
Show Notes
For years, the conversation about the long-term future has been dominated by a crucial question: how do we avoid extinction? But what if ensuring our survival is only half the battle? In this episode, Beatrice is joined by Fin Moorhouse, a researcher at Forethought and co-author with Will MacAskill of the Better Futures series, to make the case for focusing on the other half: flourishing. Or as we'd like to say in this podcast: Existential Hope!
Fin challenges the idea that a great future will emerge automatically if we just avoid the worst-case scenarios. Using the analogy of a grand sailing expedition, he explores the complexities of navigating towards a truly optimal world, questioning whether our current moral compass is enough to guide us.
The conversation dives into the concept of "moral catastrophes"—profound ethical failings, like industrial animal farming, that could persist even in technologically advanced futures. Fin also tackles the complex challenges posed by digital minds, from the risk of accidental suffering to the creation of "willing servants." He argues for the power of "moral trade" as a tool to build a more pluralistic and prosperous world, and explains why we should aim for a "Viatopia"—a stable and self-sustaining state that makes a great future highly likely. On the Existential Hope Podcast hosts Allison Duettmann and Beatrice Erkers from the Foresight Institute invite scientists, founders, and philosophers for in-depth conversations on positive, high-tech futures.
Full transcript, listed resources, and more: https://www.existentialhope.com/podcasts
Follow on X. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
More from The Existential Hope Podcast
We see elections as the foundation of our democracy, but Aristotle thought they create an oligarchy. In ancient Athens, democracy worked by choosing leaders among ordinary citizens by lottery. How could we revive this idea to improve today’s democratic systems?
For 50,000 of generations, humans have passed civilization down to their children. We could be the first generation to hand its future to AIs instead. Should we? Or could the best AI be the kind that chooses to step back and leave some things to us?
Google DeepMind has a 7-hour-long roleplaying game that helps real scientists and policy makers understand how AI will transform science by 2030. And those who played it have found it more informative than any policy brief.
In 2024, Taiwan was flooded with deepfake scam ads. Instead of a crackdown, the government texted 200,000 random citizens: what should we do? People’s proposals became law within months, and by 2025 deepfake ads were down 94%.
There are AIs running labs with little human intervention right now. And they’re doing experiments that human experts would never try. Is this changing what and how science gets done?