1. Reading List

  • He gave me an essay he wrote to read - I won’t share it here as I guess it’s his “intellectual property”
  • But I’ll share the flashcards I’m making…
  • It’s about “the ultimate decision” that you can make, which is whether you want to make your decision making be not up to chance
  • The reading list he shared:
    1. His essay on “the ultimate decision”
      • So far for me it rhymes a lot with the Kegan 3 to Kegan 4 transition
      • See e.g. the heading “Aha → am I basically reckoning with Kegan stages here?” on Questioning Effective Altruism
    2. Galen Strawson’s 2008 (or 1994? confusing) journal article “The Impossibility of Ultimate Moral Responsibility”
    3. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’s article on “Moral Responsibility”
  • And other things that Gemini suggested I read in order to better grok his essay
    1. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’s article on “Free Will”
    2. Thomas Nagel’s essay “Moral Luck” (1979)

2. Pulling out key concepts from his essay via AI

  1. The Fundamental Decision
  2. Concepts of Chance and Luck
  3. The Nature of Learning
  4. Transformation on Path RLC
  5. Core Philosophical Implications
  6. Justification for Path RLC
  7. Impediments to Path RLC
  8. Practical Considerations for Decision-Making
  9. Metaethical Implications

More detail

  1. The Fundamental Decision
    • Path ILC (Implicitly Leaving to Chance)
    • Path ELC (Explicitly Leaving to Chance)
    • Path RLC (Rejecting Leaving to Chance)
  2. Concepts of Chance and Luck
    • Chance Events vs. Leaving to Chance
    • Moral Luck
      • Circumstantial Luck
      • Constitutive Luck
  3. The Nature of Learning
    • Learning as Deepening Understanding
      • Improving reasoning
      • Enriching wisdom
      • Increasing sensitivity
      • Open-mindedness
    • Learning at the Deepest Level
      • Questioning ultimate goals and values
      • Questioning impact on others
      • Questioning the nature of agency
    • Learning in Different Domains
      • Mathematics
      • Science
      • Ethics
    • Modes Antithetical to Learning
      • Copying and parroting
      • Rote learning
      • Habitual, unthinking action
  4. Transformation on Path RLC
    • Provisional Decision-Making
    • Mental Transformation
      • Humility and circumspection
      • Open, enquiring mind
    • Convergence of Understanding
    • The Continuous Nature of Learning
  5. Core Philosophical Implications
    • Moral Responsibility
    • Autonomy
    • Moral Motivation
    • Freewill
    • Weakness of Will (Akrasia)
  6. Justification for Path RLC
    • Critique of Chance-Based Paths (ILC and ELC)
    • The “Seriously Questioning” Argument
  7. Impediments to Path RLC
    • Deficient Mental Abilities
    • Insufficient Opportunity and Understanding
    • Psychological Blockages
      • Insecurity
      • Pride
      • Narcissism
      • Complacency
      • Laziness
    • Fallacious Belief Systems
      • Arguments against the possibility of learning in ethics
        • Arguments from a flawed conception of learning
        • Arguments from personal failure to learn
        • Arguments from lack of convergence
        • Arguments from fear of losing contingent self (“a kind of death”)
  8. Practical Considerations for Decision-Making
    • Forced Probabilistic or Random Choice
      • Absence of a single best act
      • Insufficient information or understanding
      • Insufficient skill
      • Insufficient ethical progress
    • Balancing Learning and Acting
  9. Metaethical Implications
    • Rejection of Contingency-Based Ethical Theories
      • Humeanism
      • Subjectivism
      • Relativism
      • Intuitionism
      • Reflective Equilibrium
    • Potentially Viable Ethical Theories
      • Ethical Realism
      • Kantian Constructivism

