I agree here that PS is more convincing, and that EA is more actionable. But EA is effective at creating institutions around action (giving time and money) such as 80000 hours/Givewell. I think EA also makes a stronger claim on individuals' duties compared to PS because PS is focused on long term economic growth -- a fluid goal we do not yet know how to achieve.
On the strength of EA.
“Let's go back to the EA principle: "Using evidence and careful reasoning to do the most good possible". Part of the attraction of the principle is that it takes away choice. O
2jasoncrawford1yA lot of (most?) progress studies work is being done outside academia, or on the
border of academia, not in proper journals and peer-reviewed publications. My
own work is for a general audience. Anton Howes left academia to write for a
general audience. Eli Dourado is at a think tank that is affiliated with a
university, but he writes for a general audience. Brian Potter came from
industry and writes for a general audience. Etc.
See this answer in my AMA about how people can contribute:
https://progressforum.org/posts/ew6LJbcoLm8PjJLbX/ama-jason-crawford-the-roots-of-progress?commentId=ibns2uXfbyHXrdkay
[https://progressforum.org/posts/ew6LJbcoLm8PjJLbX/ama-jason-crawford-the-roots-of-progress?commentId=ibns2uXfbyHXrdkay]
I agree here that PS is more convincing, and that EA is more actionable. But EA is effective at creating institutions around action (giving time and money) such as 80000 hours/Givewell. I think EA also makes a stronger claim on individuals' duties compared to PS because PS is focused on long term economic growth -- a fluid goal we do not yet know how to achieve.
On the strength of EA.
... (read more)