next page (older posts) →
William_MacAskill · 2012-12-23T05:00:10.000Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · comments (None)
I fully agree with you on that, and from my humble experience, it's rare for people in EA to be interested in doing good purely from a cold and calculated point of view. A lot of us probably had the will to do good much earlier in life and long before we got to EA, and for us Effective Altruism is just the way in which we follow our ever-existing passion to do good.
I also think we should make sure people who stumble upon us don't get the idea that we're not doing this because we're passionate about it. That can and does alienate a pretty substantial amount of people that discover EA, from my own anecdotal experiences with friends and newer community members.
Highlighting content that talks about motivation and excitement, and presenting it to people who are new to EA, might help us to:
1. Prevent people from feeling disconnected from our mission.
2. Be more appealing to people who have a strong desire to do good but are not very analytical or comfortable with the type of content we usually highlight. After we appeal to their emotion and establish common ground - we're all hopeful and excited to do good - then we can start talking about the HOW.
Just want to say I find this topic really exciting and think your report is a great contribution to the discussion.
I hope Founders Pledge takes the plunge and creates a long-term investment fund. I’m sure the experience of doing so will be valuable and I think there will be significant informational value of having such a fund exist. I’m excited to donate to it!nathan on Nathan Young's Shortform
It would be good to easily be able to export jobs from the EA job board.nathan on Nathan Young's Shortform
I suggest at some stage having up and downvoting of jobs would be useful.nathan on Nathan Young's Shortform
Rather than using Facebook as a way to collect EA jobs we should use an airtable form
1) Individuals finding jobs could put all the details in, saving time for whoever would have to do this process at 80k time.
2) Airtable can post directly to facebook, so everyone would still see it https://community.airtable.com/t/posting-to-social-media-automatically/20987
3) Some people would find it quicker. Personally, I'd prefer an airtable form to inputting it to facebook manually every time.
Ideally we should find websites which often publish useful jobs and then scrape them regularly.
Hi Prabhat, I'm a bit late to responding, but that was my article and I do have some thoughts on how promoting general philosophy education compares to EA outreach.
On the one hand whilst philosophy could in theory become part of the core curriculum and be taught on a regular basis, this is unlikely to be true of EA. It is difficult for EA outreach to be made consistent for students, which might make it hard for students to stay engaged. Therefore I think that general philosophy wins on a "consistency" metric. However, having dedicated EA teachers at schools could (possibly) allow for more consistent EA outreach.
On the other hand there is the question of how direct (to EA) the teaching is. On this metric obviously EA outreach wins. Despite this, there is a question over how useful EA outreach might actually be to high-schoolers in terms of how decision-relevant it would be for them. As raised by Ben Todd in another comment, it might be that most of what we can say to students ("do technical subjects" etc.) is already fairly well known. Perhaps the best approach with younger students is instead to introduce people to a philosophical way of thinking more generally with an EA slant where possible (e.g. Singerian-style practical ethics), with a view for EA outreach further down the line. Therefore on a "usefulness" metric I'm not entirely sure which approach wins.
Overall I think both approaches have promise, but I would be very happy for people to explore further.wuschel on How much does a vote matter?
I completely agree with you. This whole reasoning seems to heavily depend on using causal decision theory instead of its (in my opinion) more sensible competitors.sanjay on Net value of saving a child's life from a negative utilitarian perspective?
I don't think they do. I seem to remember that this topic was debated some time back and GiveWell clarified their view that they don't see it this way, but rather they just consider the immediate impact of saving a life as an intrinsic good. (although I would be more confident claiming that this is a fair representation of GiveWell's views if I could find the place where they said this, and I can't remember where it is, so apologies if I'm misremembering)ofer on How much does a vote matter?
I don't think that the chance of the election hinging on a single vote is the right thing to look at. One should decide based on the fact that other people similar to them are likely to act similarly. E.g. a person reading this post might decide whether to vote by asking themselves whether they want 300 people on the EA forum to each spend an hour (+ face COVID-19 risk?) on voting. (Of course, this reasoning neglects a much larger group of people that are also correlated with them.)aarongertler on Progress Open Thread: October // Student Summit 2020