Skip to content
Longterm Wiki
Back

The Predictably Grievous Harms of Effective Altruism — OUP Blog

web

Relevant to AI safety discussions because EA and longtermism heavily influence AI safety funding and priorities; this critique challenges the philosophical foundations shared by parts of the AI safety community.

Metadata

Importance: 35/100blog postcommentary

Summary

A critical essay by philosophers Alice Crary, Lori Gruen, and Carol J. Adams arguing that Effective Altruism is not merely tarnished by the FTX/Bankman-Fried scandal but is structurally flawed as a philanthropic ideology. The authors contend that EA's simplistic utilitarian 'ends justify the means' framework is inadequate for addressing global problems and may actively cause harm. The piece accompanies the book 'The Good It Promises, the Harm It Does.'

Key Points

  • EA's association with Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX exposed deeper structural ethical problems beyond reputational damage from the crypto collapse.
  • The 'earn to give' model encouraged by EA co-founder MacAskill incentivizes accumulating wealth by any means, creating conditions for moral corruption.
  • Authors argue EA's utilitarian framework is at best inadequate and at worst designed to rationalize harmful conduct under the guise of 'doing the most good.'
  • The essay critiques longtermism as an offshoot of EA that further distorts moral priorities by privileging speculative future outcomes over present harms.
  • Published as a companion to a critical academic volume, this represents a philosophical rather than merely political critique of EA methodology.

Cited by 2 pages

Cached Content Preview

HTTP 200Fetched Apr 7, 20267 KB
The predictably grievous harms of Effective Altruism | OUPblog 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The Good It Promises, the Harm It Does 

 
 
 Buy Now 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 By Alice Crary , Lori Gruen , and Carol J. Adams 
 
 December 12 th 2022 

 
 
 
 Over the past decade the philanthropic ideology of Effective Altruism (EA) has grown massively both in attracting funds and in influencing young people to try to make as much money as they can and give most of it away. EA offers adherents a philosophy of charitable giving that promises to do the “most good” per dollar donated or time spent. Until recently, EA’s role in directing charitable funds had functioned stealthily, barely scrutinized by most media outlets. But a series of catastrophic financial hustles in the world of cryptocurrency has brought EA heightened attention and started to expose its dangers. 

 During the summer of 2022, journalists fawned over William MacAskill , one of the co-founders of EA and its offshoot “longtermism,” speaking admirably about the way he was able to cultivate sympathy for EA among tech and crypto billionaires such as Dustin Moskovitz, Sam Bankman-Fried, and Jaan Tallin. This led to securing hundreds of millions of dollars for effective altruist causes with pledges of billions more to come.

 On 11 November 2022, Bankman-Fried, founder and CEO of crypto-currency exchange FTX, filed for bankruptcy, amid suspicions of fraudulent conduct reaching back several years. As Bankman-Fried’s business practices came under scrutiny , so too did his association with EA . A billionaire by age 30, he had become the poster boy for EA’s “earn to give” project. Bankman-Fried was raised a utilitarian and when he was a student at MIT, MacAskill persuaded him he could do the most good by making as much money as possible and then donating that money in an “effective” way. 

 Until the day before the bankruptcy filing, MacAskill had been an advisor to FTX’s charitable foundation, which had given tens of millions to EA and longtermist projects. 

 By mid-November, with the collapse of FTX and potential criminal charges pending, discussions of EA could be found at the top of blogs, newspapers, and podcasts in the United Kingdom, United States, and, indeed, around the world. In many of these discussions, the FTX-EA relationship was framed as a problematic alliance that provided moral cover for FTX’s conduct in exchange for hefty funding for EA. The standard line was that this will be a disaster for EA , in terms of reputation as well as funding. 

 The criticism that problems are inevitable when EA adherents follow the simplistic utilitarian idea that the ends justify the means, is correct as far as it goes. But the criticism says nothing about how EA is, at best, an utterly inadequate way of addressing global problems and, at worst, designed for the very sort of

... (truncated, 7 KB total)
Resource ID: 3de6a264e6b9f624 | Stable ID: sid_9CAmDAlQ00