Hi everyone! I’m new to the Forum (and EA in general), so I’m still at the beginning of the learning curve and slowly familiarizing with the jargon :)
I really resonate with the idea of finding a middle ground that was presented in this post. Personally, I don’t have a hardline stance against eating animals, but the current methods of factory farming seem obviously broken because of the suffering involved. That’s why I usually get excited about solutions like lab-grown meat—it feels like the perfect “cheat code” to get the economic benefit without the misery.
But looking at this through the “Visionary Pragmatism” lens, I feel a bit torn: my worry is that high-tech solutions are going to be a luxury for wealthy countries for a long time. Shifting from traditional farms to high-tech factories requires a completely different workforce (farmers vs. PhDs) and infrastructure that lower-income countries might not have yet.
It feels like if we bet everything on the high-tech visionary stuff, we might leave the developing world behind. Does it make sense to have a “dual track” strategy? Like, going full speed on tech where possible, but sticking to “old school” welfarism (better conditions, less pain) in places where the tech transition is still decades away?
I’d love to hear any thoughts on this and if it’s something already taken into account!
Hi everyone! I’m new to the Forum (and EA in general), so I’m still at the beginning of the learning curve and slowly familiarizing with the jargon :)
I really resonate with the idea of finding a middle ground that was presented in this post. Personally, I don’t have a hardline stance against eating animals, but the current methods of factory farming seem obviously broken because of the suffering involved. That’s why I usually get excited about solutions like lab-grown meat—it feels like the perfect “cheat code” to get the economic benefit without the misery.
But looking at this through the “Visionary Pragmatism” lens, I feel a bit torn: my worry is that high-tech solutions are going to be a luxury for wealthy countries for a long time. Shifting from traditional farms to high-tech factories requires a completely different workforce (farmers vs. PhDs) and infrastructure that lower-income countries might not have yet.
It feels like if we bet everything on the high-tech visionary stuff, we might leave the developing world behind. Does it make sense to have a “dual track” strategy? Like, going full speed on tech where possible, but sticking to “old school” welfarism (better conditions, less pain) in places where the tech transition is still decades away?
I’d love to hear any thoughts on this and if it’s something already taken into account!