My quick take: I think most people should think of EA as little more than a hobby.
For example, I like bouldering, so I often:
Practice
Do it with friends
Consume content to learn more about it
Talk about it with friends (if they like it, I talk about it in detail; if they aren’t really interested, I might just respond to a ‘How are you?’ with ‘Good thanks! Got a new PB at the bouldering gym yesterday so spirits are high!’)
So it’s important to me and I get a lot from it, but it’ll only ever be a small part of my life.
I don’t care if I’ll never be a professional athlete, or even if I never win a local competition. I’m happy to simply do it, to hang out with others who like doing it, and to share the highlights with people who are interested in what I’m up to.
I think EA should be the same for most people. If they like the idea of helping others as effectively as possible, they could consider:
Practicing (e.g., donate some money and apply to the odd job if it looks like it’ll be a good fit)
Doing it with friends (e.g., volunteer together, run a group together, start a side project together)
Consuming content to learn more (e.g., browse the forum occasionally, listen to the odd podcast, read the odd report)
Talking about it with friends (e.g., ‘Hey I was reading about this cool charity LEEP and I think you’d really like em! They...’ etc etc)
But that’s it. It’s not a big deal if you don’t end up ‘getting an EA job’ or donating €€€€€€€€.
On the one hand, I think there’s a lot of wisdom in it. The idea that people should be either all-in on EA or out isn’t helpful, and isn’t effective either. If you think about other social movements that have made a difference (for good and/or ill) on the world, they generally offer opportunities at a number of different commitment and ability points. Take most religions for example—they do not encourage everyone to become a member of the clergy, to pursue advanced theological studies, and so on.
On the other hand, the reference to a “hobby” and some of the specific suggestions trend a little more toward EA-as-spectator-sport than I’d like. I certainly approve of your bouldering hobby, but it sounds like you (and maybe your friend group) are internalizing most of the benefits thereof. I think we can (and should) aim a little higher than that with EA, even EA for the masses.
To use a loose religion metaphor, we might have something vaguely like:
For the relatively few—do a EA job / make EA your main professional focus
For a larger minority—make EA a significant part of your life, take the GWWC pledge, be active on the Forum, go to conferences if that adds value
For the majority—donate 1%, consume at least a few hours of content a year, fast on one day a year and give the money you would have spent on food to the global poor
Yeah I think I agree with you, and I think considering those three levels to be appropriate is consistent with the statement ‘I think most people should think of EA as little more than a hobby’.
I feel like pushing the ‘treat it like a hobby’ thing is good at the mo because I see a lot of people in the EA community feeling they ought to do more, and then they feel bad when it doesn’t work out, and that sucks. I worry they begin to tie their self-worth to whether they are a ‘good EA’ or not. I want to be like, hey, take it easy, you’re doing a good job—y’know?[1]
I’m reminded of when I spoke to a therapist at my uni because I was struggling with anxiety and perfectionism. I wanted to get the best grades and do great things, but in pursuing that goal so relentlessly it was a) undermining my ability to study well and b) making me unhappy. He reminded me that being a student was only a small part of my life. I was also a friend, a partner, a citizen, a son, etc., and these parts of my life were all equally valuable (if not more so).
I might take a different approach if I was talking with a member of the general population. Rutger Bregman’s School of Moral Ambition does that. He’s very much, ‘Yo, you’ve got all this potential, you should be more morally ambitious’. But then again, maybe I wouldn’t because the most thorough definition of EA I know of is non-normative, and I’m glad this is the case.
I think this is a lovely framing and one I’m going to apply more widely, both to myself and other people. I think the EA community, given our obvious difficulty productively deploying large numbers of talented people, ought to hold it in higher esteem also. Thanks, James.
Mostly agreed, but I do think that donating some money, if you are able, is a big part of being in EA. And again this doesn’t mean reorienting your entire career to become a quant and maximize your donation potential.
Yes, I just would have emphasized it more. I sort of read it as “yeah this is something you might do if you’re really interested”, while I would more say “this is something you should really probably do”
My quick take: I think most people should think of EA as little more than a hobby.
