Hi Rebecca, thanks for your feedback, it was helpful :) I was definitely trying to strike ‘while the iron was hot’, but in the future I’ll try to balance doing things slower to catch issues like this.
I’ve gone through the post and edited out most of the typos/spelling errors I could find, and listened to it with text-to-speech to try to prevent my brain from auto-completing missing text. I can’t claim that I’ve fixed everything, but I think the piece is in a lot better place now than it was when you originally read it, and I think you might find that the piece is both more understandable and perhaps worth sharing with others if you decided to give it a re-skim.[1] If there are any particular factual inaccuracies you want to point out that still exist, I’m happy to retract or correct those too.
On the systemic vs marginal issue itself, I don’t think I’m trying to argue for an established EA position on these issues, and in fact I’d love to see pushbacks on what I’ve written here. That’s kind of what I want the debate for or against EA to be, recognising what arguments already exist and taking them into account, rather than a critic saying ‘EA doesn’t care about systemic change’ as a general statement as if there hasn’t been a large amount of debate about this very topic within the movement already. I think Malik drops the ball here in his piece, especially around EtG and non-naïve consequentialism, and I hope my revised post makes this point a bit more clearly.
Hi Rebecca, thanks for your feedback, it was helpful :) I was definitely trying to strike ‘while the iron was hot’, but in the future I’ll try to balance doing things slower to catch issues like this.
I’ve gone through the post and edited out most of the typos/spelling errors I could find, and listened to it with text-to-speech to try to prevent my brain from auto-completing missing text. I can’t claim that I’ve fixed everything, but I think the piece is in a lot better place now than it was when you originally read it, and I think you might find that the piece is both more understandable and perhaps worth sharing with others if you decided to give it a re-skim.[1] If there are any particular factual inaccuracies you want to point out that still exist, I’m happy to retract or correct those too.
On the systemic vs marginal issue itself, I don’t think I’m trying to argue for an established EA position on these issues, and in fact I’d love to see pushbacks on what I’ve written here. That’s kind of what I want the debate for or against EA to be, recognising what arguments already exist and taking them into account, rather than a critic saying ‘EA doesn’t care about systemic change’ as a general statement as if there hasn’t been a large amount of debate about this very topic within the movement already. I think Malik drops the ball here in his piece, especially around EtG and non-naïve consequentialism, and I hope my revised post makes this point a bit more clearly.
I totally understand if you don’t though