Back
Leif Wenar's Criticisms of Effective Altruism - Richard Pettigrew's Substack
blogCredibility Rating
2/5
Mixed(2)Mixed quality. Some useful content but inconsistent editorial standards. Claims should be verified.
Rating inherited from publication venue: Substack
A philosophical blog post engaging with EA critique; relevant to debates about evaluation methodology, accountability, and the ethics of top-down charitable interventions, with indirect relevance to AI safety funding and governance discussions.
Metadata
Importance: 28/100blog postcommentary
Summary
Richard Pettigrew responds to Leif Wenar's Wired magazine critique of effective altruism, distinguishing between Wenar's reasonable call for greater transparency about unintended harms and his more ambitious philosophical claim that EA is fundamentally flawed due to donors' lack of accountability to affected communities. Pettigrew accepts the transparency argument while scrutinizing the stronger accountability and power-transfer critique.
Key Points
- •Wenar criticizes GiveWell and similar evaluators for not disclosing unintended negative consequences, such as bed nets used as fishing nets or deaths linked to cash transfers.
- •Pettigrew agrees that charity evaluators should be more transparent and factor harms into cost-effectiveness analyses.
- •Wenar's deeper critique is that EA is structurally problematic because donors are not accountable to recipient communities and do not transfer decision-making power to them.
- •Pettigrew distinguishes the modest transparency critique (which he endorses) from the stronger philosophical critique (which he examines more skeptically).
- •The debate touches on broader questions of epistemic humility, paternalism, and the ethics of charitable giving in development contexts.
Cited by 1 page
| Page | Type | Quality |
|---|---|---|
| Giving What We Can | Organization | 62.0 |
Cached Content Preview
HTTP 200Fetched Mar 20, 202626 KB
[](https://richardpettigrew.substack.com/)
# [Richard’s Substack](https://richardpettigrew.substack.com/)
SubscribeSign in
Discover more from Richard’s Substack
My personal Substack. I write here about the parts of philosophy I'm thinking about. Currently, I'm thinking more & more about political philosophy, but for the past decade I've worked in epistemology and rational choice theory, so that will come up too!
Subscribe
By subscribing, you agree Substack's [Terms of Use](https://substack.com/tos), and acknowledge its [Information Collection Notice](https://substack.com/ccpa#personal-data-collected) and [Privacy Policy](https://substack.com/privacy).
Already have an account? Sign in
# Leif Wenar's criticisms of effective altruism
[](https://substack.com/@richardpettigrew)
[Richard Pettigrew](https://substack.com/@richardpettigrew)
Apr 03, 2024
20
11
1
Share
Last week, Leif Wenar, a professor of philosophy at Stanford University, wrote [a critique of effective altruism](https://www.wired.com/story/deaths-of-effective-altruism/) in Wired magazine. One of his complaints is that the charity evaluator websites, such as [GiveWell](https://www.givewell.org/), which sit at the heart of the movement’s efforts to encourage the world’s wealthy to donate a substantial proportion of their money and to donate it to those organizations that the available evidence suggests will do most good in expectation, do not explicitly advertise the unintended bad consequences of the activities undertaken by the charities they endorse; and, surely worse, they don’t include those consequences in their calculations of the charities’ benefits. Wenar writes that the bed nets treated with insecticide that are distributed by the [Against Malaria Foundation](https://www.againstmalaria.com/) have been used as fishing nets, resulting in over-fishing and a depletion of food supplies; and bandits have killed people who are guarding the money used by the charity [New Initiatives](https://www.newincentives.org/) to fund its conditional cash transfer programme. And yet, he claims, you will not find this information on the front page of the charity evaluator websites, and indeed these harms are sometimes not included in the calculations the
... (truncated, 26 KB total)Resource ID:
83e587658156edf7 | Stable ID: Y2IzNWMyND