Did the author factor in the impact of this kind of article on the external perception of the rationalist / utilitarian / EA community when weighing the utility of publishing this?
Should you push arguments that seem ridiculously unacceptable to the vast majority of people, thereby reducing the weight of more acceptable arguments you could possibly make?
Should you push arguments that seem ridiculously unacceptable to the vast majority of people, thereby reducing the weight of more acceptable arguments you could possibly make?