#1 - Consequentialism I: Epistemic Modesty
from Increments Hosted by Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani
We attempt to talk about Epistemic Modesty: broadly, the idea that one should be modest in their beliefs when other people (with similar credentials) disagree with them. Vaden however, entirely immodestly, tries abandoning the subject because he’s scared of Ben’s forceful arguments and derails the conversation on to the entirely uncontroversial subject of which systems of moral decision making are best suited for moral progress. A flabbergasted Ben tries to keep up, but too little too late. Most of the time he's just trying to get his microphone to behave anyway. References: In defence of epistemic modesty; Greg Lewis. Against Modest Epistemology; Eliezer Yudkowski. Podcast with Will MacAskill on moral uncertainty.
Embed this episode
Chapters
- 0:00 Intro
- 1:11 Main segment: epistemic modesty
- 4:30 Political opinions and empirical questions
- 10:48 Moral frameworks: consequentialism vs deontology
- 20:00 Critical rationalism vs Bayesian reasoning
- 27:20 Wallet thought experiment
- 38:00 Truth vs certainty distinction
- 47:00 Acting under moral uncertainty
- 1:02:00 Battleground of ideas and wrap-up
No transcript yet.