Re #FTX and #EffectiveAltruism:
After the business collapse of former billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried, I'm seeing lots of hot takes condemning the philosophy of effective altruism that he helped fund.
Don't throw the EA baby out with the billionaire bathwater. 1/
After the business collapse of former billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried, I'm seeing lots of hot takes condemning the philosophy of effective altruism that he helped fund.
Don't throw the EA baby out with the billionaire bathwater. 1/
2/ I'm a newcomer to this moral philosophy and framework, with just 10 to 20 hours of EA readings, podcasts, and discussions under my belt.
It is clear to me that some criticisms of EA rely on very oversimplified descriptions of the subject. Other criticisms are valid.
It is clear to me that some criticisms of EA rely on very oversimplified descriptions of the subject. Other criticisms are valid.
4/ I say the following as somebody who has spent 20+ years in NGO/nonprofit work:
I see limits to current EA discourse that need to be transcended, but I do think the EA community brings a much-needed scalpel of quantitative analysis to the NGO/charity world.
I see limits to current EA discourse that need to be transcended, but I do think the EA community brings a much-needed scalpel of quantitative analysis to the NGO/charity world.
5/ One of the simple questions that effective altruism asks is the following:
What are the best ways to spend scarce dollars to reduce suffering and save lives?
The NGO/charity sectors need independent voices to ask this question over and over again.
Here is why:
What are the best ways to spend scarce dollars to reduce suffering and save lives?
The NGO/charity sectors need independent voices to ask this question over and over again.
Here is why:
6/ The basic design challenge that many NGOs, advocacy organizations, and non-profits face is that the people who "BUY" the services aren't the same people who "CONSUME" them.
What do I mean by this?
What do I mean by this?
7/ Let's take the hypothetical of a charity, nonprofit org, or NGO that helps homeless people:
(NGO means non-governmental organization)
The people who "buy" the services of the NGO are the donors.
The people who "use" the services are the homeless.
This creates a challenge.
(NGO means non-governmental organization)
The people who "buy" the services of the NGO are the donors.
The people who "use" the services are the homeless.
This creates a challenge.
8/ Donors (or buyers) fund the organization based on the organization's marketing, PR, and reputation.
Unless you are a large donor with time and staff, you aren't investigating the organization or charity's actual effectiveness.
You are often reacting to their marketing.
Unless you are a large donor with time and staff, you aren't investigating the organization or charity's actual effectiveness.
You are often reacting to their marketing.
9/ The hypothetical homeless that the organization is supposed to help might actually be served much better with a different approach, but donors often don't have time or capacity to be able to know that.
10/ Effective Altruism communities help address this by asking rigorous questions. @GiveWell, for example, makes recommendations as to how you can make the most effective donations possible with your money.
11/ This has led the EA community to make recommendations like donating to interventions in poorer rather than richer economies because you can save more lives in places where costs are lower.
12/ Another area of internal and external debate is the EA topic of " long-termism."
There are different ways to describe this philosophy, but I understand it to be anchored in the basic idea that future lives are as important as current lives.
There are different ways to describe this philosophy, but I understand it to be anchored in the basic idea that future lives are as important as current lives.
13/ Many might argue that this is problematic in that it reduces the focus on alleviating currently existing suffering.
To me, addressing the climate crisis is one kind of of long-termism.
Many of the people who will suffer the most under climate change aren't yet alive.
To me, addressing the climate crisis is one kind of of long-termism.
Many of the people who will suffer the most under climate change aren't yet alive.
14/ An area that I think needs additional scrutiny and discussion in the EA community is the question of structural change.
15/ Many of the easily-quantifiable EA backed solutions, like mosquito nets in societies struggling with malaria, are themselves outcomes of structural failures-- like government failures.
16/ It is much much easier to calculate lives saved from mosquito net funding than it is to calculate lives save from pushing governments to take action on mosquito nets or malaria.
17/ It is even harder to currently evaluate under the EA framework whether the targeting of a government will even work or what the best way is to do so.
18/ And so as a consequence, it can be easy for EA communities to dismiss campaigns for structural change-- whether we are talking about human rights, government reform, ending corruption, etc.
Because it's hard to track success or effectiveness in this particular arena.
Because it's hard to track success or effectiveness in this particular arena.
19/ That's just one of multiple criticisms out there regarding effective altruism. But I think these criticisms should be engaged as pathways to amend and improve the EA community's general areas of consensus.
20/ I encourage folks to resist the urge to dismiss EA just because you or I don't like the conduct of folks like Sam Bankman-Fried.
Moral philosophies and communities are much bigger than the patrons that let them down.
//
Moral philosophies and communities are much bigger than the patrons that let them down.
//
21/
Interesting additional thoughts from someone reacting on Reddit:
Interesting additional thoughts from someone reacting on Reddit:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
