Thanks for the follow up!
I completely agree, and I too was troubled by this analysis. For me, the bottom line is:The fact that something is of little-to-no cost, does not mean that its moral value is also little.Furthermore, in cases like reducing animal suffering, one can both avoid being harmful himself (i.e. become vegan) AND donate to relevant charities, rather than OR.
Good to know!
Is there any information about Founders Pledge research project?
Oh I see, I misunderstood you.
Thanks, looking forward to the episode to come out.
Thank you for this answer (and the rest of them!).
Could you link to that podcast episode on advising?
Not exactly answering your question, but I think this argument (and follow up question) neglect an important aspect of your contribution.
Having more vegetarian and vegan people creates an incentive to develop meat substitutes (e.g. beyond meat, impossible).If those substitutes, and especially clean meat, will hold up to their promise (i.e. cheaper, taste just as good, and be at least as healthy as regular meat), it will have the potential to change the meat industry dramatically.In this situation, way more people may become vegetarian or vegan due to economical or health reasons.