Dislaimer: Amazing post thanks @ClaireZabel - I haven’t thought about this nearly as hard as you, so this is at best a moderately thought through hot take
I feel like the attraction of the deep and rich philosophy that is effective altruism may be underrated.
Effective Altruism is a coherent philosophy that was built from the ground up (and continues to branch and grow), with a rich philosophical underpinning from a bunch of great thinkers growing out of utilitarian roots. This has attracted a relatively stable, committed and slow growing movement which has branched and expanded, while remaining true to the phililsophical tenets from whence it came.
If we look at enduring movements which inspire people and create change, such as the civil rights movement, religions, political systems like capitalism and socialism, they have a rich and well thought out philisophical underpinnings—they don’t stand without those. I’m not sure just floating X-risk and “We’re all going to die” is going to galvanise support and get people on board.
I think pushing X-risk will get a lot of people will nod their heads and say “yeah”, and perhaps get instagram likes but very few of those initially enthusiatic people will passionately devote their lives to fighting against said risk. Unlike so many who are fighting x-risk like you say after arriving at that point through a rich journey exploring effective altruism (or similar).
Preaching these clear ideas like “X-risk” or ” without the philosophical “baggage” may seem like an easy evangelical route, but the house built on the sand can more easily collapse, and the seeds planted on hard ground don’t usually flourish.
As a final comment I agree that “Longtermism” isn’t a great cause to rally around, largely because it is only a branch of the deeper EA system and not really a standalone philosophy in and of itself. Without EA principles, does longtermism exist?
But why not test it though? Someone can try and start an anti existential-risk group without pulling people from the effective altruism crowd and we can see how it flies. I would love to be proved wrong (and could easily be).
Dislaimer: Amazing post thanks @ClaireZabel - I haven’t thought about this nearly as hard as you, so this is at best a moderately thought through hot take
I feel like the attraction of the deep and rich philosophy that is effective altruism may be underrated.
Effective Altruism is a coherent philosophy that was built from the ground up (and continues to branch and grow), with a rich philosophical underpinning from a bunch of great thinkers growing out of utilitarian roots. This has attracted a relatively stable, committed and slow growing movement which has branched and expanded, while remaining true to the phililsophical tenets from whence it came.
If we look at enduring movements which inspire people and create change, such as the civil rights movement, religions, political systems like capitalism and socialism, they have a rich and well thought out philisophical underpinnings—they don’t stand without those. I’m not sure just floating X-risk and “We’re all going to die” is going to galvanise support and get people on board.
I think pushing X-risk will get a lot of people will nod their heads and say “yeah”, and perhaps get instagram likes but very few of those initially enthusiatic people will passionately devote their lives to fighting against said risk. Unlike so many who are fighting x-risk like you say after arriving at that point through a rich journey exploring effective altruism (or similar).
Preaching these clear ideas like “X-risk” or ” without the philosophical “baggage” may seem like an easy evangelical route, but the house built on the sand can more easily collapse, and the seeds planted on hard ground don’t usually flourish.
As a final comment I agree that “Longtermism” isn’t a great cause to rally around, largely because it is only a branch of the deeper EA system and not really a standalone philosophy in and of itself. Without EA principles, does longtermism exist?
But why not test it though? Someone can try and start an anti existential-risk group without pulling people from the effective altruism crowd and we can see how it flies. I would love to be proved wrong (and could easily be).