I recently attended his book launch in London, where he was asked about EA. I was surprised by how positive his response was. His main criticism was that EA feels “nerdy,” and that these ideas deserve a much wider audience. I got the impression he sees SMA as at least somewhat aligned with EA, but aimed at a broader audience.
He mentioned Ambitious Impact twice during the talk and profiles them in a chapter in the book. He also shouted out Rob Mather (who was in attendance), and includes at least two chapters on founding and running the Against Malaria Foundation in the book. I haven’t seen other interviews, but it already seems to me like he’s promoting certain EA areas.
RUTGER: I see myself as a pluralist. It’s fine to rely on the full spectrum of human emotions and motivations. Humans are a mixed bag, right? So, we are partially motivated sometimes by things such as compassion, empathy, and altruism, which is wonderful. But we can’t solely rely on that to make this world a wildly better place.
Peter, you’re obviously the founder of the Effective Altruism movement, a movement that I admire. At the same time, though, I feel it’s a bit limited in its reach because many of the effective altruists I’ve spoken to are a bit strange and weird. They’re mainly motivated by this yearning to do good and help others. They are born altruists. A lot of them became vegan when they were very young. Many of them reacted instantly when they read your essay, Famine, Affluence and Morality, and I think what happened in the years around 2010 is that these people discovered one another on social media, and they realised, “Hey, I’m not alone.” But they’ve always been quite weird, which is fine, don’t get me wrong. I’m happy for them to do their work, but at the same time, I thought, perhaps there’s also a place for a broader movement for more “neurotypical people” that relies on other sources of motivation.
Yes, he references quite a few EA case studies in the book and in his talks. From chats I’ve had with people involved, I think they’re being thoughtful about how they relate to the EA brand—trying to reach a broader audience without getting pulled into existing perceptions.
So that’s why I say if you’re thinking of using their work in EA outreach at a significant scale, I’d suggest checking in with them first.
I recently attended his book launch in London, where he was asked about EA. I was surprised by how positive his response was. His main criticism was that EA feels “nerdy,” and that these ideas deserve a much wider audience. I got the impression he sees SMA as at least somewhat aligned with EA, but aimed at a broader audience.
He mentioned Ambitious Impact twice during the talk and profiles them in a chapter in the book. He also shouted out Rob Mather (who was in attendance), and includes at least two chapters on founding and running the Against Malaria Foundation in the book.
I haven’t seen other interviews, but it already seems to me like he’s promoting certain EA areas.
He expresses similar views in his recent interview with Peter Singer:
That’s good!
Yes, he references quite a few EA case studies in the book and in his talks. From chats I’ve had with people involved, I think they’re being thoughtful about how they relate to the EA brand—trying to reach a broader audience without getting pulled into existing perceptions.
So that’s why I say if you’re thinking of using their work in EA outreach at a significant scale, I’d suggest checking in with them first.
Very fair!
I also think that EA feels super nerdy and these ideas deserve a broader audience.