First off: On-and-off or not, that's 6 years of donating, even if it wasn't consistent on a monthly basis. I'm sure if you add this up, you could come up with amazing numbers summarizing what good in the world you already contributed to. While the people whose lives you have helped to improve or save are not able to thank you personally for it, it was still thanks to you and it can sometimes help to visualize that. Look back with pride of what you did do, not with contempt of what you didn't!

Personally, I was the same until I discovered EA a year ago, and the central key for me was pledging. I know you mentioned not wanting to feel obligated to do it, but from my point of view, it's a good thing to cement your decision while being in the mindset. I don't view it as a negative thing, but a reminder of the dedication I once had to become less self-centered. Not everyone is naturally empathetic or altruistic, and it can be tough to stay consciously on a more generous path if you're not. especially when constantly being confronted with anti-giving mindsets and opinions.

Even if not committing with something "official", automating the donations can also help. My biggest mistake, so to speak, was that I needed to consciously donate my money each month. This naturally led to skipping and forgetting some without catching up, wildly changing the amount based on how much I currently feel like, and so on. Just deciding on some "minimal amount", setting up a recurring donation and having to actively cancel it to stop makes a big difference.

Another topic for me is trying to keep the mindset alive: Follow the charities, institutions or persons that inspired you or you feel connected with, via newsletters, LinkedIn or whatever social media you use. Seeing accomplishments regularly helps staying in touch with what you donate to, and some also add a bit of emotional flavor so that you don't just see numbers, but the actual impact campaigns have.

It can also help to re-read or re-watch what inspired you initially. e.g. I love going through Peter Singer's works from time to time because his writing style resonates with me and puts me back into the mindset I had when I decided to pledge.

Last but not least, if you feel like it, joining communities can also be incredibly helpful to have role models, feel connected, and just encourage each other.

With all that being said: I absolutely feel your struggles, I've been dealing with the same for years and only time can tell how I will feel about the pledge long-term. In my opinion, it's okay to not always be enthusiastic about being charitable - finding a minimum and sticking with it always felt worth it in the end for me, though. It's usually the fear of tomorrow that makes me unsure about it, but when looking back I never once thought "if only I saved the money I donated for x...". Instead, it's "I'm glad I was a part of this".

In addition to the other great ideas...

I think there's great value in being part of a giving group - either an official fundraising circle or just with 3 or 4 friends can be a real morale and accountability boost. Maybe meet up every quarter physically or online and share your giving plans. I even know a couple of families that talk around the dinner table every month about where they will give their money.

 Its telling to me that this has been the approach of many high-impact people in the past. Will McKaskill formed a giving group at Oxford very early in EA days. The Clapham sect in the 1800s would regularly meet in a pub partially to decide where to put their resources (Anti-Slavery/Prison reform/Animal welfare)

A few individuals can stay motivated to give lots over long periods, but I think the majority of people (myself VERY MUCH included) really struggle to manage alone - and there's no shame in that. Even many who can manage giving without a community could benefit from one.

I also think us that do direct work should be more willing to tell the odd individual story of people that are helped by our work, and through those that give the money. EA is rightly allergic to anecdotes as they are the lowest form of evidence, but if we tell the odd story to help motivate people to give rather than to demonstrate impact I think it can do more good than harm. Obviously this isn't "see or engage the person in front of you" but its a bit closer at least.

 

One minor suggestion I have is to do annual donations (i.e. sit down at the end of the year / whenever you do your taxes, and decide how much disposable income you have and how much you want to give). It feels more special this way, you get more invested (if you spend time looking at potential charities recommended by GiveWell and charity evaluators), and of course it's less of a hassle than deciding monthly.

Suggestions:

1) Have a commitment device, like pledging with Giving What We Can

2) Take the active choice to donate out of your hands, set up automatic bank transfers on regular basis, separate accounts etc. So motivation isn't needed for the donations to still get done.

3) If you feel like the "why" and emotional connection could help, setup an automation so you get blog posts from organizations that you (indirectly) support are sent to your inbox/DMs - this is the work you are making happen!

Thanks for all the donations you've done over the years!

Not confident enough to call this an answer, but I think if I were giving more to GHD I would probably take a trip to one of the places GiveWell operates to see it for myself. This is partially because I quite enjoy traveling, but also because I think I place a fairly high importance on supporting that emotional connection side to donating. For me, a photo of someone I met there, a reminder of a stranger whose life might be saved by the money I was giving, would go a long way to emotional sustenance I think. Best-case scenario would be getting the chance to do a ride-along with one of the top-charities, but unsure what the practicality of arranging something like that is. 

If you currently don't get much meaning or fulfilment from giving effectively, it might help to notice the areas in your life that do give you that sense of meaning and fulfilment. The fact that this question has stayed with you for six years, even during times when you weren’t actively donating, suggests it’s something important to you, something that continues to pull at you.

For me, I’ve welcomed pledging as part of my identity, and that’s where I draw meaning from it.

Like you, I don’t tend to feel a big emotional connection to my giving. I give because I believe it’s the right thing to do. I’m at peace taking longer to pay off a mortgage if it means more people in the world get the chance to live their lives. These are lives that might otherwise be cut short by preventable causes far beyond their control.

Effective giving has become part of who I am. It shapes my relationship with money, my decision-making, my career planning. That’s been my path. I’d be curious to hear what might work for you.

Hi Wenmar! Thanks for taking the time to think about your giving and how you can make it more sustainable for you. I work at GiveWell and happened across your post-- I sent you an email with your total donations to GiveWell so far, which really have done a lot of good already. If that didn't come through, please send me a message with your current email. 

There's a lot of good advice here already; you might also enjoy this video telling the story of a child treated for clubfoot through GiveWell funding and/or subscribing to a charity newsletter (I personally love the New Incentives newsletter). Some donors also find community in GiveWell's annual staff giving blog posts (2024 post here, and past years linked from there) where some staff talk about the psychology of giving along with their chosen cause areas. 

I echo the advice that automating your monthly gifts or giving annually rather than monthly might help,. I also have a day of the year when I make my gifts (which honors a personal milestone in my life) which makes it feel more celebratory. 

Thanks again for taking the time to reflect on this. 

EA is a unique community in that its belief is based on a behavioral trait, rather than a set of ideological guidelines that give rise to certain behaviors.

If EA had an ideology, it would be an "ideology of behavior." Altruistic behavior is natural in human beings, just as other antisocial behaviors are also natural. Repressing some behavioral traits and empowering others is what a cultural model does.

Changing one's lifestyle, depriving oneself of effective capacities to participate in the social environment, enduring the incomprehension of those close to oneself—all of this cannot be done without receiving emotional feedback, which is logical in human development.

The fact that some people can act altruistically and make significant sacrifices based on a moral autonomy constituted exclusively from rational ideation seems exceptional, without many precedents in the history of human ideological thought (deontology). It might be an unhelpful (not very utilitarian) approach if we need millions of altruistic donors: people motivated to change their lifestyles and make material sacrifices.

Perhaps it would be worth reflecting on the precedents of the ideologies that have led so many to sacrifice themselves for a particular vision of the common good... none of these visions are as solidly grounded in the real possibilities of human nature as EA itself.

For example: Alcoholics Anonymous saw the inability to overcome certain addictions as an evil (for oneself and for others). They then created, through trial and error, community psychological strategies to help those who were motivated to improve their behavior and also to help others themselves. NOT DONATING is also an evil. It is an evil for others, our fellow human beings, who need our help... and it is also an evil for us who allow ourselves to be carried away by a conformist and conventional lifestyle that has been imposed on us.