Strongly agree. I’ve said before that I think that EA is in many relevant respects not like a “social movement” but also that even within the class of ‘social movements’ there’s so much diversity that we don’t gain much (and possibly only mislead outselves) by drawing comparisons to others within the class- and I think you’ve captured the point neatly here.
Another way to look at it would be to look again at the formulation that EA is “a philosophy and a social movement.” The philosophy can clearly be pursued through very many different ‘movements’ or means, and it often obscures more than it reveals to talk about ‘the movement’ as a whole.
I’ve noticed that what “EA is” seems to vary depending on the audience and, specifically, why it is that the audience is not already on board. For example, if one’s objection to EA is that one values local lives over non-local lives, or that effects don’t matter (or are trumped by other considerations), then EA is an ethical framework. But many people are on board with the basic ethical precepts but simply don’t act in accordance with them. For those people, EA seems to be a support group for rejecting cognitive dissonance.
Strongly agree. I’ve said before that I think that EA is in many relevant respects not like a “social movement” but also that even within the class of ‘social movements’ there’s so much diversity that we don’t gain much (and possibly only mislead outselves) by drawing comparisons to others within the class- and I think you’ve captured the point neatly here.
Another way to look at it would be to look again at the formulation that EA is “a philosophy and a social movement.” The philosophy can clearly be pursued through very many different ‘movements’ or means, and it often obscures more than it reveals to talk about ‘the movement’ as a whole.
I’ve noticed that what “EA is” seems to vary depending on the audience and, specifically, why it is that the audience is not already on board. For example, if one’s objection to EA is that one values local lives over non-local lives, or that effects don’t matter (or are trumped by other considerations), then EA is an ethical framework. But many people are on board with the basic ethical precepts but simply don’t act in accordance with them. For those people, EA seems to be a support group for rejecting cognitive dissonance.