Member-only story
Some thoughts on Effective Altruism
Would you save a Picasso or a child from a burning building, and why?
Effective Altruism (EA), both the movement and the concept underlying it, has been around now for about one and a half decade and has generated plenty of both enthusiasm and criticism. So I thought it may be time to write about it, in order primarily to help myself get more clear on what the fuss is all about. I hope the following considerations will also be helpful to my readers and stimulate some thought and discussion.
At its core, EA is about “using evidence and reason to figure out how to benefit others as much as possible, and taking action on that basis.” [1] This is, very clearly, something that it’s hard to object to. I, for one, don’t want to reject evidence and act irrationally when it comes to deciding to which charities to donate and how much, for instance. The problems, if any, begin to take form when we dig a bit deeper.
For instance, in terms of its basic philosophy, EA is a combination of 19th century utilitarianism (though the idea has a much longer history) and the modern notion that privileged people in the developed world should devote resources to help the global poor. Again, I find it difficult to argue the second point, but utilitarianism? No thanks. Utilitarianism is one of the three major…
