Executive summary: This exploratory post defines “moral circle expansionism” as a core principle of effective altruism, contrasting it with common moral intuitions by advocating equal moral concern for all beings with the capacity for well-being—regardless of species, nationality, or moral desert—and exploring the psychological and philosophical shifts this entails.
Key points:
Moral circles reflect how people prioritize concern, with most favoring close relations and actively disfavoring certain groups like pests or moral outcasts (e.g., child molesters), creating “inverted circles” where suffering is seen as deserved.
Effective altruists aim to simplify these circles into just three—loved ones, acquaintances, and everyone else—guided by the principle of equal consideration of interests, though full impartiality is acknowledged as psychologically unrealistic.
Four major shifts characterize this compression: rejecting extra concern for marginalized people as a default (though this may have little practical impact), rejecting moral desert (e.g., opposing gratuitous punishment even for Hitler), expanding moral concern across species lines, and ignoring arbitrary group membership (e.g., nationality).
Species inclusion depends on capacity for well-being, not usefulness or charisma; effective altruists may disagree on which beings qualify, but they reject speciesist distinctions rooted in human convenience (e.g., caring more about dogs than pigs).
The metaphor of “well-being buckets” helps illustrate that not all beings’ interests are equally weighty—some creatures (like humans) may matter more due to greater capacity for well-being, but that doesn’t justify ignoring others entirely.
The sine qua non of effective altruism, according to the author, is not discriminating among strangers based on arbitrary categories like nation or race—a universalist stance underpinning moral circle expansionism.
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: This exploratory post defines “moral circle expansionism” as a core principle of effective altruism, contrasting it with common moral intuitions by advocating equal moral concern for all beings with the capacity for well-being—regardless of species, nationality, or moral desert—and exploring the psychological and philosophical shifts this entails.
Key points:
Moral circles reflect how people prioritize concern, with most favoring close relations and actively disfavoring certain groups like pests or moral outcasts (e.g., child molesters), creating “inverted circles” where suffering is seen as deserved.
Effective altruists aim to simplify these circles into just three—loved ones, acquaintances, and everyone else—guided by the principle of equal consideration of interests, though full impartiality is acknowledged as psychologically unrealistic.
Four major shifts characterize this compression: rejecting extra concern for marginalized people as a default (though this may have little practical impact), rejecting moral desert (e.g., opposing gratuitous punishment even for Hitler), expanding moral concern across species lines, and ignoring arbitrary group membership (e.g., nationality).
Species inclusion depends on capacity for well-being, not usefulness or charisma; effective altruists may disagree on which beings qualify, but they reject speciesist distinctions rooted in human convenience (e.g., caring more about dogs than pigs).
The metaphor of “well-being buckets” helps illustrate that not all beings’ interests are equally weighty—some creatures (like humans) may matter more due to greater capacity for well-being, but that doesn’t justify ignoring others entirely.
The sine qua non of effective altruism, according to the author, is not discriminating among strangers based on arbitrary categories like nation or race—a universalist stance underpinning moral circle expansionism.
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.