There is an additional set of beliefs which EAs share, which is something like: EA institutions are a good mean to pursue those goals, their leaders worth deferring to, their forum worth using, the brand worth expanding, the community worth recruiting people into. I think this is important, otherwise it risks stolen valor and e.g., counting Bill Gates as “an EA”, and it risks eliding the ways in which the community is very dysfunctional.
I personally had a small crisis when I came to believe that the Center for Effective Altruism wasn’t cost-effective. I wrote some of my unsatisfactions up here, but since then I’ve drifted further appart.
Which is to say that I’d put more emphasis on the “together” in “We don’t know what we’re doing—but we can figure it out together” when pointing at EAs.
I don’t get that sense. Compared to most other movements I feel that people involved in EA are less likely to think those things (blind deferral/spread the brand/trust institutions)
There is an additional set of beliefs which EAs share, which is something like: EA institutions are a good mean to pursue those goals, their leaders worth deferring to, their forum worth using, the brand worth expanding, the community worth recruiting people into. I think this is important, otherwise it risks stolen valor and e.g., counting Bill Gates as “an EA”, and it risks eliding the ways in which the community is very dysfunctional.
I personally had a small crisis when I came to believe that the Center for Effective Altruism wasn’t cost-effective. I wrote some of my unsatisfactions up here, but since then I’ve drifted further appart.
Which is to say that I’d put more emphasis on the “together” in “We don’t know what we’re doing—but we can figure it out together” when pointing at EAs.
I don’t get that sense. Compared to most other movements I feel that people involved in EA are less likely to think those things (blind deferral/spread the brand/trust institutions)