I don’t claim to speak authoritatively, or to answer all of your questions, but perhaps this will help continue your exploration.
There’s an “old” (by EA standards) saying in EA, that EA is a Question, Not an Ideology. Most of what connects the people on this forum is not necessarily that they all work in the same cause area, or share the same underlying philosophy, or have the same priorities. Rather, what connects us is rigorous inquiry into the question of how we can do the most good for others with our spare resources. Because many of these questions are philosophical, people who start from that same question can and do disagree.
So I guess my general answer to your closing question is: you are not missing anything; on the contrary, you have identified a number of questions that people in EA have been debating for the past ~20 years and will likely continue doing so. If you share the general goal of effectively doing good for the world (as, from your bio, it looks like you do), I hope you will continue to think about these questions in an open-minded and curious way. Hopefully discussions and interactions with the EA community will provide you some value as you do so. But ultimately, what is more important than your agreement or disagreement with the EA community about any particular issue is your own commitment to thinking carefully about how you can do good.
I really appreciate this perspective. The idea that EA is a question rather than an ideology really resonates, especially when thinking about the diversity of approaches within the movement. It’s reassuring to know that many of these debates about long termism, AI safety, and earning-to-give aren’t settled, but rather ongoing discussions that reflect different ways of reasoning about impact. Coming from a background in fish welfare and food systems in Uganda, I see similar tensions how do we balance immediate suffering with long-term change? How do we integrate global priorities with local realities? And how do we ensure that interventions remain relevant in the face of political and economic uncertainty? It’s exciting to engage with a community that embraces these complexities, and I look forward to thinking through these questions alongside others who share the goal of doing the most good. THIS IS SURELY THE MOST GOOD.
A warm welcome to the forum!
I don’t claim to speak authoritatively, or to answer all of your questions, but perhaps this will help continue your exploration.
There’s an “old” (by EA standards) saying in EA, that EA is a Question, Not an Ideology. Most of what connects the people on this forum is not necessarily that they all work in the same cause area, or share the same underlying philosophy, or have the same priorities. Rather, what connects us is rigorous inquiry into the question of how we can do the most good for others with our spare resources. Because many of these questions are philosophical, people who start from that same question can and do disagree.
Accordingly, people in EA fall on both sides of many of the questions you ask. There are definitely people in EA that don’t think that we should prioritize future lives over present lives. There are definitely people who are skeptical about AI safety. There are definitely people who are concerned about the “moral licensing” effects of earning-to-give.
So I guess my general answer to your closing question is: you are not missing anything; on the contrary, you have identified a number of questions that people in EA have been debating for the past ~20 years and will likely continue doing so. If you share the general goal of effectively doing good for the world (as, from your bio, it looks like you do), I hope you will continue to think about these questions in an open-minded and curious way. Hopefully discussions and interactions with the EA community will provide you some value as you do so. But ultimately, what is more important than your agreement or disagreement with the EA community about any particular issue is your own commitment to thinking carefully about how you can do good.
Thanks, Cullen
I really appreciate this perspective. The idea that EA is a question rather than an ideology really resonates, especially when thinking about the diversity of approaches within the movement. It’s reassuring to know that many of these debates about long termism, AI safety, and earning-to-give aren’t settled, but rather ongoing discussions that reflect different ways of reasoning about impact. Coming from a background in fish welfare and food systems in Uganda, I see similar tensions how do we balance immediate suffering with long-term change? How do we integrate global priorities with local realities? And how do we ensure that interventions remain relevant in the face of political and economic uncertainty? It’s exciting to engage with a community that embraces these complexities, and I look forward to thinking through these questions alongside others who share the goal of doing the most good. THIS IS SURELY THE MOST GOOD.