For example, I like bouldering, so I often:
Practice
Do it with friends
Consume content to learn more about it
Talk about it with friends (if they like it, I talk about it in detail; if they aren’t really interested, I might just respond to a ‘How are you?’ with ‘Good thanks! Got a new PB at the bouldering gym yesterday so spirits are high!’)
So it’s important to me and I get a lot from it, but it’ll only ever be a small part of my life.
I don’t care if I’ll never be a professional athlete, or even if I never win a local competition. I’m happy to simply do it, to hang out with others who like doing it, and to share the highlights with people who are interested in what I’m up to.
I think EA should be the same for most people. If they like the idea of helping others as effectively as possible, they could consider:
Practicing (e.g., donate some money and apply to the odd job if it looks like it’ll be a good fit)
Doing it with friends (e.g., volunteer together, run a group together, start a side project together)
Consuming content to learn more (e.g., browse the forum occasionally, listen to the odd podcast, read the odd report)
Talking about it with friends (e.g., ‘Hey I was reading about this cool charity LEEP and I think you’d really like em! They...’ etc etc)
But that’s it. It’s not a big deal if you don’t end up ‘getting an EA job’ or donating €€€€€€€€.
I have mixed feelings about this answer.
On the one hand, I think there’s a lot of wisdom in it. The idea that people should be either all-in on EA or out isn’t helpful, and isn’t effective either. If you think about other social movements that have made a difference (for good and/or ill) on the world, they generally offer opportunities at a number of different commitment and ability points. Take most religions for example—they do not encourage everyone to become a member of the clergy, to pursue advanced theological studies, and so on.
On the other hand, the reference to a “hobby” and some of the specific suggestions trend a little more toward EA-as-spectator-sport than I’d like. I certainly approve of your bouldering hobby, but it sounds like you (and maybe your friend group) are internalizing most of the benefits thereof. I think we can (and should) aim a little higher than that with EA, even EA for the masses.
To use a loose religion metaphor, we might have something vaguely like:
For the relatively few—do a EA job / make EA your main professional focus
For a larger minority—make EA a significant part of your life, take the GWWC pledge, be active on the Forum, go to conferences if that adds value
For the majority—donate 1%, consume at least a few hours of content a year, fast on one day a year and give the money you would have spent on food to the global poor
Yeah I think I agree with you, and I think considering those three levels to be appropriate is consistent with the statement ‘I think most people should think of EA as little more than a hobby’.
I feel like pushing the ‘treat it like a hobby’ thing is good at the mo because I see a lot of people in the EA community feeling they ought to do more, and then they feel bad when it doesn’t work out, and that sucks. I worry they begin to tie their self-worth to whether they are a ‘good EA’ or not. I want to be like, hey, take it easy, you’re doing a good job—y’know?[1]
I’m reminded of when I spoke to a therapist at my uni because I was struggling with anxiety and perfectionism. I wanted to get the best grades and do great things, but in pursuing that goal so relentlessly it was a) undermining my ability to study well and b) making me unhappy. He reminded me that being a student was only a small part of my life. I was also a friend, a partner, a citizen, a son, etc., and these parts of my life were all equally valuable (if not more so).
I might take a different approach if I was talking with a member of the general population. Rutger Bregman’s School of Moral Ambition does that. He’s very much, ‘Yo, you’ve got all this potential, you should be more morally ambitious’. But then again, maybe I wouldn’t because the most thorough definition of EA I know of is non-normative, and I’m glad this is the case.
I thought 80k’s episode on altruistic perfectionism was great and we could do with more of it.
I think this is a lovely framing and one I’m going to apply more widely, both to myself and other people. I think the EA community, given our obvious difficulty productively deploying large numbers of talented people, ought to hold it in higher esteem also. Thanks, James.
Thanks for the kind words! Glad you found my framing helpful :)
Mostly agreed, but I do think that donating some money, if you are able, is a big part of being in EA. And again this doesn’t mean reorienting your entire career to become a quant and maximize your donation potential.
Oh but I did put ‘donate some money’ in my ‘hobby’ list—or am I misunderstanding you?
Yes, I just would have emphasized it more. I sort of read it as “yeah this is something you might do if you’re really interested”, while I would more say “this is something you should really probably do”