I don't know about "claims." "You are the global 1%" is a good example, IMO — it is TRUE, but if you make it too salient all the time the result is a bunch of people who wind up thinking the problem is that they have too much.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
As I've said, I agree EA isn't primarily about growth, but disagree EA is primarily about redistribution (except for some very broad & nonstandard definition of redistribution that includes things like getting factory farms to go cage-free & making sure the world doesn't blow up)
I don’t think I know what a standard definition of redistribution is, or a better term for “moving resources non-transactionally.” Insofar as EA is primarily about “doing good stuff better,” fair, I guess, although utterly lacking in content
-
-
I think you're strawmanning. "Using reason and evidence to figure out how to do the most good" (what I said) != "doing good stuff better" (what you said). And yes, a single phrase cannot contain all the content around what we consider "good", but you can read the websites, (cont)
-
... and if you do you'll see it's not empty. Basically all EA cashes out "good" in terms of the welfare of sentient beings, in a consequentialist, scope-sensitive way, w/out unfairly prioritizing a single time period, locality, or species. This is very unusual.
- 13 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I’m convinced at this point that the EA leadership does not think that redistribution is central to EA. I do not cede this about the EA rank-and-file, and I think the leadership probably ought to talk to them more, butpic.twitter.com/E7VHt9Olgd
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.