I think it makes sense to put more effort into growing cause areas separately than it did before, but it doesn’t mean completely winding down EA movement-building especially since I haven’t heard of massive challenges with recruiting new members from university movement builders.
Some ideas held by many EAs—whether right or wrong, and implied by EA philosophy or not—encourage risky behaviour. We could call these ideas risky beneficentrism (RB), and they include:
i. High risk appetite.
ii. Scope sensitivity
iii. Unilateralism
iv. Permission to violate societal norms. Violating or reshaping an inherited morality or other “received wisdom” for the greater good.
iv. Other naive consequentialism. Disregard of other second-order effects
What’s RB?
I think it makes sense to put more effort into growing cause areas separately than it did before, but it doesn’t mean completely winding down EA movement-building especially since I haven’t heard of massive challenges with recruiting new members from university movement builders.
Thanks, I missed that!