Are Dharma traditions that posit 'innate moral perfection of everyone by default' reasoning from the just world fallacy?
Can we have a market with qualitatively different (un-interconvertible) forms of money?
How would signalling/countersignalling work in a post-scarcity economy?
What are some effective ways to reset the hedonic baseline?
As far as I understand, this post decomoses 'impact' into value impact and objective impact. VI is dependent on some agent's ability to reach arbitrary value-driven goals, while OI depends on any agent's ability to reach goals in general.
I'm not sure if there exists a robust distinction between the two - the post doesn't discuss any general demarcation tool.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the most important point to note here is that 'objectiveness' of an impact is defined not to be about the 'objective state of the world' - rather about how 'general to all agents' an impact is.
I think this post is broadly making two claims -
Impactful things fundamentally feel different.
A good Impact Measure should be designed in a way that it strongly safeguards against almost any imperfect objective.
It is also (maybe implicitly) claiming that the three properties mentioned completely specify a good impact measure.
I am looking forward to reading the rest of the sequence with arguments supporting these claims.
What gadgets have improved your productivity?
For example, I started using a stylus few days ago and realized it can be a great tool for a lot of things!
Seems like this has been done already.
Enjoyed reading this. Looking forward to the next posts in the sequence.