Executive summary: The authors argue that longtermist reasoning should give much greater weight to non-human animals because their vast numbers and potential for large-scale suffering mean animal welfare could dominate long-run moral calculations, and that ignoring animals likely distorts action prioritisation.
Key points:
Longtermism typically focuses on future humans, but the authors argue this neglects non-human animals despite most moral theories granting animals some moral weight.
Animals vastly outnumber humans now and plausibly in the future, with estimates of up to 10¹⁵ aquatic vertebrates alive today, implying their aggregate welfare could outweigh human welfare even with lower moral weight per individual.
Many animals, especially in factory farming and possibly in the wild, are likely to have net-negative lives, creating an enormous amount of current and expected future suffering.
The authors reject claims that animal welfare effects are too uncertain or too small to matter for longtermist conclusions, arguing they could change results by multiple orders of magnitude.
Potential longtermist interventions for animals include ending factory farming, managing wild animal welfare, shaping future animal populations, improving animal wellbeing via technology, and influencing long-run value change through moral circle expansion.
The chapter concludes that animals must be explicitly included in longtermist deliberation and research, as doing so could significantly alter which actions are judged most beneficial for the long-term future.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The authors argue that longtermist reasoning should give much greater weight to non-human animals because their vast numbers and potential for large-scale suffering mean animal welfare could dominate long-run moral calculations, and that ignoring animals likely distorts action prioritisation.
Key points:
Longtermism typically focuses on future humans, but the authors argue this neglects non-human animals despite most moral theories granting animals some moral weight.
Animals vastly outnumber humans now and plausibly in the future, with estimates of up to 10¹⁵ aquatic vertebrates alive today, implying their aggregate welfare could outweigh human welfare even with lower moral weight per individual.
Many animals, especially in factory farming and possibly in the wild, are likely to have net-negative lives, creating an enormous amount of current and expected future suffering.
The authors reject claims that animal welfare effects are too uncertain or too small to matter for longtermist conclusions, arguing they could change results by multiple orders of magnitude.
Potential longtermist interventions for animals include ending factory farming, managing wild animal welfare, shaping future animal populations, improving animal wellbeing via technology, and influencing long-run value change through moral circle expansion.
The chapter concludes that animals must be explicitly included in longtermist deliberation and research, as doing so could significantly alter which actions are judged most beneficial for the long-term future.
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.