Scott Alexander defends the use of extreme thought experiments in moral philosophy, using Phil Robertson's controversial remarks as an example to explain their necessity and purpose. Longer summary

Scott Alexander defends the use of extreme thought experiments in moral philosophy, using Phil Robertson's controversial remarks about atheists as an example. He argues that such thought experiments, while disturbing, are necessary to tease out our true moral intuitions and principles. Scott explains that these scenarios are designed to be extreme to magnify small effects, similar to how physicists use extreme conditions to study fundamental laws. He emphasizes that engaging with such thought experiments doesn't mean philosophers endorse or fantasize about these scenarios, but rather use them as tools to explore complex ethical issues. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander explores the potential link between falling testosterone levels and declining crime rates, finding the hypothesis intriguing but ultimately insufficient to explain observed crime trends. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the hypothesis that falling testosterone levels might be related to the secular decline in crime. He examines studies showing a significant drop in testosterone levels in American men from 1987 to 2004, and research linking higher testosterone to violent crime. However, he identifies several problems with this hypothesis, including timing discrepancies between testosterone decline and crime reduction, contradictory evidence, and the fact that crime is dropping in women at the same rate as in men. While intrigued by the potential connection, Scott concludes that the hypothesis doesn't fully explain the observed crime trends. He suggests further research, including studies comparing testosterone levels in violent criminals to the general population and proposing an examination of digit ratios in historical skeletal remains to track testosterone levels over time. Shorter summary