having a major schism is one of the worst things we could do for our impact
I definitely agree. For EA to follow the lifecycle of ‘New Atheism’ would be one of the worse outcomes for the movement. Thinking about some reasons why there would be a schism:
Irreconcilable differences in belief between members of the EA Community and a zero-sum mentality about the resources that ought to go to different subgroups/causes in EA
A breakdown of trust / perceived legitimacy between EAs leaders / institutionals / power holders and a significant section of the EA Community—especially if the latter holds little formal power
Lack of belief by the community that EA can achieve its goals, or that its goals are wrong
The emergence of a new powerful social movement that appeals to similar demographics as EA does
Of these 4, I think that 2 is clearly the biggest threat. I think 1 can be overcome with a commitment to pluralism, though obviously some beliefs will fall outside of EA.
In order to avoid 2, I think EA needs to take these questions of community power seriously. The positive impact of EA is a function of its ideas and people yes, but it is also a function of its organisations and institutions—be they formal or informal. Personally, I see a lot of real value in Carla Cremer’s suggestion that EA have an institutional turn—and not only think about improving the institutional decision-making in EA cause areas, but also within EA itself!
(As a historical aside, I think the Sunni-Shia split is actually an interesting counterexample to what you raise here. Despite the initial series of battles and conflicts around succession from the Prophet, this didn’t stop the Umayyad Caliphate from becoming one of the world’s largest empires afterwards, and Islam becoming the world’s second largest religion!)
I definitely agree. For EA to follow the lifecycle of ‘New Atheism’ would be one of the worse outcomes for the movement. Thinking about some reasons why there would be a schism:
Irreconcilable differences in belief between members of the EA Community and a zero-sum mentality about the resources that ought to go to different subgroups/causes in EA
A breakdown of trust / perceived legitimacy between EAs leaders / institutionals / power holders and a significant section of the EA Community—especially if the latter holds little formal power
Lack of belief by the community that EA can achieve its goals, or that its goals are wrong
The emergence of a new powerful social movement that appeals to similar demographics as EA does
Of these 4, I think that 2 is clearly the biggest threat. I think 1 can be overcome with a commitment to pluralism, though obviously some beliefs will fall outside of EA.
In order to avoid 2, I think EA needs to take these questions of community power seriously. The positive impact of EA is a function of its ideas and people yes, but it is also a function of its organisations and institutions—be they formal or informal. Personally, I see a lot of real value in Carla Cremer’s suggestion that EA have an institutional turn—and not only think about improving the institutional decision-making in EA cause areas, but also within EA itself!
(As a historical aside, I think the Sunni-Shia split is actually an interesting counterexample to what you raise here. Despite the initial series of battles and conflicts around succession from the Prophet, this didn’t stop the Umayyad Caliphate from becoming one of the world’s largest empires afterwards, and Islam becoming the world’s second largest religion!)