Fantastic post! This is more informative AND more interesting than most philosophy papers on the topic. You accurately summarise meta-ethical hedonism and provide fair criticisms. 

This is up there with your post on infinite ethics. 

If I can find the time, I'll write down why I disagree and post it here or send you an email. 
 

We discuss US-China relations and avoiding nuclear war. Both are EA cause areas. 

I don't think we can say yet that Samo's forecasts have been "pretty wrong". 

As far as I'm aware, he's only made this forecast: 

"The Ukrainian forces are fighting valiantly and we are in the fog of war.

Given my best understanding of the military situation, Russia looks to occupy Kyiv as well as at least 70% of internationally recognized Ukrainian territory by Day 50 of the invasion." 

https://twitter.com/SamoBurja/status/1499883211748433932 

And this forecast has not been resolved yet. I hope he's wrong, of course. 

I read Scott Alexander as criticising Samo for not making more specific predictions, which is fair. 

And I think the reason Scott gives Samo a C is because of Samo's February tweets about the Russian military being strong. To my mind, this is bound up with the above forecast. I don't think we can say yet that Samo is wrong. Again, I hope he is. 

Anyways, I thought Samo provided an interesting perspective about the situation more broadly. 

Big fan of your blog, by the way :) 

Glad you found it useful Peter  

I've been very influenced by Hewitt's meta-ethics myself, and I highly recommend reading her PhD. You can also get it in book form here: https://www.amazon.com/Feeling-Value-Grounded-Phenomenal-Consciousness/dp/1534768017/ 

Glad you liked the episode :) I had limited time with Kent, so I didn't get to ask him everything I wanted to ask. I hope to have more pleasure/pain scientists on in the future, maybe from the same lab. 

Thanks! 

I don't know whether QRI could test that hypothesis in such a setup. Based on what I know, they're going to test the Symmetry Theory of Valence more directly.