Have you have read the overview of this blog? If so, I would be pleased if you would tell me which of the following styles of thought you think closest to that manifested in it:
- Have we really forsaken natural selection?
- We don’t trade with ants
- Pacing: inexplicably good
- Let’s think about slowing down AI
- Counterarguments to the basic AI risk case
- A game of mattering
- A game of mattering
- Podcasts on surveys, slower AI, AI arguments
- What do ML researchers think about AI in 2022?
- Why do people avoid vaccination?
Heh, I wish there was a catchall term for the semi-detached rationalist/evo-psych/econ strain of thought that’s becoming pretty popular in certain areas of the blogosphere.
Perhaps its a word that has lost its original meaning, but I kept thinking of “humanist” as the underlying point of view. The overview moves through every level of what it means to be human from the social-economic to psychological to brain and mind. The choices in the poll tend to fix on one level of analysis.
Having said that, usually the highest level of analysis defines the area of study.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Matching game | Meteuphoric -- Topsy.com
I said “computer scientist” because much of your analysis shows an engineering-like attention to detail. By which I mean the kind of problem-solving oriented reductionism that you would find in a well functioning software development or research team.
However, you have an ability to deeply reason in traditionally taboo areas of thought that I would call “Hansonian.”
Hm, I chose “economist” but was tempted to choose “other – utilitarian”. But, as you restricted the given choices to practicioners of established academic disciplines, I thought that might not be helpful.
The choice of “economist” should not, however, be taken to indicate that you would be well-advised to choose a carreer in economics.
1) Your opinions focus very strongly on economic questions, economic rationales, and so on.
2) Your intuitions also tend to be economistic. (similar to the earlier comment, but not exactly the same)
3) A lot of what you say seems to show influence by(or at least convergence with) the GMU economists, perhaps with a lot more Robin Hanson than anybody else.
I chose Computer Scientist, for reasons Brandon Reinhart specified.