Claims without evidence that “Donors will always look to get the most bang for their buck” despite evidence to the contrary.
Seems weird to mention longtermism but not animal welfare.
However, the article does get a lot right and I thought it had an interesting point about pluralism vs prescriptivism, and an interesting contrast between effective altruism and what the article calls “social justice philanthropy”
I didn’t find this to be a very high quality article because it seems to miss a few pretty important points.
Cites the YouGov poll without considering the limitations that most people don’t actually know what EA is.
Claims without evidence that “Donors will always look to get the most bang for their buck” despite evidence to the contrary.
Seems weird to mention longtermism but not animal welfare.
However, the article does get a lot right and I thought it had an interesting point about pluralism vs prescriptivism, and an interesting contrast between effective altruism and what the article calls “social justice philanthropy”