“Should,” “could” and “would” are insidious words. They are inherently judgemental—finding fault with the current state of affairs and envisioning a world different than reality. (In most cases better than reality, according to the beholder).
However, this is a fantasy. It is a flimsy hope with no backing support. Should/could/would imply the possibility for a different, better outcome. It is holding out hope for a better past. But quantum-mechanically, that waveform has already collapsed; the cat in the box is dead.
I say this because one of the most common afflictions I see in EA is the inner critic. Smart, productive, well-intentioned people live in chronic discomfort with the self-flagellating belief that they could do better and should do better. The beatings will continue until morale improves.
I'm not saying don't have goals; I am saying let go of the outcomes. It's fine to be ambitious and set your sights on a target, but the healthy response is to choose contentment regardless of your achievements.
But there must be some minimum ethical standard for being a human on this planet, right? Without that, any behavior is acceptable. I contend that a single metric sets the bar for what I call a minimum viable life (MVL); it is simply to minimize harm.
And that is it. Placing any more expectations on a person—yourself included—is implicitly attaching a judgment to that person: you are a good person if you meet or exceed these expectations; you are a bad person if you do not. Good/bad judgment can sometimes be a useful framing, but it's important to know that judgments are always relative. Their magnitude and polarity depend entirely on where you stand and how you look. I posit that it is never appropriate to judge another person as good or bad. It is only appropriate to assess how much harm they are causing and to put up boundaries or restraints where appropriate to attenuate future harm.
Yes, the bar is low. That's the point. If a person does nothing more than minimizing harm throughout their life, that is enough. If it helps, think of the people eking out living in poverty in LMICs that we are most trying to help. What do we really expect from them? To live life and minimize harm. Anything more anyone can do to positively contribute to the world is a bonus. And here's the important thing: only each person can determine what their own internal compass motivates them to do above and beyond.
Said another way, every individual has full agency over their life. If they want to meditate on a mountain, distribute bed nets in Africa, work on AI safety, or decided to play video games 16 hours per day, that is their right as an empowered human to do. It is only when those actions involve unnecessary harm to others we need to intervene.
It might feel like this low bar would then result in low achievement and low impact. That is a risk, and given 8 billion people on the planet, it is bound to happen. But I am an optimist. I have faith in humanity. I have seen the spark of passion that drives people to go above and beyond simply minimizing harm. Examples abound in the EA community. I have even felt that myself. This post is proof. It would have been less effort to not draft this, revise it, edit it, and post it. Yet I did because I feel it can improve the lives of others.
So I encourage you to lower your achievement bar all the way down to minimize harm: to others but also—and especially—to yourself. If you are in a place where all you feel you can do at the moment is minimize harm, that is OK. Know that this is a universal experience. If you take care of yourself and allow others to step up and support you as well, I have faith you will get past it. When you do get to a better state, the experience and memory of your own struggle will bring you empathy and compassion for others. You will find you have not only the motivation to do what is important but an inner sense of what you uniquely can contribute to the world.
And contribute you will. Maybe not as you envisioned because as much as we'd like to, we cannot predict the future. But you will make a positive difference, and—perhaps more importantly—your journey along the path will serve as a role model for those who follow.
Surely your criteria has the same issue; we are implicitly attaching a judgement to a person based on whether or not they minimize harm?
Correct, which is why the phrase “any more” is key in that sentence.