This is a special post for quick takes by lilly. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
What are examples of behaviors you engage in that you suspect are inconsistent with the values/behaviors most EAs would endorse, but that you endorse doing (i.e., because you disagree to some extent with standard EA values, or because you think that EAs draw the wrong behavioral conclusions on the basis of EA values)?
Examples would (probably) not be: "I donate to political campaigns because I think this may actually be high EV" [not inconsistent with EA values] or "I eat meat but feel bad about it" [not endorsed]
Examples might be: "I donate to a local homeless shelter because it's especially important to me to support members of my community" [deviates from standard EA values] or "I eat chickens that were raised on a local farm because I think they have good lives" [different behavioral conclusions]
I avoid flying and travel by train instead (most of the time)=> even if it costs me a substantial part of my limited vacation time. I could compensate my extra emissions many times if I donated (my hourly salary)*(time saving) to a giving green top charity - but I don't do it.
I don't think this is very inconsistent with EA values.
I respect people who avoid flying a huge amount. I think this can be justified from an EA perspective by the way it draws attention to climate issues as it is hard to ignore, with potential to influence other people's personal behavior, but also what they stand for and vote for.
I think e.g. the GWWC pledge is bad for many people including me to take, and that starting for-profit businesses should be the default course of action for improving the world, not non-profits. I am in fact pretty anti-"donation" as a paradigm for getting anything done at this point. This is not that outside of the Overton window here - there are plenty who love markets in these parts - but it is definitely not squarely within it either. I find myself trying to exhort people to be more greedy so they will receive more reward signal that accurately tracks and internalizes their impact, rather than get lost in the vague cloud of abstractions divorced from reality that tend to permeate these parts.
Edit: obviously donations get things done sometimes. I mean as an absolute comparison, and on the margin. I would at least sorta frame churches as businesses offering a membership subscription in exchange for 10% of income. The people receiving these membership benefits are presumably strengthened and restored by this trade rather than weakened/self-sacrificial/self-abnegated as the altruism attractor so often engenders.
-I eat meat, because animal welfare isn't a top priority for me, although I very much support better lives for farm animals
-I spend money on a bunch of things that other people might not prioritise. I have separate donation and spending money budgets, and my spending money budget is relatively liberal (eg my husband and baby son and I live in a 3 bedroom house in London)
-I'm a big fan of bureaucracy and following the rules, way more than the average EA
I think about optimization and scale of impact for my donations, but not for my day to day work (anymore). I am most productive and useful when I’m focused on helping the people I encounter on a given day, however I can help them. When I’m looking for general opportunities to help my neighbors, friends, colleagues, and family on an individual level, by offering whatever bit of helpful energy I have to give at a given moment, I get consistently positive feedback about giving useful help, and I am energized.
When I used to let my peers or managers or myself push me to justify how I help people, Optimization mindset led me to burn tons of energy trying to find “the most good” I could to, but actually doing almost nothing useful.
What are examples of behaviors you engage in that you suspect are inconsistent with the values/behaviors most EAs would endorse, but that you endorse doing (i.e., because you disagree to some extent with standard EA values, or because you think that EAs draw the wrong behavioral conclusions on the basis of EA values)?
Examples would (probably) not be: "I donate to political campaigns because I think this may actually be high EV" [not inconsistent with EA values] or "I eat meat but feel bad about it" [not endorsed]
Examples might be: "I donate to a local homeless shelter because it's especially important to me to support members of my community" [deviates from standard EA values] or "I eat chickens that were raised on a local farm because I think they have good lives" [different behavioral conclusions]
I avoid flying and travel by train instead (most of the time)=> even if it costs me a substantial part of my limited vacation time. I could compensate my extra emissions many times if I donated (my hourly salary)*(time saving) to a giving green top charity - but I don't do it.
I don't think this is very inconsistent with EA values.
I respect people who avoid flying a huge amount. I think this can be justified from an EA perspective by the way it draws attention to climate issues as it is hard to ignore, with potential to influence other people's personal behavior, but also what they stand for and vote for.
I think e.g. the GWWC pledge is bad for many people including me to take, and that starting for-profit businesses should be the default course of action for improving the world, not non-profits. I am in fact pretty anti-"donation" as a paradigm for getting anything done at this point. This is not that outside of the Overton window here - there are plenty who love markets in these parts - but it is definitely not squarely within it either. I find myself trying to exhort people to be more greedy so they will receive more reward signal that accurately tracks and internalizes their impact, rather than get lost in the vague cloud of abstractions divorced from reality that tend to permeate these parts.
Edit: obviously donations get things done sometimes. I mean as an absolute comparison, and on the margin. I would at least sorta frame churches as businesses offering a membership subscription in exchange for 10% of income. The people receiving these membership benefits are presumably strengthened and restored by this trade rather than weakened/self-sacrificial/self-abnegated as the altruism attractor so often engenders.
Oh wow, I have so many!
-I eat meat, because animal welfare isn't a top priority for me, although I very much support better lives for farm animals
-I spend money on a bunch of things that other people might not prioritise. I have separate donation and spending money budgets, and my spending money budget is relatively liberal (eg my husband and baby son and I live in a 3 bedroom house in London)
-I'm a big fan of bureaucracy and following the rules, way more than the average EA
I think about optimization and scale of impact for my donations, but not for my day to day work (anymore). I am most productive and useful when I’m focused on helping the people I encounter on a given day, however I can help them. When I’m looking for general opportunities to help my neighbors, friends, colleagues, and family on an individual level, by offering whatever bit of helpful energy I have to give at a given moment, I get consistently positive feedback about giving useful help, and I am energized.
When I used to let my peers or managers or myself push me to justify how I help people, Optimization mindset led me to burn tons of energy trying to find “the most good” I could to, but actually doing almost nothing useful.