Stories of people with very different experiences to theirs. I think people can usually do with more empathy. Stories are a great way to open ourselves to the lives of others.
For me, I was moved by The Diving Bell and the Butterfly which is written by person with locked in syndrome (like Stephen Hawking had).
Worth noting that Thinking Fast and Slows has some issues in the replication crisis (mainly around priming). Eg. this article here. https://jasoncollins.blog/2016/06/29/re-reading-kahnemans-thinking-fast-and-slow/
Not so much an EA book, but David Deutsch’s The Beginning Of Infinity is my top recommendation. It helped me understand how to avoid making some kinds of mistakes in my epistemology.
Out of interested why do you think it’s bad to discuss publicly?
An AMA. I honestly don’t think I’m a particularly good person to write one, but I think it would be good to have more on here.
I think if you’re in an EA job I’d love to see an AMA from you.
Well we know what we’re all giving our families this Christmas!
I think this view is correct but I would think about how I expressed it.
If someone was sharing advice like this, they care about the future of humanity. Telling them they are making bad choices might put them off. Rather I would want to encourage them and suggest some of the highest impact interventions.
It’s easy to come across as superior particularly to people who are trying to make the world better. This would be harmful.
Sure though effectively that reads to me as “you shouldn’t have published this”. Is that what you mean?
If you mean “you should use a much more fine grained model if you ever get near a trustee board to decide if you should take it”- yes, I agree”
It’s tricky isn’t it. It’s a poor model :P but it’s better than my poorly informed intuition. Not quite sure what to do about that. Have a good one :)
Thanks for your time in writing this. You’ve clearly thought about it a lot. I’ll have a look at your comments.
I guess we want to encourage people to do more pieces like this and I think that were I not quite robust I would find this response intimidating. Maybe you could have started with a hello or a thank you to lighten the tone?
1)I think you would get to research a charity before agreeing.
2)I don’t know the answer.
I don’t have enough money to do that kind of work for every charity and to do it for a specific one I’d have to know how representative it is.
I agree. If none of the charities represented are ones which do things you think are valuable or can conceive of becoming valuable I suggest people turn down the offer.
However, perhaps you could get some budget moved from dog and cat shelters into factory farming or change the types of protests that your members attend. Some types of change would be efficiency though others could be new avenues or publishing impact. I think you are right to say you could get some sense of likelyhood of positive impact on being offered the trusteeship.
Can you think of a way to include this kind of variability simply? Otherwise I guess there is no way to know whether this is a good idea or not and I’m not sure what to do with that.
The model does nothing to consider the variability in impactfulness of charities. Many people think that the majority of charitable interventions achieve nothing, and it seems odd to ascribe value to a charity whose work isn’t achieving anything.
Thinking again, I’m not sure I agree. The model assumes a 5% increase in effect. For a charity doing no impactful work that might mean making it slightly impactful, which doesn’t seem unreasonable—getting them to make impact assessments could do far more good than this. What do you think?