Is there any particular topic, or set of ideas, from effective altruism criticism is being sought for? Alternatively, is there a particular format for the criticism that’s being preferred? In particular, if I know some folks who might criticize effective altruism, I could ask them to publish their perspective on this forum. On the other hand, the threat of receiving downvotes, and being in the element of an intellectual opponent, seems to me a (fair) reason one might not want to publish criticism(s) of effective altruism on this forum.
I believe if it’s explained to potential critics that effective altruism is based upon a tenet of self-reflection, and rationality, so it’s earnestly seeking criticism of its ideas so that it can change and improve itself, those critics might be more willing to specify their focus. After Holden Karnofsky published his critique of the MIRI, MIRI temporarily hired former Givewell analyst Jonah Sinick to assess the validity of their organizational strategy relative to the organization’s goals. Additionally, Luke Muehlhauser and Holden Karnofsky in particular have maintained a dialogue on what Holden, or Givewell, might think of the MIRI’s ongoing work, and how they’ve improved over time. If the MIRI as an organization can solicit what criticism it receives in pursuit of self-improvement to be tailored to specific subject matter, perhaps effective altruism as a whole can do the same.
I think that it’s useful to hear what people think of the whole idea. For reference, there’s Singer’s TED talk, Will’s ‘What is Effective Altruism?’, and lots more intoductory essays. Apart from that, my suggestions for new critics would be:
It’s probably better not to read a lot existing critiques at this stage because it might make you less imaginative.
To keep it constructive, it often helps if you can suggest what would count as an improvement.
You can email criticism to me or post it here (as a comment or as a new thread)
If you’re writing something more substantial, you can get people to give feedback by sending it around as a google doc.
Is there any particular topic, or set of ideas, from effective altruism criticism is being sought for? Alternatively, is there a particular format for the criticism that’s being preferred? In particular, if I know some folks who might criticize effective altruism, I could ask them to publish their perspective on this forum. On the other hand, the threat of receiving downvotes, and being in the element of an intellectual opponent, seems to me a (fair) reason one might not want to publish criticism(s) of effective altruism on this forum.
I believe if it’s explained to potential critics that effective altruism is based upon a tenet of self-reflection, and rationality, so it’s earnestly seeking criticism of its ideas so that it can change and improve itself, those critics might be more willing to specify their focus. After Holden Karnofsky published his critique of the MIRI, MIRI temporarily hired former Givewell analyst Jonah Sinick to assess the validity of their organizational strategy relative to the organization’s goals. Additionally, Luke Muehlhauser and Holden Karnofsky in particular have maintained a dialogue on what Holden, or Givewell, might think of the MIRI’s ongoing work, and how they’ve improved over time. If the MIRI as an organization can solicit what criticism it receives in pursuit of self-improvement to be tailored to specific subject matter, perhaps effective altruism as a whole can do the same.
I think that it’s useful to hear what people think of the whole idea. For reference, there’s Singer’s TED talk, Will’s ‘What is Effective Altruism?’, and lots more intoductory essays. Apart from that, my suggestions for new critics would be:
It’s probably better not to read a lot existing critiques at this stage because it might make you less imaginative.
To keep it constructive, it often helps if you can suggest what would count as an improvement.
You can email criticism to me or post it here (as a comment or as a new thread)
If you’re writing something more substantial, you can get people to give feedback by sending it around as a google doc.