Different people in EA define ‘good’ in different ways. You can argue that some cause is better for some family of definitions, but the aim is, I think, to help people with different definitions too achieve the goal.
You say “if by far the most good can be done by this allocation and there are sound public arguments for this conclusion”, but the idea of ‘sound public arguments’ is tricky. We’re not scientists with some very-well-tested models. You’re never going to have arguments which are conclusive enough to shut down other causes, even if it sometimes seems to some people here that they do.
Different people in EA define ‘good’ in different ways. You can argue that some cause is better for some family of definitions, but the aim is, I think, to help people with different definitions too achieve the goal.
You say “if by far the most good can be done by this allocation and there are sound public arguments for this conclusion”, but the idea of ‘sound public arguments’ is tricky. We’re not scientists with some very-well-tested models. You’re never going to have arguments which are conclusive enough to shut down other causes, even if it sometimes seems to some people here that they do.