Thanks for brining our convo here! As context for others, Nathan and I had a great discussion about this which was supposed to be recorded...but I managed to mess up and didnât capture the incoming audio (i.e. everything Nathan said) đą
Guess Iâll share a note I made about this (sounds AI written because it mostly was, generated from a separate rambly recording). A few lines are a little spicier than Iâd ideally like but đ€·
Donations and Consistency in Effective Altruism
I believe that effective altruists should genuinely strive to practice effective altruism. By this, I mean that there are individuals who earnestly and seriously agree with the core arguments that animal welfare charities deserve significant financial support, both in relative and absolute terms. However, they do not always follow through on these convictions when it comes to donations.
Many, for example, will eagerly nod along with introductory presentations for university effective altruism groups often highlight the fact that a tiny fraction of all donations go toward animal welfare causes, even within EA.
And, as far as I can tell, very few if any EAs affirmatively dispute that animal welfare as a cause is simply more important and neglected, and similarly as tractable, as global poverty. But their donations do not seem to reflect this, going to GiveWell-type charities like GiveDirectly or Against Malaria Foundation instead of animal welfare organizations.
While supporting poverty alleviation efforts is commendable in its own right â after all we want poor people having more money and fewer dying from preventable diseases â it seems incongruous given their professed beliefs.
Without delving too deeply into speculation or psychoanalysis regarding individual motivations behind these donation choices; one possibility is simply an emotional preference for contributing toward human-centric causes over those focused on animalsâ well-being.
To be clear: I am not claiming any personal moral superiority here; my own charitable giving record is awfully small in relative terms. Nonetheless I encourage fellow EAs who share concerns about factory farmingâs abhorrent nature and have resources available for philanthropy to seriously consider allocating their donations toward animal welfare causes.
Thanks for posting this. I had branching out my giving strategy to conclude some animal-welfare organizations on the to-do list, but this motivated me to actually pull the trigger on that.
I think most of the animal welfare neglect comes from the fact that if people are deep enough into EA to accept all of its âweirdâ premises they will donate to AI safety instead. Animal welfare is really this weird midway spot between âdoesnât rest on controversial claimsâ and âmaximal impactâ.
Definitely part of the explanation, but my strong impression from interaction irl and on Twitter is that many (most?) AI-safety-pilled EAs donate to GiveWell and much fewer to anything animal related.
I think ~literally except for Eliezer (who doesnât think other animals are sentient), this isnât what youâd expect from the weirdness model implied.
Assuming Iâm not badly mistaken about othersâ beliefs and the gestalt (sorry) of their donations, I just donât think theyâre trying to do the most good with their money. Tbc this isnât some damning indictmentâitâs how almost all self-identified EAsâ money is spent and Iâm not at all talking about ânormal person in rich country consumption.â
Thanks for brining our convo here! As context for others, Nathan and I had a great discussion about this which was supposed to be recorded...but I managed to mess up and didnât capture the incoming audio (i.e. everything Nathan said) đą
Guess Iâll share a note I made about this (sounds AI written because it mostly was, generated from a separate rambly recording). A few lines are a little spicier than Iâd ideally like but đ€·
Thanks for posting this. I had branching out my giving strategy to conclude some animal-welfare organizations on the to-do list, but this motivated me to actually pull the trigger on that.
I think most of the animal welfare neglect comes from the fact that if people are deep enough into EA to accept all of its âweirdâ premises they will donate to AI safety instead. Animal welfare is really this weird midway spot between âdoesnât rest on controversial claimsâ and âmaximal impactâ.
Definitely part of the explanation, but my strong impression from interaction irl and on Twitter is that many (most?) AI-safety-pilled EAs donate to GiveWell and much fewer to anything animal related.
I think ~literally except for Eliezer (who doesnât think other animals are sentient), this isnât what youâd expect from the weirdness model implied.
Assuming Iâm not badly mistaken about othersâ beliefs and the gestalt (sorry) of their donations, I just donât think theyâre trying to do the most good with their money. Tbc this isnât some damning indictmentâitâs how almost all self-identified EAsâ money is spent and Iâm not at all talking about ânormal person in rich country consumption.â