Thanks, I will have a look. I stand by the point that just because parts of academia may have accepted a certain definition doesn't mean the general public has or should.
I definitely agree with that. The articles I cited make it clear that overloading the word with new definitions creates opportunities for both unintentional confusion and strategic ambiguity, as well as makes it harder to think and talk about the original concept of "racist".
Thanks. Time and energy are definitely relevant factors. I'm quite ignorant of all of this, but when it comes to property renovation I would think you could be highly involved at the start (drawing up plans etc.) and then could more or less leave the builders to execute the plan, and then put it on the market. So not no time - but perhaps not a huge amount.
As I say I'm a complete noob so would appreciate any further information!
I hope it goes without saying that I'm asking this on earning to give/earning to save grounds by the way.
It is, as you said, entirely possible that it is due to ignorance or misinformation, and it may even be that the truth of the matter is that there is indeed no systemic racism in today's society, but none of this changes the fact that, in saying these things, we are being racist.
I've quoted the above because I think it provides a decent summary of what you're saying.
I would say this is the first time I've come across the idea that someone who (hypothetically) correctly says that systemic racism doesn't exist would then correctly b...
I think it would be fair to say that parts of academia have redefined "racist" or "racism" in different ways, some similar to Eric's definition. But my understanding is that they've done it for political (as opposed to scholarly) reasons. (Otherwise they would have created new terms to refer to their new concepts, instead of overloading an existing word.) These articles may help explain what is going on:
...I have friends who I have watched first hand having to read through a racist Facebook thread who were subsequently unable to focus for hours afterward.
I just read through this thread and it just doesn't sit right with me to have called it a racist thread. In fact I would say that there are many people of colour who share the same views as the original poster in that thread.
All racists may deny systemic racism, but that doesn't mean that all those who deny systemic racism are racist. Perhaps the original poster is ignorant or misinformed (if he is...
Thanks fair point. Although "throughout this post" is probably a bit harsh. The cute girl thing was explicitly mentioned to be relevant to me specifically. I certainly could have said "find a partner at EA Global" though.
P.S. Will MacAskill is the most dreamy EA of them all and this is coming from a heterosexual male.
P.P.S Dale also makes some good points
Glad to hear you think it's a good idea! How do you feel about events such as speed-dating / singles events versus websites?
Fair point. Overall I think I'm more positive about singles events / speed dating than a dating website. But I accept concerns over being able to find the right numbers and coming off as slightly cultish
Thanks. I'm someone who has historically shrugged off diversity as a low priority issue but I'm becoming more open-minded about it. I'm not particularly well-read about it but would like to change that
I didn't mean to make it seem that the underlying idea is that everyone in EA is a frugal vegan, that was meant to be a somewhat humorous example to illustrate a point. I think my core idea is that a significant proportion (but not all) EAs are sufficiently different to the average non-EA person as to make dating outside EA difficult (but not impossible).
I actually am someone who can compromise to a certain extent, for example I went to Singapore for my friend's wedding in January, but I am thinking of those who don't feel they can. I accept...
Thanks for your response which seems to have resonated with others. Skewed gender ratio is a difficulty, although it is possible to equalise the number of men and women at singles events by making them ticketed. I am also not taking into account LGBTQ+ here, but in theory you could have LGBTQ+ EA events.
It may feel culty and that may well be a valid reason not to pursue it. I do wonder if this will still be a concern when EA has grown further. We tend not to think of vegan events as culty (well I suppose a lot of people do...). Perhaps EA is just a bit too small at this moment in time to make encouraging EA-dating viable, but when it has become more mainstream it may be a natural progression for the movement.
I do think you could compromise, but I worry that some EAs won't want to. If you take Peter Singer's drowning child thought experiment seriously you may not want to placate your non-EA girlfriend by going on that holiday abroad.
Taking that thought experiment seriously for many people really will entail a high degree of demandingness without much room for compromise.
Funny article!
I actually think getting that sort of information might be quite useful. I'm not saying we should have an independent research project on "Romantic relationships in EA" but perhaps the next EA survey could throw a few questions in regarding how being an EA has impacted on social/romantic life. We don't want to completely neglect the how "nice" it is to be part of the EA community angle. Making progress on this could help us grow the community in the long-run.
Not surprising, but perhaps a slight issue both for the dating idea and more widely.
Putting dating aside I wonder if we need to do more to attract women. Whilst I don't think diversity is intrinsically valuable, I do think it can be instrumentally valuable in that it promotes a wider range of viewpoints and can attract more people to the movement in the long-run.
Hi there, thanks for your reply. I will need some more time to reflect on what you have said and the links you sent but I wanted to send a preliminary reply based on my first impressions.
Firstly I don't really disagree with anything you have said. I wouldn't say I have assumed there is no possibility of a downside and I wouldn't suggest that. However I sincerely take your comments on board and recognise that considerations of downsides would have to play a central role if taking this idea any further. As mentioned I have posted an intention...
Thanks. I will look at US investment options.
I don't have significant assets so I would only have to pay a $2,350 renunciation fee (this obviously still isn't great but in the grand scheme of things it's not that bad).