Discover more from Overcoming Bias
Ten years ago today the GMU economics department voted to award me tenure. With that vote, I won my academic gamble. I can’t be sure what my odds reasonably were, so I can’t be sure it was a gamble worth taking. And I’m not sure tenure is overall good for the world. But I am sure that I’m very glad that I achieved tenure.
Many spend part of their tenure dividend on leisure. Many spend part on continuing to gain academic prestige as they did before. Many switch to more senior roles in the academic prestige game. And some spend tenure on riskier research agendas, agendas that are foolish for folks seeing tenure.
Though some may disagree, I see myself as primarily in this last category. And since that would not be possible without tenure, I bow in sincere supplication, and thank my colleagues for this treasured honor. THANK YOU for my tenure.
Thank You GMU Econ!
My, pondering that scenario has made me optimistic: one likely outcome of said social upheaval would be liberalizing the FDA, which would have very positive knock-on effects for human welfare.
@RobinHanson:disqus : That seems essentially impossible, if you use a standard such as a pill marketed with an explicit FDA endorsement of the longevity claim. (Such an endorsement would cause massive social upheaval, and I suspect that with the government in its current form, regardless of the pace of scientific advancement, no such endorsement will be made for at least 60 years. Just think of the lawsuits... they would have to use an extraordinary standard of clinical evidence.) But perhaps @disqus_7K1HQbDsf2:disqus was suggesting weaker FDA certification along the lines of, "the general health and well-being of an average person aged 50 taking the pill is comparable to that of an average person aged 45 not taking the pill." That seems far more plausible, but I'd still bet against it at 10:1 odds by 2023. (Again, mostly because this would be such an important drug that probably decades of clinical trials and longitudinal studies would be required before the FDA would sign off on such a claim.) Which raises the specter that if medical researchers *do* make such an advance, we will be denied what must be hundreds of trillions of dollars worth of welfare returns from it, by our own government. But more likely, the drug would be copied and marketed abroad, and rich Americans would quickly procure it overseas. Still likely to cause massive social upheaval, but of the more familiar class warfare kind.