3. Flashcards on key concept 1 (the fundamental decision)

Dan argues that the most fundamental decision a person faces is 
{{c1::the choice between 3 paths}}
|
Acronyms of Dan's 3 paths: 
{{c1::ILC
ELC
RLC}}
|
Dan's 3 paths
ILC stands for 
{{c1::Implicitly Leaving to Chance}}
|
Dan's 3 paths
ELC stands for 
{{c1::Explicitly Leaving to Chance}}
|
Dan's 3 paths
RLC stands for 
{{c1::Rejecting Leaving to Chance}}
|
Dan's 3 paths, full names:
{{c1::ILC (Implicitly Leaving to Chance)
ELC (Explicitly Leaving to Chance) 
RLC (Rejecting Leaving to Chance)}}
|
What is the defining characteristic of Path ILC? 
{{c1::Continuing to make decisions 
in the way one's 
upbringing, genes, and experiences 
have chanced to condition them}}
|
How does Lucy's initial behaviour in the 'Twins' example illustrate Path ILC
{{c1::She uncritically accepts the beliefs and methods of her community}}
such as 
{{c1::using the wrong maths formula and maximising her own pleasure}}
|
In what 3 realms is it particularly common 
for people to remain on Path ILC?
{{c1::Religion, politics, and ethics}}
|
What is the primary aim of someone on Path ELC? 
{{c1::To strive to increase as much as possible 
the role of chance in their decision-making}}
|
What is the ideal or purest form of Path {{c2::ELC}}
{{c1::To choose at random between all available options at every moment}}
|
What is the core principle of Path RLC?
{{c1::To strive to reduce as far as possible 
the role of chance in one's decision-making}}
|
What are the two key activities 
that define the process 
of being on Path RLC?
{{c1::Striving to learn at the deepest level}}
{{c2::Striving to base decisions upon everything learned so far}}
|
What are the two key activities 
that define the process 
of being on Path RLC?
{{c1::Striving to learn at the deepest level}}
{{c1::Striving to base decisions upon everything learned so far}}
|
How would someone on Path RLC respond 
when confronted with a mathematical or scientific belief they hold 
due to their upbringing?
{{c1::They would ask 'why' this belief is held over alternatives 
and seek to learn the underlying principles of the subject}}
|
3 things that someone on Path RLC might do 
when approaching an ethical decision, 
such as how to treat others
{{c1::
1. They question their current ethical framework 
2. Try to learn in ethics 
3. To find a non-arbitrary way to act}}
|
(Re: Dan from Superprof)
Why is the decision between the three paths 
considered the most fundamental?
{{c1::Because the choice of path 
underpins and determines 
how all other subsequent decisions are made}}
|
What does taking Path RLC provide that the other paths lack
{{c1::A foundation for a life with purpose, meaning, autonomy, 
and the confidence that one is acting rightly}}
|
In the 'River' example, 
how does Lucy's decision-making differ 
if she is on Path ILC versus Path RLC
{{c1::On Path ILC, she acts on her chanced-to-have pleasure-maximising principle}}
{{c1::On Path RLC, she acts on what she has learned is ethically right}}

4. Flashcards on key concept 2 (types of luck)

In his essay "Moral Luck", 
What fundamental problem does Thomas Nagel identify 
Regarding our ordinary practice of moral assessment?
{{c1::A person's moral standing 
can be significantly affected by factors beyond their control, 
yet we continue to judge them as if they were fully in control}}
|
What is the core distinction Dan makes 
between "chance events" 
and the act of 
"leaving to chance"
{{c1::Chance events happen to us and present our options, 
whereas leaving to chance is the act of choosing amongst those options 
without a firm grounding }}
|
Dan's essay focuses on which types of Nagel's moral luck?
{{c1::Circumstantial}} luck 
{{c1::Constitutive}} luck 
|
Nagel identifies {{c1::four}} types of moral luck 
|
What is "circumstantial luck", according to Nagel?
{{c1::The luck of 
the specific problems 
and situations 
one happens to face}}
|
What is "constitutive luck", according to Nagel?
{{c1::The luck of being the kind of person you are, 
with certain inclinations, capacities, and character traits}}
|
The third type of moral luck identified by Nagel:
{{c1::Luck in antecedent circumstances}}
AKA {{c1::causal luck}} 
|
The fourth type of moral luck identified by Nagel:
{{c1::Luck in the way one's actions turn out}}
AKA {{c1::resultant luck}}
|
How does Dan's "Path RLC" offer a direct response 
to the problem of constitutive luck?
{{c1::It proposes that one can actively overcome their 'chanced-to-have' character
by striving to learn 
and base their decisions on that learning}}
|
In the 'River' example, 
Lucy happening to pass by as the child falls in 
is an instance of what specific type of luck?
{{c1::Circumstantial }}
|
In the 'Twins' example, 
the coin toss determining the core ethical dispositions of Lucy and Felicity 
is a stark illustration of what concept?
{{c1::Constitutive luck}}
|
According to Dan's essay, 
When does a person become morally responsible 
for their character traits?
{{c1::When they have the good circumstantial luck 
of being able to take Path RLC, 
but choose not to }}
|
How does Nagel's concept of "resultant luck" 
apply to a driver who, through a momentary lapse of attention, 
hits a child who runs into the road?
{{c1::The driver is judged more harshly 
than another driver with the same lapse of attention 
where no child was present, 
even though the action was identical}}
|
How does Dan's essay reframe the problem of moral luck 
from a first-person perspective?
{{c1::It frames it not as a state of being, 
but as a fundamental choice between 
leaving things to chance (ILC/ELC) 
or rejecting chance (RLC)}}
|
In the 'River' example, 
the rain and the child slipping into the water 
are examples of what?
{{c1::Chance events 
that result in Lucy being presented with a particular set of options}}
|
According to Dan's essay, 
being in a position where you have the option to take Path RLC 
is itself an instance of what?
{{c1::Good circumstantial luck}}
|
What term describes the type of luck related to 
the kind of person you are, 
including your {{c2::ingrained habits}}, {{c2::desires}}, and {{c2::values}}
{{c1::Constitutive luck}}
|
How does Dan's essay reframe the problem of constitutive moral luck?
{{c1::As a choice: 
if one has the option to take Path RLC, 
one has the option to escape constitutive luck, 
making one responsible for that choice}}