All points make sense. I find that when introducing the idea, however, people seem slightly confused by the idea of “doing as much good as possible” (I tend to use nearly identical phrasing). I think the idea seems too abstract to them, and I feel compelled to give some kind of more concrete example to help explain. Although I haven’t really tried it out as an alternative, the idea of EA aiming to “benefit others” seems that it might be slightly clearer / more imaginable?
If you agree, this then raises the question of whether we should distinguish a definition of EA for “academic” and “outreach” / explanatory purposes. I’d argue that we should probably avoid separating a definition out for different contexts, so might need to keep thinking about how to word a definition which is clear, but also allows for nuance?
I’d agree with being hesitant to distinguish definitions of EA for “academic” and “outreach” purposes. It seems like that’s asking for someone to use the wrong definition in the wrong context.
Really? “doing as much good as possible” is confusing people? I tend to use that language, and I haven’t noticed people getting confused (maybe I haven’t been observant enough!)
Aren’t you going further from the definition though?
Any short definition about EA by itself I find to be abstract. Most people I encounter assume it’s about doing as much good small things as possible—or worse that it’s a political philosophy (red/blue thinking). It’s only when I give examples of myself or ask what their cause interests could be that they slowly break away from the abstract dictionary definitions.
Maybe “confusing” was the wrong word. But I tend to get the sense that people just have no idea what the concept means in practice when I say that, because its so vague / abstract. I’m guessing that people are thinking along the lines “what does he mean by ‘doing good’? Surely he means something else / something more specific?”
But I might just be misreading people slightly too.
All points make sense. I find that when introducing the idea, however, people seem slightly confused by the idea of “doing as much good as possible” (I tend to use nearly identical phrasing). I think the idea seems too abstract to them, and I feel compelled to give some kind of more concrete example to help explain. Although I haven’t really tried it out as an alternative, the idea of EA aiming to “benefit others” seems that it might be slightly clearer / more imaginable?
If you agree, this then raises the question of whether we should distinguish a definition of EA for “academic” and “outreach” / explanatory purposes. I’d argue that we should probably avoid separating a definition out for different contexts, so might need to keep thinking about how to word a definition which is clear, but also allows for nuance?
I’d agree with being hesitant to distinguish definitions of EA for “academic” and “outreach” purposes. It seems like that’s asking for someone to use the wrong definition in the wrong context.
Really? “doing as much good as possible” is confusing people? I tend to use that language, and I haven’t noticed people getting confused (maybe I haven’t been observant enough!)
Aren’t you going further from the definition though?
Any short definition about EA by itself I find to be abstract. Most people I encounter assume it’s about doing as much good small things as possible—or worse that it’s a political philosophy (red/blue thinking). It’s only when I give examples of myself or ask what their cause interests could be that they slowly break away from the abstract dictionary definitions.
Maybe “confusing” was the wrong word. But I tend to get the sense that people just have no idea what the concept means in practice when I say that, because its so vague / abstract. I’m guessing that people are thinking along the lines “what does he mean by ‘doing good’? Surely he means something else / something more specific?” But I might just be misreading people slightly too.
It’s not confusing, but it’s vague.
I’ve often observed your lack of observance :)