Conversation

Really enjoyed this! Noodling: say we take the stance that the totalizing version of EA is troubled, but on the margin, as a *lens* to add to one's repertoire, it leads to interesting ideas and inspiring behavior. Is it possible to make strong institutions based on that stance?
1
6
Like many strong institutions, EA's strength in recruiting young people, inspiring high-cost actions, fundraising, etc seems to depend on making crisp, strident, highly legible claims: shut up or multiply! Is a "metarational" institution doomed to seem milquetoast by comparison?
1
4
This seems like a much weaker attractor: "the mutilitarians try to figure out what's best by weighing a well-balanced zoo of considerations, always sensitive to the individual and the context." Can you build a movement out of that?
2
7
One way to look at this is: this sort of reduces to what traditional large philanthropies do! They have some semi-illegible set of values and processes; they make decisions on causes in a way that's sort of patterned and sort of idiosyncratic.
2
2
Gentlemen, I’m interested to write about this. Perhaps together? Fwiw, I believe a meta-rational movement’s possible. (Although not on that framing!) E.g. alt to EA principle: “Help others discover and live by their sources of meaning, while respecting your own in the process.”
1
2
Show replies