Back
Stephen Darwall on Effective Altruism - Richard Pettigrew
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 relevant to AI safety insofar as EA moral frameworks underpin much longtermist and existential risk work; useful for those examining the ethical foundations of the AI safety movement.
Metadata
Importance: 28/100blog postcommentary
Summary
Richard Pettigrew examines Stephen Darwall's critique that effective altruism fails to adequately account for justice and mutual accountability as fundamental moral considerations. Pettigrew engages with the argument while defending the movement's philosophical diversity, noting EA encompasses more than utilitarian or purely consequentialist frameworks. The discussion is relevant to AI safety insofar as EA-adjacent reasoning underlies much of the longtermist and existential risk reduction work in the field.
Key Points
- •Darwall argues EA—whether utilitarian or broadly altruistic—neglects justice and mutual accountability as core moral categories.
- •Pettigrew notes many effective altruists are not utilitarians, and the movement hosts diverse ethical frameworks beyond simple consequentialism.
- •The critique raises questions about whether aggregative welfare maximization is an adequate basis for large-scale moral action, including AI governance.
- •Pettigrew's own nuanced relationship with EA gives the commentary a balanced, insider-outsider perspective.
- •The debate touches on foundational questions about which moral frameworks should guide AI safety and longtermist resource allocation.
Cited by 1 page
| Page | Type | Quality |
|---|---|---|
| Earning to Give: The EA Strategy and Its Limits | -- | 63.0 |
Cached Content Preview
HTTP 200Fetched Mar 15, 202627 KB
Stephen Darwall on effective altruism
Richard’s Substack
Subscribe Sign in Stephen Darwall on effective altruism
Richard Pettigrew Jan 08, 2024 11 8 3 Share Last week, Stephen Darwall, a moral philosopher at Yale University, published a critique of effective altruism in the journal Liberties (it’s behind a paywall, but if you sign up for an account with the journal, can read two articles for free each month). I’m always curious about such critiques, as I have a complicated relationship to effective altruism myself. I read about it in the mid-2000s in a newspaper article that highlighted the difference between what is achieved by giving £1000 to a national British charity like the National Trust, giving £1000 to an international health charity like the Against Malaria Foundation, and spending £1000 on something for yourself. Without much more thought, I was convinced of the broad commitments of what then was barely even a movement, more a handful of charity evaluator websites, and pledged, at least to myself, to give a proportion of my salary to their recommended effective charities. For about a decade, I didn’t think much more about it beyond checking the websites each year to see where I might send money for the next twelve months. I noticed when they started to draw attention to work that helps non-human animals, and particularly those suffering under factory farming, and I started sending some money that way. And I noticed again when they started to advocate for work that seeks to reduce the risk of human extinction, and I didn’t start to send any money that way—not because I am sure they’re wrong about that, but because I’m not sufficiently sure they’re right (see here ).
Since my first encounter with it, effective altruism has decidedly become a movement, and it has grown enormously, both in terms of the number of people involved, either by pledging to donate or by researching the effectiveness of interventions, and in terms of the amount of money committed to its approach, largely as a result of persuading some billionaires of its merits. And, as is appropriate, with greater participation, funding, and power has come greater scrutiny—indeed, last summer I reviewed the first book-length critique of effective altruism , edited by Carol J. Adams, Alice Crary, and Lori Gruen. And, partly because of this greater scrutiny, and partly because of very public crimes and misdemeanours committed by very visible adherents, such as Sam Bankman-Fried , the movement has been rocked by a number of scandals recently.
Pink and Blue , Anni Roenkae Darwall’s critique, however, doesn’t focus on these scandals. Hi
... (truncated, 27 KB total)Resource ID:
dfc512943f93a86f | Stable ID: YmZiZDJlMD