{
  "id": "version:problem-moral-parliament-in-practice-v1",
  "recordId": "problem:moral-parliament-in-practice",
  "version": 1,
  "previousId": null,
  "adapterVersion": "research-content-v1",
  "subject": {
    "type": "entry",
    "collection": "problems",
    "frontmatter": {
      "title": "Moral Parliament in Practice",
      "number": 16,
      "statement": "How should a real giver allocate money when unsure which moral framework is right, and do different methods give stable answers?",
      "progress": "A comparison of allocation methods, such as credence-weighted averaging, moral parliaments and maximizing expected choice-worthiness, on real portfolios, with their sensitivity reported.",
      "conditions": [
        {
          "collection": "conditions",
          "id": "single-lens"
        }
      ],
      "bounty": "Unfunded. The Question Bounties program will attach prizes once it is funded.",
      "sources": []
    },
    "body": "\n## Why it matters\n\nThe [Single Lens](/diagnosis/single-lens/) is the condition Charitology was founded to treat. Treating it means giving people a sound way to act on several frameworks at once.\n\n## Where to start\n\nThe [Portfolio Builder](/tools/portfolio-builder/) implements a simple credence-weighted method. The open problem is whether more sophisticated methods give meaningfully different, and more defensible, answers.\n"
  },
  "subjectHash": "9db796c7b98733c7758349e182aba71107e5b6172d358fb2fec9865cf0da9547",
  "authorship": {
    "state": "unknown",
    "complete": false,
    "actorIds": [],
    "refs": []
  },
  "sources": [
    {
      "sourceId": "source:current-problems-moral-parliament-in-practice",
      "selector": {
        "kind": "entry"
      }
    }
  ],
  "hash": "8436f32ecfedbe8b77e2d8dd2e967207dfcfcd603069e86076fb0cf77a43d31f"
}