"Convergence on Existential Risk Policy"

Nick Bostrom, Toby Ord, and Will MacAskill argue that humans face rapidly increasing existential risks this century. Given these authors focus on technology as both the villain and the hero of our existence, Zoe Cremer and Luke Kemp categorize them as taking a Techno Utopia Approach (TUA) towards existential risk. While recognizing merits to this approach, they also argue that a more democratic methodology and diverse set of approaches is needed. Joshua Schuster, Derek Woods, and Emile Torres have also taken a critical view of the (TUA), arguing that it fails to consider the interests of marginalized populations and other species. Given the more diverse scope of existential threats identified by these authors, and the shorter-term motivation of their concerns, I categorize them as taking a Shorter-term Pluralist Approach (SPA).

This paper aims to explore the following question: given the different values of the (TUA) and the (SPA), where might their support of policies related to existential risk converge? Answering this question is important, because while theoretical discussions have independent intellectual value for many, policies associated with existential risks have potential consequences for everyone. This discussion can help scholars and policymakers form alliances, better understand their rivals, and more effectively allocate resources to practical areas of research and debate.