The evolution of effective altruism
Effective altruism is portrayed as both a serious attempt to use evidence and reason to do the most good and, increasingly, a vehicle for tech and finance elites to rationalize power, wealth and controversial projects. Commenters weigh its concrete achievements in global health and poverty relief against scandals like FTX, “earning to give” in harmful industries, longtermist focus on hypothetical future lives, and perceived cult-like or undemocratic tendencies. Many see a small but influential movement whose ideological tensions — near-term charity vs. AI risk and future trillions of people — now intersect with wider political fights over billionaires, regulation and control of advanced AI.
Scope and Nature of the Movement
- Debate over whether EA is a major “social movement,” a niche subculture, or just a small, wealthy “order” with outsized influence.
- Some argue it “conquered the world” only within tech/VC bubbles; globally it remains tiny.
- Others say its importance comes from the power and money its adherents control, not headcount.
Positive Views and Defenses
- Defenders stress the original core: use evidence and reason to direct money/time to where it helps most (e.g., malaria nets, global health, cash transfers, animal welfare, biosecurity).
- Several participants mention substantial personal giving and career changes toward global health or existential risk work.
- EA is framed by supporters as unusually aligned between values and action compared to most groups.
- Some see criticism as driven by discomfort with non‑standard moral choices or by culture‑war dynamics, especially around AI safety and tech billionaires.
Critiques of Motives and Philosophy
- Many see EA as “mental gymnastics” that justifies greed, especially via “earning to give” and “patient philanthropy” (get rich now, donate later).
- Longtermism draws heavy fire: prioritizing hypothetical future people over existing suffering is called absurd, sociopathic, and detached from reality.
- Skeptics argue rational, KPI‑style optimization is misapplied to messy moral domains and vulnerable to hidden assumptions and motivated reasoning.
- Some fear EA becomes an excuse for harmful careers (e.g., adtech, finance) on the promise of later donations.
Scandals, Power, and Grift Concerns
- Strong association in the thread between EA and the cryptocurrency fraud scandal; some see EA as having “given birth” to it.
- Examples raised: purchases of high-end properties (a Czech castle, a historic English manor) with EA-linked funds; defenders counter that some details are misreported and that disputed funds were later returned.
- EA is accused of functioning like a cult or conspiracy, with sex scandals, “savior complex,” and billionaire PR cover.
- Others argue this is a smear that fixates on fringe behavior and high-profile failures.
Backlash Dynamics
- Suggested reasons for hostility:
- Perceived gap between stated altruism and elite self-interest.
- Alignment with or friendliness toward billionaires.
- Anxiety over EA’s influence on AI regulation and concentration of power.
- General suspicion of any movement claiming to have uniquely “effective” morality.