Link to original article

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Four categories of effective altruism critiques, published by jtm on April 9, 2022 on The Effective Altruism Forum. When discussing critiques of effective altruism, I often find that lots of different kinds of critiques are lumped together, which can lead to people talking past each other. Here's an attempt at categorising different things one might focus on – I'm not sure the categories are exhaustive and I also welcome suggestions for refined categorisations. Four categories of critiques Normative assumptions & moral values This includes the philosophical underpinnings of effective altruism, including (but not limited to) claims about what is valuable and what people ought to do. Empirical assumptions & theories of change This includes beliefs about empirical questions like "How likely is human extinction this century?" or "What is the most cost-effective way of improving human health?" It also includes worldviews or theories of change, like "Positive societal change is more likely to be gradual than radical" or "Positive societal change is more likely to be driven by elites than by large movements." Institutions & organisations in the effective altruism social movement This includes both institutions in the broad sense of the word, such as how hiring practices or how strategic decisions for the social movement are made. It also includes questions pertaining to specific organisations, such as how transparent a particular funder is or how much an organisation achieved in the past year. Social norms & practices in the effective altruism community This includes things about the community aspect of effective altruism, i.e. the ways that people in the movement interact not just as colleagues, but also as friends, partners, housemates, and subscribers to a shared ideology. Topics to explore could include how people interact with those outside the movement, the effects of talking about money in a certain way, or the causes and effects of demographic and intellectual homogeneity. Examples in each category I also include below some examples of existing work in each category, though each list is thoroughly non-exhaustive. Also, I'm sure that some of the examples could fit into more than one category; I tried placing them in the category they seemed to represent the most.For several of these examples, I haven't read them in their entirety; some I've only barely skimmed. For each, I'm sure there are things I don't agree with, just as there is something in every one of these that I do agree with. You'll note that these aren't sweeping critiques of effective altruism or longtermism as a whole, they are rather critical assessments of specific aspects (although those would also be interesting). I personally find that while both "we should use evidence and reason to do the most good" (effective altruism) and "positively influencing the longterm future is a key moral priority of our time" (longtermism) are rather unobjectionable as general claims, the way they are practised could be better, hence the value of critiques. I would love to see more examples – please post your favourites in the comments! Normative assumptions & moral values Xuan: AI Alignment, Philosophical Pluralism, and the Relevance of Non-Western Philosophy Unruh: Constraining longtermism (Working paper, likely available upon request) Mogensen: The only ethical argument for positive 𝛿? Russell: On two arguments for Fanaticism Joe_Carlsmith: On infinite ethics Empirical assumptions & theories of change Garfinkel: How sure are we about this AI stuff? Srinivasan: Stop the Robot Apocalypse Denise_Melchin: Why I am probably not a longtermist weeatquince: The case of the missing cause prioritisation research Singer: The Hinge of History Weyl: Hear This Idea interview (second half) Brian Tomasik: Why Charities Usually Don't...