You do not have Javascript enabled. Some elements of this website may not work correctly.

About this talk



EA Global: Boston 2017

When faced with ethical decisions, we generally prefer to act on more evidence rather than less. If the expected value of two options available to us are similar but the expected value of one option is based on more evidence than the the other is, then we will generally prefer the option that has more evidential support. In this talk, Amanda Askell argues that although we are intuitively disinclined to favor interventions with poor evidential support, there are reasons for thinking that these are sometimes better than favoring interventions with a proven track record.