This was already posted a few links down.
One interesting aspect of posts like this is that they can, to some extent, be (felicitously) self-defeating.
As Bastian Stern has pointed out to me, people often mix up [pro tanto-considerations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie#Use_in_academic_philosophy) with all-things-considered-judgements - usually by interpreting what is merely intended to be a pro tanto-consideration as an all-things-consid...(read more)
Thanks Ryan, that's helpful. Yes, I'm not sure one would be able to do something that has the right combination of accuracy, interestingness and low-cost at present.
Sure, I guess my question was whether you'd think that it'd be possible to do this in a way that would resonate with readers. Would they find the estimates of quality, or level of postmodernism, intuitively plausible?
My hunch was that the classification would primarily be based on patterns of wor...(read more)
Good points. I agree that what you write within parentheses is a potential problem. Indeed, it is a problem for many kinds of far-reaching norms on altruistic behaviour compliance with which is hard to observe: they might handicap conscientious people relative to less conscientious people to such an...(read more)
Thanks. My claim is somewhat different, though. Adams says that "whenever humanity can see a slow-moving disaster coming, we find a way to avoid it". This is an all-things-considered claim. My claim is rather that sleepwalk bias is a pro-tanto consideration indicating that we're too pessimistic abou...(read more)
It is not quite clear to me whether you are here just talking about instances of sleepwalking, or whether you are also talking about a predictive error indicating anti-sleepwalking bias: i.e. that they wrongly predicted that the relevant actors would act, yet they sleepwalked into a disaster.
Open Phil gives $500,000 to Tetlock's research.