of cost-effectiveness analysis within the effective altruism movement. While early effective altruists championed the use of rigorous cost-effectiveness analyses, in many circles those methods have fallen decidedly out of favor.
-
The good it promises (Part 5: de Coriolis et al.)
Andrew deCoriolis and colleagues urge effective altruists to dream big, keeping their eye on the prize: an end to factory farming. In this post, I discuss what deCoriolis and colleagues like about effective altruists’ animal advocacy work, and what changes they’d like to see.
-
Exaggerating the risks (Part 9: Biorisk – Grounds for doubt)
Effective altruists often argue that biological phenomena pose a significant near-term existential risk. In this post, I give some preliminary reasons to doubt that claim.
-
Meta: Funded!
Reflective altruism is now fully funded through the end of 2024. Thanks to Austin Chen and Manifund for their generous support.
-
Mistakes in the moral mathematics of existential risk (Part 2: Ignoring background risk)
I discuss a second mistake in the moral mathematics of existential risk: neglecting background risk. I show how a leading discussion of biorisk makes this mistake, and also makes the mistake discussed in Part 1 of this series.
-
Epistemics: (Part 3: Peer review)
What is the role of peer review within effective altruism? What should that role be?