Evidence receipt / belief
Published · transcript-backedTyler Cowen: belief
10 Aug 2022 Conversations with Tyler William MacAskill on Effective Altruism, Moral Progress, and Cultural Innovation
“I think you want to have it both ways, unless you feel my bet on you to fight for the humans is wrong.”
Source trail
Everything needed to verify it.
- Speaker
- Tyler Cowen
- Attribution
- Verified speaker
- Claim type
- belief
- Recorded
- 10 Aug 2022
- Publisher
- Conversations with Tyler
Transcript context
…It’s a great question. Among people I know, views are divided on, “Should you think that a human-originating future is going to be better than an alien-originating civilization?” My honest view is more like it’s a toss-up. I don’t see a particular reason for thinking that a civilization that comes from human beings is going to be much greater in value than from aliens. Whether this undermines existential risk, though, is dependent very crucially on whether we actually expect aliens to come and build a flourishing civilization. I think the best guess from the Fermi paradox — that is the paradox that we don’t, in fact, see advanced intelligent life — is that, probably, we’re just alone, at least in a very, very large section of space. So, as an empirical fact, I think it’s really quite likely that if humanity dies off, no one else will take our place to build some flourishing civilization. Just contingent on the space aliens being out there, if someone asked me to bet, “Well, which side in the war would Will MacAskill fight on?” I would bet 1,000 to 1 you’d fight for the humans. But in your moral theory, the humans being better than the aliens — it’s a toss-up. This notion that you can’t actually escape some preexisting degree of partiality in the normative framework seems to resurface. I think you want to have it both ways, unless you feel my bet on you to fight for the humans is wrong. Is there really a 50 percent chance you’ll fight for the aliens? Here’s the argument. I have two moral perspectives that I’m putting some weight on. One says aliens have as good a chance of producing a great civilization as humans do. The second is the more partial view which would weight humans above aliens. If I’m putting weight on both of them, which again I think we should — I don’t think you should be super confident in any one model worldview — then that will favor, to some extent, the humans. I think it would be a mistake to favor the humans by 10,000 to 1, supposing you could do some very risky thing that could wipe out both. It’s a 50/50 chance of wiping out both aliens and humans, but 50 percent chance of saving the humans, and that increases your odds of humanity surviving. Then I’m like, “No, don’t do that thing.” But would I give some extra weight to human-originating civilization, all things considered? Then, yes.…
Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.