Increments

They trade provocative thought experiments and taboo hypotheticals, from incest ethics to looksmaxing culture. They debate medical assistance in dying and the ethics of extreme risk-taking like free soloing. Conversations drift to nomadic academic life, Popperian influences, charity choices, and the oddities of fan DMs and financial-domination stories.

Don Robinson, a pseudonymous progressive-libertarian accelerationist, joins to unpack Trump, MAGA dynamics, and political strategy. Conversations cover Trump as a trial-and-error force, why MAGA appeals despite flaws, ICE and immigration enforcement controversies, preference falsification in politics, and whether Popperian incrementalism fits confrontational leadership. Short, sharp takes on risks, accountability, and when rapid change might be justified.

They wrestle with whether we can define truth and if science even approaches it. They compare correspondence, pragmatic, and coherence theories and why some fail. Tarski’s meta-language move and language hierarchies come up as a fix for paradoxes. They also tackle ambiguity, background knowledge, and why demagogic questions can undermine the idea of truth.

Two years without discussing effective altruism -- did you miss it? Not as much as Vaden, surely. And probably a right bit more than Ben. Well, we're back in the game with a spicy one. Was EA a front for AI safety from the beginning? Did the leaders care not a wit for global poverty? Is Ben going to throw himself out window if Vaden keeps this up? We discuss Feedback on our introspection episode The motives of the EA founders The felicia forum Is this a conspiracy theory? EA's strategic ambiguity Bostromism, transhumanism, and AI safety EA funding The public/core divide and the funnel model Quotes new effective altruists tend to start off concerned about global poverty or animal suffering and then hear, take seriously, and often are convinced by the arguments for existential risk mitigation - Will MacAskill Existential risk isn’t the most useful public face for effective altruism – everyone inc[l]uding Eliezer Yudkowsky agrees about that - Scott Alexander, 2015 Utilitymonster: GWWC is explicitly poverty-focused but high impact careers (HIC) is not. In fact, hardcore members of GWWC are heavily interested in x-risk, and I estimate that 10-15% of its general membership is as well. I’d take them seriously as a group for promoting utilitarianism in general. I’m a GWWC leader. [Redacted]: but HIC always seems to talk about things in terms of “lives saved”, ive never heard them mentioning other things to donate to. […] Utilitymonster: That’s exactly the right thing for HIC to do. Talk about lives saved with their public face, let hardcore members hear about x-risk, and then, in the future, if some excellent x-risk opportunity arises, direct resources to x-risk. - From felicia forum. References Gleiberman's paper: https://medialibrary.uantwerpen.be/files/8518/61565cb6-e056-4e35-bd2e-d14d58e35231.pdf Old EA wikipedia page (web archive): https://web.archive.org/web/20170409171350/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism Old CEA webpage (web archive): https://web.archive.org/web/20161219031827/https://www.centreforeffectivealtruism.org/fundraising/ Socials Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link Become a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here. Click dem like buttons on youtube Let us funnel you into the core group of super secret patreon supporters. Send us an email at incrementspodcast@gmail.com Support Increments

Celebrate the holidays with a deep dive into parenting, where advice for new fathers shines. Explore Robert Kegan's stages of identity development and the allure of enlightenment. The discussion touches on the struggles of introspection, revealing how difficult true self-knowledge can be. The risks of over-analysis in therapy are highlighted, alongside a fascinating look at countertransference. Finally, there's a nod to the enlightening show Couples Therapy as a model for effective therapeutic guidance.

The hosts delve into Popper's intriguing thoughts on consciousness and problem-solving. They debate whether all thought is inherently about solving problems. The discussion turns to the clash between empirical content and probability in science. Historical examples shed light on how theories evolve and progress through higher content. Simplicity and verisimilitude are highlighted as guiding principles in theory choice. Ultimately, they argue for a problems-first approach to scientific advancement, emphasizing that theories exist to tackle real-world challenges.

Scott Aaronson, the Schlumberger Centennial Chair of Computer Science at UT Austin and director of its Quantum Information Center, dives into the riveting debate on AI's role in our lives. He passionately advocates for educational reform, emphasizing individualized learning. The discussion navigates the concept of 'justa-ism,' questioning whether AI is merely a tool or something more. Scott also touches on limitations of current AI training methods, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and the unpredictability of AI advancements—inviting us to consider the broader implications for humanity.

Dive into Popper's philosophy of science as the hosts explore what makes a scientific theory great. They discuss whether we can judge theories before testing, the debate on responsibility for a lost watch, and the intricacies of male skincare routines. The conversation touches on concepts like empirical versus logical content, the significance of growth in science, and whether aiming for high probability aligns with scientific progress. Expect a fiery clash over Bayesianism and Popper's critiques, all while keeping it lighthearted!

We're joined by Jonathan Rauch to discuss what it means to be a radical incrementalist, how to foment revolution on geological timescales, and whether Christianity can be a force for good in politics. Can Jon convince angry-Hitchens-atheist Vaden that Christianity has some benefits? Will both Vaden and Ben be at Sunday prayer? Follow Jonathan on his website, at Brookings, at The Atlantic or on Bluesky. We discuss The constitution of knowledge and whether it's holding Norms vs laws, and whether we should introduce more laws to codify norms Popper's paradox of tolerance How should liberals respond to illiberalism? Which tactics, if any, should democrats adopt from MAGA to fight MAGA? Sharp Christianity and Christian nationalism Rauch's plea to Christians References The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth Cross Purposes: Christianity's Broken Bargain with Democracy Errata Jonathan Rauch is the author of nine books, not eight! Socials Follow us on Twitter at @JonRauch, @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link Become a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here. Click dem like buttons on youtube Anyone in Canada have a basement suite Jonathan could rent for a while? Send your address over to incrementspodcast@gmail.comSpecial Guest: Jonathan Rauch.Support Increments

Ben Recht, a professor at UC Berkeley, explores the nuances of statistics and AI. He defends Bayesian approaches while humorously questioning the utility of statistics in daily life. The discussion dives into AI doom, the origins of the term 'robot,' and the contributions of Paul Meehl to science. Recht highlights the philosophical pitfalls of probabilistic reasoning in AI and debates the relevance of traditional statistical methods. Listen in for a thoughtful critique on the intersection of statistics, science, and societal perceptions of technology.