Just as an aside, I’m not sure that’s obvious. John Stuart Mill was a leader in the abolition movement. He was arguably the Peter Singer of those times.
The first known argument for legalization of homosexuality in England
Animal rights
Abolishing the death penalty and corporal punishment (including of children)
Separation of church and state
Freedom of speech
precisely because of the difficulties in EV calculation
The extensive work on factory farming is certainly one counterexample, but the interest in artificial intelligence may be a more powerful one on this point.
Might be useful in elucidating why people criticizing EAs always mischaracterize us as not caring about systemic change or harder-to-quantify causes.
Those causes get criticized because of how hard to quantify they are. The relatively neglected thing is recognizing both strands, and arguing for Goldilocks positions between ‘linear clear evidence-backed non-systemic charity’ and ‘far too radical for most interested in systemic change.’
And Bentham was ahead of the curve on:
Abolition of slavery
Calling for legal equality of the sexes
The first known argument for legalization of homosexuality in England
Animal rights
Abolishing the death penalty and corporal punishment (including of children)
Separation of church and state
Freedom of speech
The extensive work on factory farming is certainly one counterexample, but the interest in artificial intelligence may be a more powerful one on this point.
Perhaps “systemic change bias” needs to be coined, or something to that effect, to be used in further debates.
Might be useful in elucidating why people criticizing EAs always mischaracterize us as not caring about systemic change or harder-to-quantify causes.
Those causes get criticized because of how hard to quantify they are. The relatively neglected thing is recognizing both strands, and arguing for Goldilocks positions between ‘linear clear evidence-backed non-systemic charity’ and ‘far too radical for most interested in systemic change.’