This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
The Bankman-Fried/FTX Saga just gets better and better. A "why oh why" article in the Wall Street Journal has plums to be plucked out, such as these.
(And if Will MacAskill wants to repair his reputation, he better make some moves sharpish because the media are painting him as Sam's guru who encouraged and indeed enabled him).
Yeah, does anyone think that someone who doesn't know the first thing about EA or any of the people here, when reading this, is going to come away with a good view of all concerned? Personally I'm very amused that veganism has been dragged into this: "guy who swindled billions is against meat eating" 🤣 So let's count 'em up: that's utilitarianism, Effective Altruism, cryptocurrency, and veganism all tainted by association!
As for MacAskill, it sounds like he was in contact with Bankman-Fried up until quite recently:
He has distanced himself now, but unfortunately that may be too little, too late:
But wait, that isn't the best bit:
Oh yes. Just imagine it. Instead of Musk buying Twitter, it could have been Bankman-Fried. If people are getting het-up about Twitter potentially collapsing, what would they think if Twitter was caught up in the undertow of the FTX collapse? 😈
As the resident apologist of EA, even I find it somewhat hilarious how much spotlight Macaskill has been getting throughout this entire fiasco. He has consistently from the beginning said that he doesn’t think he is smart or qualified enough to lead the movement or have as much impact as he does. It seems like he was right.
That being said, I wonder if this could be a sort of “no press is bad press” moment for Effective Altruism. As someone who has been involved for years, the amount of buzz I see around EA both online and in my personal life has been incredible. Between the media push for Macaskill‘s book and now this juicy scandal, I wouldn’t be surprised if the amount of people who know what EA is has doubled in just the last six months.
Time will tell if this is a good thing for EA or not, but speaking from my personal experience the main issue in talking to people about it was apathy. At least now the space will be a bit more entertaining and potentially show normies that there can be drama and fun to be had even in doing good. Maybe we’ll even pull in some rdrama folks who knows.
No, this is exactly why we’re in this mess in the first place. Mosquito nets and clean water are boring. High-leverage crypto trading is fun and exciting. Living in a penthouse with your buddies is cool and sexy. Drama appeals to the deepest impulses of the primate brain. A world without drama would be very boring indeed. But drama, living in penthouses, and high-leverage crypto trading are not altruism. In case you think that no smart or rational person would ever make such a category error, consider the following primary source:
-Caroline Ellison, October 5, 2021.
Pull up a Bitcoin price chart and find early October 2021. She was making bank in a bull market and confused getting rich for doing good. She is a smart girl, and noticed that something seemed off. As we now know, she did not correctly resolve the problem. This should tell you something about the darkness and corruption inherent in the human soul. Altruism is not natural and must be either rigorously guarded or lost.
Yeah I agree that EA has been leaning a lot more towards mental masturbation and things that are fun to think about like AI safety. That being said you have to bend a bit to the drama if you want to have massive societal impact and change the way everyday people view doing good.
I’m optimistic that even if EA gets watered down in its quest for more adoption, it will at least inject some good ideas/mental frameworks into the mainstream branch of philanthropy.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link