One last piece of anecdotal evidence: Despite repeated attempts, I have never been able to āconvertā anyone to effective altruism. Not even close. Iāve gotten friends to agree with me on every subpoint, but still fail to sell them on the concept as a whole. These are precisely the kinds of nerdy and compassionate people you might expect to be interested, but they just arenāt.
In comparison, I remember my own experience taking to effective altruism the way a fish takes to water.
Iāve had many conversations about EA, and Iāve convinced at least a few people about the basic āgive more to charity, and find better charitiesā idea (people who didnāt seem to have an underlying compulsion to give). And Iāve definitely heard stories of people who became gradually more convinced by arguments related to e.g. longtermism or wild animal suffering, despite initial reluctance or commitment to what they were previously working on.
What would you count as a āconversionā? Someone who is initially resistant to one or more EA-related ideas, but eventually changes their mind? For any definition, I think examples are out there, though how common they are will depend on which definition we use.
One place to look for examples would be EA-aligned orgs that hire people who arenāt particularly EA-oriented. Staff at these orgs are immediately exposed to lots of EA philosophy, but (in some cases Iāve heard of) only gradually shift their views in that direction, or start off not caring much but become more interested as they see the ideas put into practice.
I can try to track down people who I think this would describe and connect them with you. But first ā what are you planning to do with the emails you receive? Would it be better for people to describe their āconversionā experiences on a Forum thread?
Would it be better for people to describe their āconversionā experiences on a Forum thread?
I suspect the EA Survey is the ideal place to ask this sort of question because selection effects will be lowest that way. The best approach might be to gather some qualitative written responses, try to identify clusters in the responses or dimensions along which the responses vary, then formulate quantitative survey questions based on the clusters/ādimensions identified.
Iāve had many conversations about EA, and Iāve convinced at least a few people about the basic āgive more to charity, and find better charitiesā idea (people who didnāt seem to have an underlying compulsion to give). And Iāve definitely heard stories of people who became gradually more convinced by arguments related to e.g. longtermism or wild animal suffering, despite initial reluctance or commitment to what they were previously working on.
What would you count as a āconversionā? Someone who is initially resistant to one or more EA-related ideas, but eventually changes their mind? For any definition, I think examples are out there, though how common they are will depend on which definition we use.
One place to look for examples would be EA-aligned orgs that hire people who arenāt particularly EA-oriented. Staff at these orgs are immediately exposed to lots of EA philosophy, but (in some cases Iāve heard of) only gradually shift their views in that direction, or start off not caring much but become more interested as they see the ideas put into practice.
I can try to track down people who I think this would describe and connect them with you. But first ā what are you planning to do with the emails you receive? Would it be better for people to describe their āconversionā experiences on a Forum thread?
I suspect the EA Survey is the ideal place to ask this sort of question because selection effects will be lowest that way. The best approach might be to gather some qualitative written responses, try to identify clusters in the responses or dimensions along which the responses vary, then formulate quantitative survey questions based on the clusters/ādimensions identified.