It makes sense to me that an author who writes a book about a social movement should mention that they were a co-founder of that movement just for the sake of clarity, even if it doesn’t actually sell more books.
Will MacAskill isn’t a philosophy professor writing in the abstract about ideas he finds interesting; he helped to develop those ideas, and the community around them. Knowing that is useful to me as a reader.
I agree with you that this debate is of little consequence. An exception might be that we should try to make sure that people who don’t have a strong claim to be “co-founders” don’t try to make such claims, as it makes EA history confusing to follow and helps people be seen as speaking “for effective altruism” when this isn’t the case.
(One could argue that no one can speak for effective altruism at all, but Will MacAskill has a better claim to do so than, say, me.)
I agree with all this. Like I said, I don’t personally object to the uses of ‘co-founder of EA’ as far as the claim has been made. It’s not like many people who would qualify as co-founders of EA bother making the claim, and it’s not like Will or Jacy are writing books that often. So it doesn’t come up much anyway.
It makes sense to me that an author who writes a book about a social movement should mention that they were a co-founder of that movement just for the sake of clarity, even if it doesn’t actually sell more books.
Will MacAskill isn’t a philosophy professor writing in the abstract about ideas he finds interesting; he helped to develop those ideas, and the community around them. Knowing that is useful to me as a reader.
I agree with you that this debate is of little consequence. An exception might be that we should try to make sure that people who don’t have a strong claim to be “co-founders” don’t try to make such claims, as it makes EA history confusing to follow and helps people be seen as speaking “for effective altruism” when this isn’t the case.
(One could argue that no one can speak for effective altruism at all, but Will MacAskill has a better claim to do so than, say, me.)
I agree with all this. Like I said, I don’t personally object to the uses of ‘co-founder of EA’ as far as the claim has been made. It’s not like many people who would qualify as co-founders of EA bother making the claim, and it’s not like Will or Jacy are writing books that often. So it doesn’t come up much anyway.