If you were, for instance, a grantmaker, these might look very different.
Strongly upvoted, I would say that for most roles these do look very different. The āaltruismā part of āeffective altruismā is something I really value. I would much rather collaborate with someone that wants to do the most good, than with someone that wants to get the most personal glory or status. For example, someone that cares mostly about personal status will spend much less time helping others, especially in non-legible ways.
But thatās mostly relevant in small scale altruism? Like I wouldnāt give to beggars on the street. And I wouldnāt make great personal sacrifice (e.g. frugal living, donating the majority of my income to charity [I was donating 10% to GiveWellās maximimum impact fund until a few months ago (Forex issues [Iām in Nigeria], now Iām unemployed)]) to improve the lives of others.
But I would (and did!) reorient my career to work on the most pressing challenges confronting humanity given my current/āaccessible skill set. I quit my job as a web developer, Iām going back to university for graduate study and plan to work on AI safety and digital minds.
My lack of altruism simply is not that relevant for trying to improve the condition for humanity.
What youāre missing is that I want to attain status/āprestige/āglory by having positive impact not through some other means.
It feels like youāre failing to grasp what that actually means?
My pursuit of status/āprestige/āglory is by trying to have the largest impact on a brighter future conditioning on being the person I am (with the skills and personality I have).
But I would reorient my career to work on the most pressing challenges confronting humanity given my current/āaccessible skill set. I quit my job as a web developer, Iām going back to university for graduate study and plan to work on AI safety and digital minds.
I think this is very admirable and wish you success! If indeed youāre acting exactly like someone who straightforwardly wanted to improve the world altruistically, thatās what matters :)
Edit: oh I see you were also donating 10%, thatās also very altruistic! (At least from an outside view, I trust you on your motivations)
I think Iāve been defining āaltruismā in an overly strict sense.
Rather than say Iām not altruistic, I mostly mean that:
Iām not impartial to my own welfare/āwellbeing/āflourishing
Iām much less willing to undertake personal hardship (frugality, donating the majority of my income, etc.) and I think this is fine
10% is not that big an ask (I can sacrifice that much personal comfort), but donating 50% or forgoing significant material comfort would be steps I would be unwilling to take.
(Reorienting my career doesnāt feel like a sacrifice because Iāll be able to have a larger positive impact through the career switch.)
Rather than say Iām not altruistic, I mostly mean that: *Iām not impartial to my own welfare/āwellbeing/āflourishing
To me, those are very different claims!
10% is not that big an ask (I can sacrifice that much personal comfort)
Thatās very relative! Itās more than what the median EA gives, itās way more than what the median non-EA gives. When I talk to non-EA friends/ārelatives about giving, the thought of giving any% is seen as unimaginably altruistic.
Even people donating 50% are not donating 80%, and some would say itās not that big of an ask. IMHO, claiming that only people making huge sacrifices and valuing their own wellbeing at 0 can be considered āaltruistsā is a very strong claim that doesnāt match how the word is used in practice.
I now think it was a mistake/āmisunderstanding to describe myself as non altruistic and believe that I was using an unusually high standard.
(That said, when I started the 10% thing, I did so under the impression that it was what the sacrifice I needed to make to gain acceptance in EA. Churches advocate a 10% tithe as well [which I didnāt pay because I wasnāt actually a Christian (I deconverted at 17 and open atheism is not safe, so Iāve hidden [and still hide] it)], but it did make me predisposed to putting up with that level of sacrifice [Iād faced a lot of social pressure to pay tithes at home, and I think I gave in once].
The 10% felt painful at first, but I eventually got used to it, and it became a source of pride. I could brag about how I was making the world a better place even with my meagre income.)
āThat said, when I started the 10% thing, I did so under the impression that it was what the sacrifice I needed to make to gain acceptance in EAā
If this sentiment is at all widespread among people on the periphery of EA or who might become EA at some point, then I find that VERY concerning. Weād lose a lot of great people if everyone assumed they couldnāt join without making that kind of sacrifice.
Helping others in non-legible ways is often one of the best ways to build personal status. Scope sensitivity and impartiality seems like bigger issues, if Iām trying to accurately picture differences between status-seeking motivations and impartially altruistic motivations.
Impartiality. Maybe Iām more biased towards rats/āEAs, but not in ways that seem likely to be decision relevant?
You could construct thought experiments in which I wouldnāt behave in an ideal utilitarian way, but for scenarios that actually manifest in the real world, I think I can be approximated as following some strain of preference utilitarianism?
by helping other people as much as possible, without any expectation of your favours being returned in the near future ā you end up being much more successful, in a wide variety of settings, in the long run.
This is what you mention, and I agree with it. But
if you and I share the same values, the social situation is very different: if I help you achieve your aims, then thatās a success, in terms of achieving my aims too. Titting constitutes winning in and of itself ā thereās no need for a tat in reward. For this reason, we should expect very different norms than we are used to be optimal: giving and helping others will be a good thing to do much more often than it would be if we were all self-interested.
