English proficiency: not fluent
I know I can’t listen to cold criticism, so please give me warm criticism.
alphaplus
Karma: 12
The Causes of Reluctance to Donation
It’s almost impossible to predict the long term effect.
Humans are the only actors that can produce moral force. But the problem is, how much AW will change indirectly by spending on GH? I have neither evidence nor instict to guide me on this.
This question lacks the context of how we use money, so our answers would vary a lot without a consensus.
”It would be better for EA practitioners to spend …” is different from “It would be better for existing major organizations to spend …” in terms of cost effectiveness.
My feeling is slanted towards disagree, but I’m sure it’s biased. I simply don’t know much about AW, so I choose neutral.
I like your opinion. I previously thought that spending on GH had no negative effect on AW, but I updated my thinking.
Also, I think spending on GH can have a positive indirect effect on AW. Talented individuals who would have died otherwise could be saved. These individuals might then contribute to technology advancements. and this marginal productivity could have a positive effect on AW in the long run.
However, the scale of this effect is uncertain. I have neither evidence nor instinct about this.