Upvote. This is a very nice analysis, and something I personally have been missing for a long time.
Regarding the PR-problem: it is worth noting that if the EA-movement has a negative net effect on total well-being—for example because of animal suffering resulting from encouraging human-centred aid—then it might be a good thing for the EA-movement to suffer such a problem. After all, if our movement shrinks in such a scenario, this increases total well-being. For this reason, whether the “PR-problem” is good or bad depends on the results of precisely these kinds of analyses.
True. Of course, some people are confident that helping the global poor is positive overall, so can be straightforwardly concerned about the PR problem.
Upvote. This is a very nice analysis, and something I personally have been missing for a long time.
Regarding the PR-problem: it is worth noting that if the EA-movement has a negative net effect on total well-being—for example because of animal suffering resulting from encouraging human-centred aid—then it might be a good thing for the EA-movement to suffer such a problem. After all, if our movement shrinks in such a scenario, this increases total well-being. For this reason, whether the “PR-problem” is good or bad depends on the results of precisely these kinds of analyses.
True. Of course, some people are confident that helping the global poor is positive overall, so can be straightforwardly concerned about the PR problem.