Bentham's Bulldog

• Bentham's Bulldog 24 May 2026 16:28 UTC

  3 points

  1 ∶ 0

  in reply to: PeterMcCluskey’s comment on: Strong Longter­mism Is Sim­ply Correct

  Even if future people matter .001% as much as present people, the argument for SL goes through.

  Also, it just seems bizarre that the moral importance of a person would depend on when in time they exist. If someone time-traveled back from the future to the present, would it start being 100x worse for them to stub their toe?

• Bentham's Bulldog 24 May 2026 16:27 UTC

  2 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: TFD’s comment on: Strong Longter­mism Is Sim­ply Correct

  I’m not sure I quite get what you’re saying. The point is just that if actions have positive EV and impact on the order of 10^50 lives potentially, that is very likely to swamp other positive actions.

Strong Longter­mism Is Sim­ply Correct

• Bentham's Bulldog 18 May 2026 16:44 UTC

  2 points

  1 ∶ 0

  on: Effec­tive Altru­ism Aus­tralia is launch­ing a new pod­cast—de­signed for a broad audience

  So cool!

Benefi­cence As Opportunity

Re­view: The Dy­ing Trade

You Should Go Ve­gan to Stop Fa­cil­i­tat­ing Tor­ture of the In­no­cent

Ex­pand Your Mo­ral Circle

The Best Ar­gu­ment Against Deon­tol­ogy Is About Suitcases

Goodmaxxing

Book Re­view: All the Lives You Can Change

Fol­low up: time sen­si­tive an­i­mal welfare ac­tion

Time Sen­si­tive Ur­gent An­i­mal Welfare Ac­tion

• Bentham's Bulldog 23 Apr 2026 13:59 UTC

  2 points

  1 ∶ 0

  on: Seven­teen rea­sons I’m here

  Awesome post!

Effec­tive Altru­ism and Rad­i­cal Trivialisms

Hu­mane Pes­ti­cides Are Mas­sively Mo­rally Ur­gent

None of It Is Pre­tend

Lead­ing In­sect Farm Took Millions In Sub­sidies, Then Col­lapsed Into A Wak­ing Nightmare

If You’re To Die

Utili­tar­i­anism Is Ob­vi­ously Wrong!