Executive summary: The author argues that insect suffering is plausibly the worst problem in the world due to the vast number of insects and the likelihood that many suffer intensely, and recommends supporting efforts to reduce insect suffering through donations, policy advocacy, and support for habitat loss and human civilization.
Key points:
Scale and plausibility of insect suffering: Insects likely can suffer, and given their enormous population (~10¹⁸ alive at a time), the collective scale of their suffering—especially through short, painful lives and deaths—could far exceed all human suffering in history.
Ethical reasoning: Even with conservative assumptions about insect sentience, their suffering remains orders of magnitude greater than human suffering; denying its moral importance would require rejecting common-sense ethical principles about the badness of pain.
Cognitive biases: The neglect of insect suffering stems from psychological biases like scope neglect, empathy gaps, and a preference for the natural, which distort our moral intuitions.
Intervention recommendations: Donating to insect-focused charities (e.g. Insect Institute), submitting policy feedback (e.g. against insect farming), and supporting organizations like Wild Animal Initiative are practical ways to reduce suffering.
Support for human civilization and habitat loss: Civilization and habitat destruction may reduce wild insect populations and thus overall suffering; rewilding is discouraged for increasing animal suffering.
Moral call to action: Insect suffering is described as the most important issue in the world today, and the author urges readers to prioritize it in their altruistic efforts.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The author argues that insect suffering is plausibly the worst problem in the world due to the vast number of insects and the likelihood that many suffer intensely, and recommends supporting efforts to reduce insect suffering through donations, policy advocacy, and support for habitat loss and human civilization.
Key points:
Scale and plausibility of insect suffering: Insects likely can suffer, and given their enormous population (~10¹⁸ alive at a time), the collective scale of their suffering—especially through short, painful lives and deaths—could far exceed all human suffering in history.
Ethical reasoning: Even with conservative assumptions about insect sentience, their suffering remains orders of magnitude greater than human suffering; denying its moral importance would require rejecting common-sense ethical principles about the badness of pain.
Cognitive biases: The neglect of insect suffering stems from psychological biases like scope neglect, empathy gaps, and a preference for the natural, which distort our moral intuitions.
Intervention recommendations: Donating to insect-focused charities (e.g. Insect Institute), submitting policy feedback (e.g. against insect farming), and supporting organizations like Wild Animal Initiative are practical ways to reduce suffering.
Support for human civilization and habitat loss: Civilization and habitat destruction may reduce wild insect populations and thus overall suffering; rewilding is discouraged for increasing animal suffering.
Moral call to action: Insect suffering is described as the most important issue in the world today, and the author urges readers to prioritize it in their altruistic efforts.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.