I think all your comments are valid. I definitely did not agree with the conclusions or the negativity towards utilitarianism as the vast majority of EA’s see it.
My motive for sharing this was: in previous posts I’ve shared examples of where EA’s are unjustly considered, basically, to weird to be relevant, without any clear justification of why. In this article, at least the allegedly flawed assumptions of EA’s were clearly outlined, and it was not outrageous to argue that, yes, some EA’s do think like that sometimes.
So, IMHO we all need to be ready with arguments like what you’ve outlined, to say “I can see why you think that—but here is a better way to think about it, and I think it will reassure you that most EA’s, even those who call themselves utilitarians, do not have these crazy ideas.”
I think all your comments are valid. I definitely did not agree with the conclusions or the negativity towards utilitarianism as the vast majority of EA’s see it.
My motive for sharing this was: in previous posts I’ve shared examples of where EA’s are unjustly considered, basically, to weird to be relevant, without any clear justification of why. In this article, at least the allegedly flawed assumptions of EA’s were clearly outlined, and it was not outrageous to argue that, yes, some EA’s do think like that sometimes.
So, IMHO we all need to be ready with arguments like what you’ve outlined, to say “I can see why you think that—but here is a better way to think about it, and I think it will reassure you that most EA’s, even those who call themselves utilitarians, do not have these crazy ideas.”