I also wanted to chime in about debate. For context, I did Lincoln-Douglas debate (LD) competitively throughout high school.
I think many LDers could be good targets for outreach. Many ideas from EA come up extensively in LD. In particular: different moral theories and arguments for/against them, cost/benefit analysis, moral hedging to deal with moral uncertainty, arguments for existential risk reduction, and focus on existential risks. Note that debaters bastardize many of these arguments and concepts, but I think this introduction is useful nonetheless. LD was certainly where I first heard names like Bostrom, MacAskill, Singer, and Parfit. More generally, I think LD inculcates many attitudes and skills that can be useful for EAs. Debating LD well requires extensive research of policies, thinking hard about how to apply moral theories to concrete problems, and thinking through both sides of issues.
I should note a major caveat to what I said above. Much of the LD community and discussions within LD are not the sort of EA debates I noted above. There is much sophistry and arguing over rules. Moreover, the LD community is fairly left politically (at least based off arguments many people read) and so I imagine there could be some pushback to outreach efforts.
If anyone is interested in learning more about LD, or US high school debate more generally, I’m happy to talk about it!
Unfortunately, at this point I have relatively limited contact with current LDers—there are some I know, but not very well. I do knowsome people who are important within the LD community (e.g., run debate camps or major tournaments), but I am not very involved in LD anymore.
If any of the people who run debate camps or major tournaments are into EA or open to it, I’d be excited about talking to them or intro-ing them to other people, fwiw.
I also wanted to chime in about debate. For context, I did Lincoln-Douglas debate (LD) competitively throughout high school.
I think many LDers could be good targets for outreach. Many ideas from EA come up extensively in LD. In particular: different moral theories and arguments for/against them, cost/benefit analysis, moral hedging to deal with moral uncertainty, arguments for existential risk reduction, and focus on existential risks. Note that debaters bastardize many of these arguments and concepts, but I think this introduction is useful nonetheless. LD was certainly where I first heard names like Bostrom, MacAskill, Singer, and Parfit. More generally, I think LD inculcates many attitudes and skills that can be useful for EAs. Debating LD well requires extensive research of policies, thinking hard about how to apply moral theories to concrete problems, and thinking through both sides of issues.
I should note a major caveat to what I said above. Much of the LD community and discussions within LD are not the sort of EA debates I noted above. There is much sophistry and arguing over rules. Moreover, the LD community is fairly left politically (at least based off arguments many people read) and so I imagine there could be some pushback to outreach efforts.
If anyone is interested in learning more about LD, or US high school debate more generally, I’m happy to talk about it!
Cool! Are you still in contact with friends still in high school and doing LD?
Unfortunately, at this point I have relatively limited contact with current LDers—there are some I know, but not very well. I do know
If any of the people who run debate camps or major tournaments are into EA or open to it, I’d be excited about talking to them or intro-ing them to other people, fwiw.