One problem with effective altruism as currently conceived is that it may lead to errors similar to those seen in the struggle for social justice.
Effective altruism emerges as a rationalization that improves upon the evident shortcomings of empathy-based altruism. In empathy-based altruism, we act to satisfy a motivation where the resulting action—being largely ineffective—is not logically consistent with the ultimate goal of altruism (for instance, we send charitable donations in response to a high-impact advertisement without realistically considering how much suffering that aid actually alleviates). Conversely, in social-justice altruism, we may aim to make effective donations while ignoring underlying psychological motivational factors (acting instead on a hidden motive), meaning the increase in effectiveness is merely apparent.
True altruistic effectiveness is achieved when the altruistic behavioral strategy is correctly aligned with the agent's motivation; this is not the case with social-justice altruism, which—furthermore—tends to have a far weaker capacity to evoke an emotional response than empathy-based altruism.
Within the egalitarian ideal of politiical social justice, the stated motivation is to create a world with less suffering through political decision-making; however, the hidden motivation is often retributive justice (punishing the oppressive minority held responsible for the inequality). This explains the failure of the most ambitious political ideologies centered on social justice.
In the ideal of empathy-based altruism, the stated motivation is to help reduce the suffering of others, yet the hidden motivation is to alleviate our own suffering—suffering triggered by empathy for those who are in pain and capable of making a strong emotional impact on us. In the ideal of effective altruism (viewed as altruism-as-social-justice), the articulated motivation is likewise to reduce the suffering of others; however, the hidden motivation might be—for instance—to gain self-esteem (or honor, status, or popularity) within an elitist environment that prizes participation in social justice movements.
One possible solution is to view altruism as the necessary economic consequence of benevolence (an ethic of virtue). In this scenario, the psychological motivation is equivalent in its effects to that of altruism-as-empathy, yet its origin (an overt one) lies in participation within a subculture of benevolence. This subculture offers the agent emotional rewards—such as a non-aggressive environment, affective connection, and social engagement—within a context of cognitive clarity (coherent idealism and enlightened rationality). Effective altruism would then emerge as a necessary consequence of this dynamic; indeed, it would be inconsistent to hold an anti-aggressive, rational, and benevolent ideal that did not entail effective altruistic acts.
The challenge lies in the fact that, while altruism—like social justice—can be quantified (in terms of money, goods, or services dedicated to altruistic ends), benevolence can only be described in approximate terms: as an individual state of mind or attitude -ethos?- inclined toward empathy, the control of aggression, the development of affective social skills, and enlightened prosocial behavior, all of which yield rewarding emotional effects.
This places us in the realm of something that does not yet exist: an "ideology of behavior"—a concept that would equate motivation with ideology.
Nevertheless, there are precedents for effective social organizations founded on principles of behavioral conditioning or "primed behavior." While these do not constitute ideologies of behavior, they do represent strategies for behavioral control organized at a societal level for the common good. Examples range from "Alcoholics Anonymous" to the Jesuit "Spiritual Exercises" and the Amish—who organize themselves socially without a coercive government (relying on the emotional development of what they call *Gelassenheit*). These social strategies for behavioral change incorporate diverse cultural elements selected through trial and error.
Benevolence can be cultivated both psychologically (as in therapy) and culturally (provided the cultural environment supports it). Benevolence resembles antiagressivity and could even be measured using biological markers, although, in social practice, the emotional states associated with prosociality, non-aggression, and friendliness are quite unmistakable.
The great advantage of benevolence over social justice ideologies is that, aside from avoiding hidden agendas, it can provide powerful emotional rewards at the interpersonal level—rewards that offset the material sacrifices inherent in effective altruistic action.
