All of mbennedsen's Comments + Replies

Dear Andy,

Thank you very much for your comment. That sounds like a pretty cool project! I will definitely be in touch (when I get a look at the above suggestions and get my own head sorted out).

Cheers!

Awesome Jonas! I will check out your work and get back to you asap! Please do shoot me a private msg -- would love to get in touch!

Thanks, Ben! I didn't know about this project. Will check it out!

Dear Sanjay,

Thank you for your post. Much appreciated!

I did not know of your project. Sounds awesome and I will definitely look into it. As to your comments:

RE: Social media I am personally more bullish about this than my original post might suggest. In fact, I think the things you mention could be powerful motivators for increased giving. The reason why I sound bearish is that friends I have talked to were somewhat on the fence about the idea. And I can follow their reasoning: They/I fear that the social media integration might become "unhealthy&quo... (read more)

1
ednevsky
4y
Hi Mikkel. I'm a bit late here, but would love to chat about your findings.

I have no idea, actually. My intuition is that there is one...or that there will become one. Or at least that there ought to be one.

Maybe the market can be created through social media? (see Sanjay's post below).

0
Peter Wildeford
8y
Do you think it would make sense to try to assess this first through market research or creating an MVP?

Maybe I am missing something here, but -- given your post and your arguments -- how does it follow that the EA movement should not endorse case-specific effective altruism?

If I understand the "EA mission" correctly, it is about doing the most good in total. The original poster seems to believe that EA endorsing case-specific effective altruism will do more good than if they don't (overall). Hence, if you disagree, you should argue why it would be better for EA to not endorse this. Where am I making a mistake in this logic?

My own intuition (which ... (read more)

1
MichaelDickens
8y
What does it mean for the EA movement to endorse something? If that just means that I should say cause-specific effective altruism is a good thing, then okay, I hereby declare that cause-specific effective altruism is a good thing. But if you mean that I should spend my limited time campaigning to convince people in causes like the arts to focus on more effective interventions within their own cause, then I think it's pretty clear that I should not do that.

Great, thanks for sharing! I don't use reddit enough, but will try to swing by regularly.

Hi Ian,

Great and thought-provoking post. Thank you very much for taking the time to write it!

I will think about it and might respond at length later, but for now, let me ask you this: How do you propose the EA movement go about introducing "case-specific effective altruism"? Do you imagine several official sub-groups, each dedicated to a specific cause?* Or do you simply want EA to acknowledge that case-specific effective altruism is a good thing, so that people can set up their own domain-specific EA groups if they like?

In sum, a few words on yo... (read more)

1
IanDavidMoss
8y
Sure thing. I don't have a fully-fleshed-out plan to offer you, but here is an initial thought. My main suggestion is to implement a kind of chapter-based network (let's assume for the sake of argument that we can figure out a way to avoid confusion with the existing EA-based local chapter system). This is similar to your suggestion of sub-groups dedicated to specific causes and geographies. I think the difference between what I'm envisioning and what you're suggesting, though, is that I am not thinking that the talent and resources for these organizations would primarily come from the existing EA community. For example, in Createquity's case, we are all people in the arts and I am the only one who even borderline considers myself an effective altruist. Yet, the work we do is very aligned. Similarly, there is a large if somewhat unorganized community of evaluators, scientists, philanthropists, think tanks, and service organizations dedicated to effective practice in various domains. (I use the term "domain" here rather than "cause" since I am considering geography to be a potential domain.) It is possible that some of those folks could be converted to working on more global EA issues, but for those who can't be, the domain-specific groups would be a way for them to plug in and put to good use the knowledge that the larger network is generating. So it would not be a huge drain on existing EA resources, but neither am I advocating that EA take a completely hands-off approach. I think there is a ton of value to be realized from coordination and spread of the EA brand to individual domains. As long as it's always recognized that domain-specific is subordinate to cause neutral, the brand need not be harmed. It's almost like the domain-specific organizations are the farm team for EA's major leagues, both in terms of recommended interventions/actions and potentially for talent as well.

This was a good write-up. Thank you very much for doing it, Sean -- and good luck with the future developments. I'm very much looking forward to following the research coming out of CSER!