Hi Ben, looking forward to reading your story aloud for the audio project!
So, on behalf of future readers/ālistenersā¦ how do you pronounce ālumiqā?
tae šø
Karma: 345
Iād love to read! Female American voice here. Iām a trained singer, but not a trained voice actor. I have a Tascam DR-05 and might be able to finagle access to a recording studio.
This is great timing. Iām currently in the middle of reading Significant Digits aloud. Just this past week, I realized that voice acting is a ton of fun and Iād like to contribute to a project :)
Thanks for organizing, Fin!
When exactly is the deadline to apply? Thanksgiving, since November 25 is two weeks from when this was posted on November 11?
Asking on behalf of a professor friend who would appreciate the chance to work on her application over the weekend :)
āEpistemic hurdleā is nicely concise, and I like the corresponding mental image of EAs who are ready to run to do good, but need to overcome the barrier of (2).
Nice, thanks for sharing!
Iām currently researching the related topic of the compassion-oriented Buddhist spiritual path, so my response will be from that perspective. Feel free to DM me if you want to chat.
John Makransky, of Boston College and Kathmandu University, has done great work on this question. He adapts Tibetan Buddhist practices for a secular Western context. See āCompassion Without Fatigue: Contemplative Training for People who Serve Othersā (third link from the top). The main insight for me is that I am not alone in trying to alleviate sufferingāso many people throughout history have stood in compassionate solidarity, and I can draw on them for support.
Makransky takes the opposite approach of commenter Denis Drescherāhe (and the Buddhist tradition) believe that reducing feelings of compassion is not the answer. Boundless compassion (along with boundless wisdom) is quite literally the goal of the Mahayana Buddhist path, so itās wonderful that you feel so much compassion already. Countless Asian philosophers have been developing these ideas for millennia, so theyāve inevitably come up with some good ideas and coping mechanisms!
For a beginner-friendly philosophical analysis of the progression from painful compassion to wise equanimity, see Sadness, Love, Openness by Chƶkyi Nyima Rinpoche. Note that this author is a Tibetan lama, so he takes a more religious approach than Makransky.
Hope this helps!
I highly recommend the Bodhicaryavatara by Shantideva! Itās the most significant ethical text of the Mahayana Buddhist tradition, with some serious Madhyamaka metaphysics sprinkled in. Iām currently writing my undergrad thesis on it, and Iād be happy to talk about it.
Hereās a great guide: https://āāwww.shambhala.com/āāguide-to-the-way-of-the-bodhisattva/āā. I took an intensive course on the Bodhicaryavatara in the traditional monastic style in Kathmandu, Nepal; see https://āāryi.org/āāprograms/āādegree-programs if you really want to dive deep. The school is currently offering all courses online.
Iām also studying The Ladder of Divine Ascent by St. John Climacus, with the accessible commentary Thirty Steps to Heaven by Vassilios Papavassiliou. St. John is venerated in both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church, but he gets more attention from the Orthodox. I find Orthodoxy fascinating because it has such a mystical relationship-oriented spirituality compared to the legalistic style of both Catholicism and Protestantism. However, this text focuses on individual spirituality; thereās not much discussion of ethics.
Why should I donate to international poverty relief when these people would just have more kids (contributing to overpopulation) and not do anything good in the world? Shouldnāt I donate to scholarship funds for local college students instead, since theyāre more likely to make a difference?
(I suspect this is a common line of reasoning among well-off educated white people in wealthy countries who think people in third-world countries are selfish and unambitious, but wonāt say that outright.)
Absolutely, I hear this all the time. Hereās some anecdotal advice:
In particular, thereās a strong thread in my circles that privileged people need to give up their power (for example, this was recently posted in the math Discord server at my left-leaning university), and philanthropy allows privileged people to hold onto power while feeling good about themselves. Social justice folks and EAs agree that everyone is complicit in injustice, and we should each take life-changing steps to help. The difference is that EAs claim that throwing away oneās power isnāt a good way to help. EAs could appeal to social justice folks by arguing that donating money is a great way to share the benefits of oneās privilege; GiveDirectly is particularly appealing here. Finally, Iāve heard good things about mutual aid societies; perhaps you could compare and contrast mutual aid societies and effective charities.
Hereās a compilation of ideas from 2015 called āWhat Can A Technologist Do About Climate Change?ā: http://āāworrydream.com/āāClimateChange/āā
Hi! Thanks for this new way to get career advice.
Iād greatly appreciate ideas for where my skill set could be most useful.
