Hi,
Your text mentions the importance of cause-neutrality but focuses on humanity,
e.g. “maximizing good accomplished largely reduces to doing what is best in
terms of very long-run outcomes for humanity.“ Why don’t you include any other
species?
To explain where I’m coming from: To my knowledge, GiveWell and Good Ventures
also focus on “humanity” and talk about “humanitarians” but I’m not familiar
with any argument that shows why that focus makes sense (I’m grateful to be
pointed to one). Of course, I don’t expect you to answer on behalf of GW or GV,
and I should ask them directly in public, I just mention them to explain that I
wonder the same thing about other organizations that write about similar topics.
To me, it makes much more sense to replace ‘humanity,’ in your text with ‘beings
that can suffer’ or similar.
We think many non-human animals, artificial intelligence programs, and extraterrestrial species could all be of moral concern, to degrees varying based on their particular characteristics but without species membership as such being essential. Humanity is used alternately in the text with “civilization,” a civilization for which humanity is currently in the driver’s seat.
Hi, Your text mentions the importance of cause-neutrality but focuses on humanity, e.g. “maximizing good accomplished largely reduces to doing what is best in terms of very long-run outcomes for humanity.“ Why don’t you include any other species?
To explain where I’m coming from: To my knowledge, GiveWell and Good Ventures also focus on “humanity” and talk about “humanitarians” but I’m not familiar with any argument that shows why that focus makes sense (I’m grateful to be pointed to one). Of course, I don’t expect you to answer on behalf of GW or GV, and I should ask them directly in public, I just mention them to explain that I wonder the same thing about other organizations that write about similar topics.
To me, it makes much more sense to replace ‘humanity,’ in your text with ‘beings that can suffer’ or similar.
Thanks!
We think many non-human animals, artificial intelligence programs, and extraterrestrial species could all be of moral concern, to degrees varying based on their particular characteristics but without species membership as such being essential. Humanity is used alternately in the text with “civilization,” a civilization for which humanity is currently in the driver’s seat.