at the Leaders Forum 2019, around half of the participants (including key figures in EA) said that they don’t self-identify as “effective altruists
Small note that this could also be counter evidence—these are folks that are doing a good job of ‘keeping their identity small’ yet are also interested in gathering under the ‘effective altruism’ banner. (edit: nevermind, seems like they identified with other -isms) .
Somehow the EA brand is threading the needle of being a banner and also not mind-killing people … I think.
Would EA be much worse if we removed the ‘banner’ aspect of it? I don’t know… it feels like we’re running an experiment of whether it’s possible to nurture and grow global prioritist qualities in the world (in people who might not have otherwise done much global prioritism, without a banner/community to help them get started). It’s not clear if we’re done with that experiment—if anything, initial results look promising from where I’m sitting. So my initial thought is that I don’t quite want to remove the banner variable yet (but then again maybe Global Priorities could keep that variable)
Perhaps partly because of this, at the Leaders Forum 2019, around half of the participants (including key figures in EA) said that they don’t self-identify as “effective altruists”, despite self-identifying, e.g., as feminists, utilitarians, or atheists.
For further clarification, see also the comment I just left here.
Ah whoops, thanks for the clarification. I’m glad that delineation was made during the session!
Hmm so maybe some weaker point: perhaps banners like ‘atheism’ and ‘feminism’ have the property ‘blend me with your identity or consequences’, whereas EA doesn’t as much, and maybe that’s better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Anyway, thanks for the post Jonas, I agree with many points and have had similar experiences.
Small note that this could also be counter evidence—
these are folks that are doing a good job of ‘keeping their identity small’ yet are also interested in gathering under the ‘effective altruism’ banner. (edit: nevermind, seems like they identified with other -isms) .Somehow the EA brand is threading the needle of being a banner and also not mind-killing people … I think.
Would EA be much worse if we removed the ‘banner’ aspect of it? I don’t know… it feels like we’re running an experiment of whether it’s possible to nurture and grow global prioritist qualities in the world (in people who might not have otherwise done much global prioritism, without a banner/community to help them get started). It’s not clear if we’re done with that experiment—if anything, initial results look promising from where I’m sitting. So my initial thought is that I don’t quite want to remove the banner variable yet (but then again maybe Global Priorities could keep that variable)
I specifically wrote:
For further clarification, see also the comment I just left here.
Ah whoops, thanks for the clarification. I’m glad that delineation was made during the session!
Hmm so maybe some weaker point: perhaps banners like ‘atheism’ and ‘feminism’ have the property ‘blend me with your identity or consequences’, whereas EA doesn’t as much, and maybe that’s better. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Anyway, thanks for the post Jonas, I agree with many points and have had similar experiences.