My dream job would be some sort of research role at the intersection of philosophy, math, computer science, and religious studies. Lately, Iāve been curious about the risks of demographic shift toward religious fundamentalists.
What steps could I take toward a role like this? Where can I find EAs interested in the future religious landscape? Has there already been discussion in EA circles about the demographic shift toward fundamentalism?
As soon as I can, I plan to do some internet research and write up preliminary thoughts on risks from fundamentalism. Iāll also work on getting more involved in the Christian and Buddhist EA communities. Beyond that, though, what can I do?
---
Hereās my background:
I expect to graduate this June from a US public research university with a major in Philosophy, a minor in Math, and a minor in Computer Science. I completed a few semi-prestigious tech research internships, spent a semester studying at a Buddhist monastery in Nepal, and am writing my thesis on the spiritual paths of Mahayana Buddhism and Orthodox Christianity.
I have a strong grasp of an unusually wide variety of philosophies and religions. It brings me endless enjoyment to understand where people are coming from. Iāve won a couple philosophical writing awards.
As for math and computer science, Iām your run-of-the-mill strong student. I excel at proofs and logic, but I donāt enjoy programming much. Iād love to learn more mathāa minor doesnāt feel like enough!
As someone dubiously planning a career affiliated with the U.S. Department of Defense, I would really appreciate an analysis of working inside and outside of The System. Historically, have altruists been able to do good from within harmful governments (fascist dictatorships, military juntas, genocidal governments, etc.)? How? Which qualities do altruism-friendly systems have?
āI only ask of God
That I am not indifferent to the pain,
That the dry death wonāt find me
Empty and alone, without having done the sufficient.āfrom https://āālyricstranslate.com/āāen/āāSolo-le-pido-Dos-I-only-ask-God.html
āBut those who fill with bliss
All beings destitute of joy,
Who cut all pain and suffering away
From those weighed down with misery,
Who drive away the darkness of their ignoranceā
What virtue could be matched with theirs?
What friend could be compared with them?
What merit is there similar to this?āāThe great should never be abandoned for the less,
And othersā good should be regarded as supreme.āāIf with kindly generosity
One merely has the wish to soothe
The aching heads of other beings
Such merit knows no bounds.
No need to speak then, of the wish
To drive away the endless pain
Of each and every living being,
Bringing them unbounded excellence.āāIf the simple thought to be of help to others
Exceeds in worth the worship of the Buddhas,
What need is there to speak of actual deeds
That bring about the weal and benefit of beings?āfrom BodhisattvacaryÄvatÄra (The Way of the Bodhisattva) by Åantideva
I canāt resist mentioning that Mahayana Buddhism considers meditation to be an altruistic act because it fosters wisdom and compassion. Sam Harrisā Waking Up app is particularly great at taking meditation seriously; plus, the company has taken the Giving What We Can pledge.
Many charities and hospitals accept knitted and crocheted donations, and they usually prefer super-affordable acrylic. When I was learning to knit and crochet as a little kid, I donated a lot of preemie- and newborn-sized hats. The great thing about these crafts is that they can be either easy and meditative or creative and engaging.
In the spirit of Aaron Gertlerās expansion on calling elderly relatives, we can extend āfeeding stray catsā to spending time with animals. This can be as small as giving some extra attention to local animalsāin my case, I like to hang out with the cows and sheep at my university who are destined to become meatāor as significant as volunteering at a farm sanctuary.
Hereās a looking-at-the-bright-side sort of progress:
Iāve been bewildered for most of this year about why Iām struggling so much to get things done. Just 2020-related stress doesnāt explain it.
Well, I think Iāve figured out that Iām just really burned out (or, as Cal Newport puts it, in a state of ādeep procrastinationā).
...in one of my two majors! So, Iāve changed the burned-out major to a minor. Now Iāll graduate in just a few months, giving me more time to learn things and explore career options (which Iām suddenly more excited about).
My path ahead isnāt exactly straightforward, but at least Iāve gained some valuable knowledge about what it could look like.
This seems like an incredibly interesting and important discussion! I donāt have much time now, but Iāll throw in some quick thoughts and hopefully come back later.
I think that there is room for Romy and Paoloās viewpoint in the EA movement. Lemme see if I can translate some of their points into EA-speak and fill in some of their implicit arguments. Iāll inevitably use a somewhat persuasive tone, but disagreement is of course welcome.
(For context, Iāve been involved in EA for about six years now, but Iāve never come across any EAs in the wild. Instead, Iām immersed in three communities: Buddhist, Christian, and social-justice-oriented academic. Iām deeply committed to consequentialism, but I believe that virtues are great tools for bringing about good consequences.)
