Yup, I definitely overgeneralized here and may be completely off. I think there’s something where I’m pointing at, and this helps me clarify my thinking. So thanks.
Generally: I by no means want to demonize anyone for struggling. To a significant extent, I buy into a social model of mental health, and mostly see one person’s struggling as a symptom of their whole surrounding (social and other) being diseased.
My intention behind this post was to point out some ways in which I think EA is suboptimally organized. The rough claim I was aiming for is this: “It’s easier to be a saint in paradise, so let’s make EA a bit more paradisic by fixing some of our norms.”
I agree with that rough claim. And I liked the rest of the blog.
I guess I do see people who are struggling behaving badly sometimes. I just don’t think it’s in any more frequent than the general population. Or I see sometimes see them using the fact they’re struggling to justify their bad behaviour, and I don’t buy that.
I think a more steelmanned version of my initial claim would be that there’s a particular type of struggling that corresponds to low-integrity behavior, and that some aspects of current EA culture make it more likely for people to struggle in that particular way. Even (and maybe especially) if they are generally caring and well-meaning and honestly dedicated to the cause.
I think “scarcity mindset” is an okay handle.
A postrationalist friend also pointed out that what I’m talking about corresponds to Buddhism’s realm of hungry ghosts. In modern psychological reinterpretations of Buddhist mythology, that describes a mode of existence people can get stuck in when they develop the wrong kind of rumination. Basically, always being very aware of lack and what’s missing and being desperate to fill that up.
I’m not sure yet how useful either of these handles will turn out—but yet again, this whole post is an intellectual work in progress and I only reposted it here because people on Facebook found it surprisingly insightful.
Yup, I definitely overgeneralized here and may be completely off. I think there’s something where I’m pointing at, and this helps me clarify my thinking. So thanks.
Generally: I by no means want to demonize anyone for struggling. To a significant extent, I buy into a social model of mental health, and mostly see one person’s struggling as a symptom of their whole surrounding (social and other) being diseased.
My intention behind this post was to point out some ways in which I think EA is suboptimally organized. The rough claim I was aiming for is this: “It’s easier to be a saint in paradise, so let’s make EA a bit more paradisic by fixing some of our norms.”
I agree with that rough claim. And I liked the rest of the blog.
I guess I do see people who are struggling behaving badly sometimes. I just don’t think it’s in any more frequent than the general population. Or I see sometimes see them using the fact they’re struggling to justify their bad behaviour, and I don’t buy that.
I think a more steelmanned version of my initial claim would be that there’s a particular type of struggling that corresponds to low-integrity behavior, and that some aspects of current EA culture make it more likely for people to struggle in that particular way. Even (and maybe especially) if they are generally caring and well-meaning and honestly dedicated to the cause.
I think “scarcity mindset” is an okay handle.
A postrationalist friend also pointed out that what I’m talking about corresponds to Buddhism’s realm of hungry ghosts. In modern psychological reinterpretations of Buddhist mythology, that describes a mode of existence people can get stuck in when they develop the wrong kind of rumination. Basically, always being very aware of lack and what’s missing and being desperate to fill that up.
I’m not sure yet how useful either of these handles will turn out—but yet again, this whole post is an intellectual work in progress and I only reposted it here because people on Facebook found it surprisingly insightful.