Also strong upvote. I think nearly 100% of the leftist critiques of EA I've seen are pretty crappy, but I also think it's relatively fertile ground. For example, I suspect (with low confidence) that there is a community blindspot when it comes to the impact of racial dynamics on the tractability of different interventions, particularly in animal rights and global health. I expect that this is driven by a combination of wanting to avoid controversy, a focus on easily quantifiable issues, the fact that few members of the community have a sociolo... (read more)
I'm a bit late to the party on this one, but I'd be interested to find out how differential treatment of indigenous groups in countries where snakebites are most prevalent impacts the tractability of any interventions. I don't have any strong opinions about how significant this issue is, but I would tentatively suggest that a basket of 'ethnic inequality issues' should be considered a third 'prong' in the analysis of why snakebites kill and maim so many people, and could substantially impact our cost-effectiveness estimates.Explanation:The WHO report ... (read more)
Nothing to add, I just want to comment that this is a wonderful initiative. Thanks for setting this up!
I'm currently writing a sequence exploring the legal viability of the Windfall Clause in key jurisdictions for AI development. It isn't strictly a red-team or a fact-checking exercise, but one of my aims in writing the sequence is to critically evaluate of the Clause as a piece of longtermist policy.If I'd like to participate, would this sort of thing be eligible? And should I submit the sequence as a whole or just the most critical posts?
UK/European folks - if you're looking for a second monitor, I recommend you buy one of these. They usually have a discount code, which makes them some of the best value on the market. The only thing to keep in mind is that they eat up your battery pretty fast, which may not be ideal if you plan to use them for long stretches away from a plug socket.
I have no strong opinions on whether this is a good or a bad idea, all things considered. But:
If you have an argument for why I should feel different, I'd appreciate if you explain the argument rather than downvoting.
I think there is value:
Regarding the downsides:
Hi Will,(1) Is a really good point. I will definitely consider this. A few thoughts right now:Encouragingly, the position here in England for contractual damages comes from Hadley v Baxendale, where damages are given for all losses that 'were in the contemplation of both parties' at the time they contracted. Given the very nature of the agreement is that the Developer has to pay out a colossal sum if they reach a certain % of GDP/market cap, I'd assume that the Developer's future profits would be included here. That said, specific performance seems like a ... (read more)
Strong upvote - this is a really great post and helped me understand the source of many disagreements between myself and my more social justice-oriented friends.
Sorry for the late comment, but I believe there are 40+ engaged EAs in the UK Civil Service, which is mostly based around Westminster. Did you leave them off because you are specifically looking at corporations?
So, your comment here:
’It doesn't predict that being a member of two "oppressed" classes can result in an intersectional "privilege".’
Is referring to the advantage that western Asian women receive on the dating scene. My point is that this is compatible with intersectionality theory, because although the general structure of the power relationships between men/women, majority/minority ethnic groups, and white people/Asians disadvantages western Asian women, none of these relationships are 100% downside.
So, the idea is that on balance the relationship is oppressive, rather than that the relationship is just 100% beneficial/harmful for either side.
Is that more clear?
I also don't think the prior should be 'people of all ethnicities feel the exact same set of charitable obligations' - that seems like a similarly strong claim. Still, in the absence of any good data to back up my claim or yours, I think it's appropriate to be very uncertain about any hypothesis we might have about why people do or don't give.Thanks for improving my thinking on this.
I think you might have misunderstood the scope of this post. I want to emphasise that I endorse none of the following claims:
[a white person can never] understand or model the discrimination or pain faced by a (for example) queer, poor, Black and Muslim individual.it’s pointless for a male to study female psychology because a male will never understand what it’s like to be female and should instead have no voice in the conversationdiversity and “equity” and “justice” [are] innate, disseminated values, rather than potential or circumstantial instrumental on
[a white person can never] understand or model the discrimination or pain faced by a (for example) queer, poor, Black and Muslim individual.
it’s pointless for a male to study female psychology because a male will never understand what it’s like to be female and should instead have no voice in the conversation
diversity and “equity” and “justice” [are] innate, disseminated values, rather than potential or circumstantial instrumental on
That said, your comment has shifted me towards your perspective that intersectionality is unlikely to be useful for EAs, and it's better to start a new language game. I think the word comes with enough baggage that it is hard to use as a neutral tool for analysing issues, and is liable to be misunderstood. Thanks for helping to improve my thinking here.
it only predicts it when you are a member of a "privileged" class and an "oppressed" class*. It doesn't predict that being a member of two "oppressed" classes can result in an intersectional "privilege".
I think perhaps we mean different things when we use the words 'privilege' and 'oppression'. Under intersectionality theory, Group X is privileged in respect of Group Y if they are the beneficiaries of the power relationship, all things considered. Similarly, Group Y is oppressed if they are generally disadvantaged by that relationship. That doesn't m... (read more)
Thanks for your message David. I think this probably depends on your definition of 'discrimination' - in SJ language, discrimination is typically something that happens at a systemic, rather than an individual level. That is to say, a set of policies that systematically disadvantage a particular group can still be discrimination if they reflect a prevailing system in which that group is disadvantaged. This can be true even if there is no bad intent on the part of individuals.I think this broader definition is not always helpful, particularly because (a) it... (read more)
Thanks for your message Charles. First, to respond to:
By the above, do you mean that focusing on one cause area neglects the other? If so, that observation doesn't seem like a contribution. Otherwise, if you meant something else, that seems like "original research" as these speculations and tradeoffs pulls on a vast range of topics. I'm skeptical that this theory helps thinking here.
By the above, do you mean that focusing on one cause area neglects the other? If so, that observation doesn't seem like a contribution.
Otherwise, if you meant something else, that seems like "original research" as these speculations and tradeoffs pulls on a vast range of topics. I'm skeptical that this theory helps thinking here.
I don't mean that focusing on one cause area always neglects the other. Rather, I mean that some issues EAs care about could be at the intersection of two types of disadva... (read more)
Hi Chris, I've responded to this somewhat in my response to Jackson above.FWIW, I'm trying to avoid focusing on race questions here, because I think they're pretty charged and racial equality isn't an EA cause area in any case. Still, I think it's worth responding to your comment that:
... the model doesn't deal very well with the fact that Asians earn more on average than people who are white or an Asian woman may be better off in some ways than an Asian man (such as dating).
I actually think the model deals very well with this, as intersectionality would p... (read more)
I totally agree with you on this Erich; in my opinion, intersectionality is a useful tool to describe the phenomena of overlapping disadvantage, but a problem isn't more important or more effective just because it's an intersectional one.
Hi Tyner, thanks for your message,
I don't have any studies I can point to on this, no, but the idea that privileged white men find it easier to take a universalising, impartial approach to doing good seems intuitively plausible. Admittedly, most of the data I have to support that argument are from private conversations, along with a general lack of demographic diversity in EA.I'm open to the idea that I could be wrong here - can I ask you to explain in a little more detail why you feel that the PoC case isn't unique?
Hi evelynciara, thanks for sharing these. Can I ask - are you raising these as an indication that you support my thesis, or just to add to the discussion?
Thanks for your message Jackson. A few thoughts:
Red-team - "Are longtermism and virtue ethics actually compatible?"
A convincing red-team wouldn't need a complex philosophical analysis, but rather a summary of divergences between the two theories and an exploration of five or six 'case studies' where consequentialist-type behaviour and thinking is clearly 'unvirtuous'.
Explanation - Given just how large and valuable the long-term future could be, it seems plausible that longtermists should depart from standard heuristics around virtue. For instance, a longtermist working in biosecurity who car... (read more)