---
I think the main difference between Guerrillaās perspective and the dominant EA perspective is that Guerrilla believes that small actions, virtues, intuitions, etc. really matter. Iām inclined to agree.
Social justice intuition says that the fundamental problem behind all this suffering is that powerful/āprivileged people are jerks in various ways. For example, colonialism screwed up Africaās thriving (by the standards of that time) economy. (Iām no expert, but as far as I know, it seems highly likely that African communities would have modernized into flourishing places if they werenāt exploited.) As another example, privileged people act like jerks when they spend money on luxuries instead of donating.
Spiritual intuition, from Buddhism, Christianity, and probably many other traditions, says that the reason powerful/āprivileged people are jerks is that theyāre held captive by greed, anger, delusion, and other afflictive emotions. For example, itās delusional and greedy to think that you need a sports car more than other people need basic necessities.
If afflictive emotions are the root cause of all the worldās ills, then I think itās plausible to look to virtues as a solution. (I interpret āgenerating the political willā to mean āgenerating the desire for specific actions and the dedication to follow throughā, which sound like virtues to me.) In particular, religions and social justice philosophers seem to agree that itās important to cultivate a genuine yearning for the flourishing of all sentient beings. Other virtuesāequanimity, generosity, diligenceāobviously help with altruistic endeavors. Virtues can support the goal of happiness for all in at least three ways. First, a virtuous person can help others more effectively. Compassion and generosity help them to gladly share their resources, patience helps them to avoid blowing up with anger and damaging relationships, and perseverance helps them to keep working through challenges. Second, people who have trained their minds are themselves happier with their circumstances (citation needed). Great, now thereās less work for others to do! Third, according to the Buddhist tradition, a virtuous person knows better what to do at any given moment. By developing compassion, one develops wisdom, and vice versa. The āEffectiveā and the āAltruismā are tied together. This makes sense because spiritual training should make one more open, less reactive, and less susceptible to subconscious habits; once these obscurations are removed, one has a clearer view of what needs to be done in any given moment. You donāt want to act on repressed fear, anger, or bigotry by accident! To riff off Romy and Paoloās example of āwealthy EA donorsā failing to work on themselves, their ignorance of their own minds may have real-world consequences when they donāt even notice that they could support systemic change at their own organizations. The argument here is that our mental states have significant effects on our actions, so weād better help others by cleaning up our harmful mental tendencies.
Maybe this internal work wonāt bear super-effective fruit immediately, but I think itās clear that mind-training and wellbeing create a positive feedback loop. Investing now will pay off later: building compassionate and wise communities would be incredibly beneficial long-term.
---
Miscellaneous points in no particular order:
āEA seems to unquestioningly replicate the values of the old system: efficiency and cost-effectiveness, growth/āscale, linearity, science and objectivity, individualism, and decision-making by experts/āelitesā.
Hereās how I interpret the argument: historically, people who value these things have gone on to gain a bunch of power and use it to oppress others. This is evidence that valuing these things leads to bad consequences. Therefore, we should try to find values that have better track records. Iād be fascinated to see a full argument for or against this chain of reasoning.
More factors that may or may not matter: Greed might be the root cause of someoneās aspiration toward efficiency+growth. A lack of trust+empathy might lead someone to embrace individualism. Giving power to experts/āelites suggests a lack of respect for non-elites.
āIn short, we believe that EA could do more to encourage wealth owners to dig deep to transform themselves to build meaningful relationships and political allyship that are needed for change at the systems level.ā
If you assume that spreading virtues is crucial, as Iāve argued above, and if virtues can spread throughout networks of allies, then you should build those networks.
We would suspect that donors and grant managers with a deep emotional connection to their work and an actual interest to have their personal lives, values and relationships be touched by it will stick with it and go the extra mile to make a positive contribution, generating even more positive outcomes and impact.
We need mind training so that we can help impartially. Impartiality is compatible with cultivating āwarmā qualities like trust and relationships. Julia Wise explains why no one is a statistic: http://āāwww.givinggladly.com/āā2018/āā10/āāno-one-is-statistic.html
More philanthropic funding, about half of it we would argue, should go to initiatives that are still small, unproven and/āor academically āunprovableā, that tackle the system rather than the symptoms, and adopt a grassroots, participatory bottom-up approach to finding alternative solutions, which might bear more plentiful fruit in the long run.ā
Sounds like a good consequentialist thesis that fits right in in EA!
Willpower is likely not a valid model ā see the top-level comment by MichaelStJules below.
The point remains valid, though, that people are only willing to change their lives so much.
Thanks!