The Effective Altruism Newsletter & Open Thread - 23 November 2015 Edition
By SoerenMind @ 2015-11-26T10:01 (+3)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
undefined @ 2015-11-26T15:13 (+3)
Not sure if this is the proper place to post. This is one of the best philosophy papers I've read in my life:
"The Possibility of an Ongoing Moral Catastrophe" by Evan G. Williams.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9567-7
Abstract: "This article gives two arguments for believing that our society is unknowingly guilty of serious, large-scale wrongdoing. First is an inductive argument: most other societies, in history and in the world today, have been unknowingly guilty of serious wrongdoing, so ours probably is too. Second is a disjunctive argument: there are a large number of distinct ways in which our practices could turn out to be horribly wrong, so even if no particular hypothesized moral mistake strikes us as very likely, the disjunction of all such mistakes should receive significant credence. The article then discusses what our society should do in light of the likelihood that we are doing something seriously wrong: we should regard intellectual progress, of the sort that will allow us to find and correct our moral mistakes as soon as possible, as an urgent moral priority rather than as a mere luxury; and we should also consider it important to save resources and cultivate flexibility, so that when the time comes to change our policies we will be able to do so quickly and smoothly."
undefined @ 2015-11-26T22:40 (+3)
Protip: To access academic articles that are behind a paywall, try adding "sci-hub.io/" to the beginning of the URL: http://sci-hub.io/http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9567-7
undefined @ 2015-11-26T16:32 (+3)
I think that most people here will tell you that we already know specific examples of such wrongdoing e.g. factory farming.
undefined @ 2016-01-02T04:04 (+2)
The author addresses this:
"The reader may be an activist, already convinced that some specific moral catastrophe is taking place, and doing everything he can to put an end to it. However, so as not to obscure my main point about unidentified catastrophes, I ask the reader to set known catastrophes aside; let him imagine that all of his favorite political causes triumph, and society becomes organized exactly as he thinks best. I hope to convince him that even in such a scenario, a moral catastrophe would still probably be taking place. My reason is this: there are so many different ways in which a society—whether our actual one or the one of the reader’s dreams—could be catastrophically wrong that it is almost impossible to get everything right."
undefined @ 2016-01-04T20:01 (+1)
Not sure if this is the proper place to post.
I think it'd be a good place to post; it's an open thread!
undefined @ 2015-11-27T19:47 (+1)
This is catty, but has anyone else noticed how many of some CEA members' blog posts and Facebook updates are about how we should keep giving to and growing metacharities like CEA?
undefined @ 2015-11-28T03:22 (+7)
I think this is a good thing and more charities should do it. As a potential donor, it makes my job a lot easier when charities publicly present the best arguments in favor of donating to them.
undefined @ 2015-12-11T13:32 (+2)
I'd find it weird if people who chose their careers based on what they thought was of the greatest benefit didn't advocate for that work to other people with similar priorities.
And in response to the suggestion of self-serving behaviour or even corruption raised by this post, it should be made absolutely clear that the trustees of CEA are legally barred from being employed by or financially profiting from its operations.