As an organization, Wild Animal Initiative is committed to the position that animals matter equally regardless of when they exist.
That is, we exist to help as many wild animals as we can as much as we can. All else equal, it doesnāt matter to us whether that happens in our lifetimes or in the long-term future, because it feels the same to the animals in either case. Weāre not in the business of warm fuzziesādespite the warmth and fuzziness of many of our clients.
In practice, because there are so many wild animals in the far future, that leads us to think about the far future a lot. Itās the main reason weāre laser-focused on supporting the growth of a self-sustaining academic field dedicated to improving wild animal welfare. As far as we can tell, that currently seems like the most reliable vehicle for institutionalizing an ethical and scientific framework capable of continuously serving wild animalsā interests.
Several of our staff also believe that our decisions should primarily work backward from what we think would be best ~1000+ years from now. But we havenāt committed to that as an organization.
This position has been called āstrong longtermism.ā Itās something we plan to consider further.
Even though itās not our official position, strong longtermists might still choose to donate to WAIābecause they believe we have the most promising theory of change, because they believe weāre the most funding-constrained of available longtermist projects, or for other reasons.
In the meantime, Iād love to hear from anyone who has ideas on what we might do differently if we were to adopt a strong longtermist position.
Hi Michael and Abraham!
The answer depends on which type of longtermism weāre talking about.
As an organization, Wild Animal Initiative is committed to the position that animals matter equally regardless of when they exist.
That is, we exist to help as many wild animals as we can as much as we can. All else equal, it doesnāt matter to us whether that happens in our lifetimes or in the long-term future, because it feels the same to the animals in either case. Weāre not in the business of warm fuzziesādespite the warmth and fuzziness of many of our clients.
In practice, because there are so many wild animals in the far future, that leads us to think about the far future a lot. Itās the main reason weāre laser-focused on supporting the growth of a self-sustaining academic field dedicated to improving wild animal welfare. As far as we can tell, that currently seems like the most reliable vehicle for institutionalizing an ethical and scientific framework capable of continuously serving wild animalsā interests.
Several of our staff also believe that our decisions should primarily work backward from what we think would be best ~1000+ years from now. But we havenāt committed to that as an organization.
This position has been called āstrong longtermism.ā Itās something we plan to consider further.
Even though itās not our official position, strong longtermists might still choose to donate to WAIābecause they believe we have the most promising theory of change, because they believe weāre the most funding-constrained of available longtermist projects, or for other reasons.
In the meantime, Iād love to hear from anyone who has ideas on what we might do differently if we were to adopt a strong longtermist position.