Interesting! Just to clarify for others, SMS means: A social movement is a loosely organized effort by a large group of people to achieve a particular goal, typically a social or political one.
Which isn’t what EA does, as it is much more field-building oriented. However SMS seems the most efficient way of obtaining positive results; do you suggest that we do the same/try to think more broadly about public advocacy? Thinking about AI safety? Holy Elmore’s piece on AI safety advocacy supports your conclusion.
I also wonder how much this analysis is applicable for EA since EA is highly peculiar; it doesn’t obey the same rules that usually apply to communities IMO. So the ND seems especially relevant for EA since it’s basically working through a network of white, STEM, rich men (more than 60% of the community as per the last RP survey) who want to make a change. As long as EA doesn’t openly make efforts to become more diverse and more accessible, will it be efficient to go for SMS?
I might have misunderstood completely your post though!
(i) the use of evidence and careful reasoning to work out how to maximize the good with a given unit of resources, tentatively understanding ‘the good’ in impartial welfarist terms, and
(ii) the use of the findings from (i) to try to improve the world.
(i) refers to effective altruism as an intellectual project (or ‘research field’); (ii) refers to effective altruism as a practical project (or ‘social movement’).
Second, you can see it reflected in CEA’s programming. I’d say their Groups programme is a social movement support programme (and, as I’m funded by that programme, I’d say most of my work is social movement work).
Interesting! Just to clarify for others, SMS means: A social movement is a loosely organized effort by a large group of people to achieve a particular goal, typically a social or political one.
Which isn’t what EA does, as it is much more field-building oriented. However SMS seems the most efficient way of obtaining positive results; do you suggest that we do the same/try to think more broadly about public advocacy? Thinking about AI safety? Holy Elmore’s piece on AI safety advocacy supports your conclusion.
I also wonder how much this analysis is applicable for EA since EA is highly peculiar; it doesn’t obey the same rules that usually apply to communities IMO. So the ND seems especially relevant for EA since it’s basically working through a network of white, STEM, rich men (more than 60% of the community as per the last RP survey) who want to make a change. As long as EA doesn’t openly make efforts to become more diverse and more accessible, will it be efficient to go for SMS?
I might have misunderstood completely your post though!
Thanks for the comment!
I’d say EA is very much a movement.
First, MacAskill mentions it in his definition of EA:
Second, you can see it reflected in CEA’s programming. I’d say their Groups programme is a social movement support programme (and, as I’m funded by that programme, I’d say most of my work is social movement work).
Third, the outside world perceives it as a movement. See the Wikipedia definition, this New Yorker article, and this TIME article.