One of the incredible strengths of the EA community is that we all share values and share the same end-goals. This gives us a remarkable potential for much more in-depth cooperation than is normal in businesses or other settings where people are out for themselves. So next time you talk to another effective altruist, ask them how you can help them achieve their aims. It can be a great way of achieving what you value.
I really think altruism/āvalue-alignment is a strength, and a group would lose a lot of efficiency by not valuing it.
(Of course, itās not the only thing that matters)
Empirically it feels hard to get much credit/āegoist-value from helping people? Maybe your experience has just been different. But I donāt find helping people very helpful for improving my status.
Strongly upvoted, I would say that for most roles these do look very different.
The āaltruismā part of āeffective altruismā is something I really value.
I would much rather collaborate with someone that wants to do the most good, than with someone that wants to get the most personal glory or status.
For example, someone that cares mostly about personal status will spend much less time helping others, especially in non-legible ways.
But thatās mostly relevant in small scale altruism? Like I wouldnāt give to beggars on the street. And I wouldnāt make great personal sacrifice (e.g. frugal living, donating the majority of my income to charity [I was donating 10% to GiveWellās maximimum impact fund until a few months ago (Forex issues [Iām in Nigeria], now Iām unemployed)]) to improve the lives of others.
But I would (and did!) reorient my career to work on the most pressing challenges confronting humanity given my current/āaccessible skill set. I quit my job as a web developer, Iām going back to university for graduate study and plan to work on AI safety and digital minds.
My lack of altruism simply is not that relevant for trying to improve the condition for humanity.
What youāre missing is that I want to attain status/āprestige/āglory by having positive impact not through some other means.
It feels like youāre failing to grasp what that actually means?
My pursuit of status/āprestige/āglory is by trying to have the largest impact on a brighter future conditioning on being the person I am (with the skills and personality I have).
I think this is very admirable and wish you success!
If indeed youāre acting exactly like someone who straightforwardly wanted to improve the world altruistically, thatās what matters :)
Edit: oh I see you were also donating 10%, thatās also very altruistic! (At least from an outside view, I trust you on your motivations)
I think Iāve been defining āaltruismā in an overly strict sense.
Rather than say Iām not altruistic, I mostly mean that:
Iām not impartial to my own welfare/āwellbeing/āflourishing
Iām much less willing to undertake personal hardship (frugality, donating the majority of my income, etc.) and I think this is fine
10% is not that big an ask (I can sacrifice that much personal comfort), but donating 50% or forgoing significant material comfort would be steps I would be unwilling to take.
(Reorienting my career doesnāt feel like a sacrifice because Iāll be able to have a larger positive impact through the career switch.)
To me, those are very different claims!
Thatās very relative! Itās more than what the median EA gives, itās way more than what the median non-EA gives. When I talk to non-EA friends/ārelatives about giving, the thought of giving any% is seen as unimaginably altruistic.
Even people donating 50% are not donating 80%, and some would say itās not that big of an ask.
IMHO, claiming that only people making huge sacrifices and valuing their own wellbeing at 0 can be considered āaltruistsā is a very strong claim that doesnāt match how the word is used in practice.
As Wikipedia says:
I now think it was a mistake/āmisunderstanding to describe myself as non altruistic and believe that I was using an unusually high standard.
(That said, when I started the 10% thing, I did so under the impression that it was what the sacrifice I needed to make to gain acceptance in EA. Churches advocate a 10% tithe as well [which I didnāt pay because I wasnāt actually a Christian (I deconverted at 17 and open atheism is not safe, so Iāve hidden [and still hide] it)], but it did make me predisposed to putting up with that level of sacrifice [Iād faced a lot of social pressure to pay tithes at home, and I think I gave in once].
The 10% felt painful at first, but I eventually got used to it, and it became a source of pride. I could brag about how I was making the world a better place even with my meagre income.)
āThat said, when I started the 10% thing, I did so under the impression that it was what the sacrifice I needed to make to gain acceptance in EAā
If this sentiment is at all widespread among people on the periphery of EA or who might become EA at some point, then I find that VERY concerning. Weād lose a lot of great people if everyone assumed they couldnāt join without making that kind of sacrifice.
Helping others in non-legible ways is often one of the best ways to build personal status. Scope sensitivity and impartiality seems like bigger issues, if Iām trying to accurately picture differences between status-seeking motivations and impartially altruistic motivations.
Iām a rationalist.
I take scope sensitivity very seriously.
Impartiality. Maybe Iām more biased towards rats/āEAs, but not in ways that seem likely to be decision relevant?
You could construct thought experiments in which I wouldnāt behave in an ideal utilitarian way, but for scenarios that actually manifest in the real world, I think I can be approximated as following some strain of preference utilitarianism?
Iām trying to question
In the abstract, rather than talking about you specifically.
Some quotes helping other altruists:
This is what you mention, and I agree with it.
But
I really think altruism/āvalue-alignment is a strength, and a group would lose a lot of efficiency by not valuing it.
(Of course, itās not the only thing that matters)
Empirically it feels hard to get much credit/āegoist-value from helping people? Maybe your experience has just been different. But I donāt find helping people very helpful for improving my status.
Have you read How to Win Friends and Influence People? Iirc more than half the book is about taking an interest in other people, helping them, etc.