6 ms·

I've read this book together with the two books about Effective Altruism bei Peter Singer (The Life You Can Save and The Most Good You Can Do), and I have to sa

I've read this book together with the two books about Effective Altruism bei Peter Singer (The Life You Can Save and The Most Good You Can Do), and I have to say these books have really changed my life. I know it sounds cheesy, but I've never read books that had such a lasting influence on me. Those books provide just the right rational and scientific arguments and have shown me with how much cognitive dissonance I, as a supposed rational person, ran through my life.

a3voices 11y ago
I'd argue that being an effective altruist actually makes you less rational. As part of your genetic fitness, your brain is optimized for survival, reproduction, and keeping your children alive. If you're in the middle class and you give your money away then it goes against those objectives.
- sullyj3 11y ago
  But rationality isn't about effectiveness in achieving the things you are evolutionarily optimised for, because those things don't necessarily line up with the things you want! There's no a priori reason to value evolutionary goals over goals you pick for yourself. That would be an appeal to nature. If helping other people is really something you care about and value intrinsically, then rationality is about finding the most effective ways and means of helping other people.
- gglitch 11y ago
  By extension of that logic, the brain is not geared for reason, which I think is probably true.
  - eli_gottlieb 11y ago
    The brain is geared for resource-bounded abductive reasoning, a job it performs with remarkable efficiency.
    - gglitch 11y ago
      Does it? I don't know. Obviously results will vary. I think the standout example of the brain's wiring no longer being optimal for modern life is of people's physiological responses to anxiety. Elevated heartrate and adrenaline release are all great when you're being chased by a predator, but extremely unhelpful when you're taking a standardized test that will determine how much tuition you pay later on, or delivering a presentation to a prospective employer.
  - a3voices 11y ago
    Well I think the fundamental issue is that it is impossible to rationally prove which values are more important than other ones. You have to almost arbitrarily decide. For example you could hypothetically design an artificial intelligence that is optimized for creating paperclips. As a person, you could decide your life goal is to drink as much glue as possible or something stupid like that. But since it goes against your survival instinct and cultural values (and everyone else's) you will just be a dysfunctional crazy person. Biologically you could define a "good" value system as one which is conducive to you having offspring. Ethics, morality, cultural values, etc. are not necessary for that although they might provide intellectual simplifications that help.
    - ionised 11y ago
      Survival instinct isn't the same as reproductive isntinct though. I have the will to survive but zero desire to have children.
- Kurtz79 11y ago
  I'd argue that survival, reproduction, and keeping your children alive have more to do with instinct and subconscious, and rationality is trying to go beyond this basic movers.
- edanm 11y ago
  The objectives of "your genes" do not have to be your objectives. So you can be rational, but have different goals from what you were "meant" to (for some value of the word "meant").
  - a3voices 11y ago
    Well perhaps that is true but then you will experience a lot more mental incongruity. For example, gay and transgendered people have much higher suicide attempt rates. The more you deviate from traditional family values, the unhappier you will likely feel. There is a big correlation I bet.
    - edanm 11y ago
      I don't think what you're saying is true re: mental incongruity. And I don't think your example of gay suicides proves it, as it's hard to know what is the cause (and many people will point out, and I would agree, that there are many other causes of gay suicides, e.g. that our culture is oppressive toward gay people).
    - ionised 11y ago
      Traditional family values as we understand them have not always been how families worked. Traditions can change. Traditions that don't serve you any purpose personally should be discarded.
  - nine_k 11y ago
    To put in in other words, whatever your (gene-induced) instincts may urge you to do may not be the best strategy to successfully reproduce. Humans are a culture-based species. Helping your culture may be reciprocated by increased chance of your progeny surviving and prospering. Also, cultures (at least microbial ones) with a certain percent of altruists grow faster than cultures without them, even though altruists' genes become less represented: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/323/5911/272.abstract http://www.sciencemag.org/content/323/5911/272.abstract
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Genes are just part of the picture. Culture is as important - cultures evolve and are selected for fitness in almost the same way as genetics. This is a mammal thing, especially vivid in humans. In fact, culture has been shaping genes far more than genes, culture. In the last 50,000 years Homo Sapiens genetic adaptation has increased manyfold, likely in response to environmental changes brought on by culture (agrarian societies, towns and cities, large-scale cooperative venture etc). So the 'genes rule the organism' idea has been untrue for 1000 generations, for humans.
  - a3voices 11y ago
    This should go without saying but if you go against your culture, your chances of finding a life partner and having children are less likely. So genetically you are tailored to "fit in".
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Much of our genetic adaptation agrees with this - growing up with infantile features (like extreme social behavior, empathy, imprinting on other adults for years after birth, smaller face/jaws, far less hair) helps us live in larger groups in close proximity i.e. villages, towns and cities.
    - edanm 11y ago
      You're also genetically tailored to have lots of sex, theoretically in order to reproduce, but that doesn't prevent people from using birth control. You're genetically programmed to eat lots of fat, theoretically because it would better for you, although these days with easy abundance of foo it's much less heathy. Worth mentioning that you might be genetically predisposed to do something to achieve some end goal, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with or actually try to achieve that end goal.
      - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        And remember, genes benefit the line not just the individual. Even insect colonies have non-reproducing members. If some folks don't reproduce but protect and nurture other clan children, this increases the next generation's gene survival, then those genes continue too.
- ionised 11y ago
  I agree with this but our status as a 'social species' is a factor too. Empathy goes beyond just your family. Giving away money and thus 'helping the group' akin to older elephants protecting the entire herd might flip that feel-good switch in the brain.

a3voices 11y ago

I'd argue that being an effective altruist actually makes you less rational. As part of your genetic fitness, your brain is optimized for survival, reproduction, and keeping your children alive. If you're in the middle class and you give your money away then it goes against those objectives.

sullyj3 11y ago
But rationality isn't about effectiveness in achieving the things you are evolutionarily optimised for, because those things don't necessarily line up with the things you want! There's no a priori reason to value evolutionary goals over goals you pick for yourself. That would be an appeal to nature. If helping other people is really something you care about and value intrinsically, then rationality is about finding the most effective ways and means of helping other people.
gglitch 11y ago
By extension of that logic, the brain is not geared for reason, which I think is probably true.
- eli_gottlieb 11y ago
  The brain is geared for resource-bounded abductive reasoning, a job it performs with remarkable efficiency.
  - gglitch 11y ago
    Does it? I don't know. Obviously results will vary. I think the standout example of the brain's wiring no longer being optimal for modern life is of people's physiological responses to anxiety. Elevated heartrate and adrenaline release are all great when you're being chased by a predator, but extremely unhelpful when you're taking a standardized test that will determine how much tuition you pay later on, or delivering a presentation to a prospective employer.
- a3voices 11y ago
  Well I think the fundamental issue is that it is impossible to rationally prove which values are more important than other ones. You have to almost arbitrarily decide. For example you could hypothetically design an artificial intelligence that is optimized for creating paperclips. As a person, you could decide your life goal is to drink as much glue as possible or something stupid like that. But since it goes against your survival instinct and cultural values (and everyone else's) you will just be a dysfunctional crazy person. Biologically you could define a "good" value system as one which is conducive to you having offspring. Ethics, morality, cultural values, etc. are not necessary for that although they might provide intellectual simplifications that help.
  - ionised 11y ago
    Survival instinct isn't the same as reproductive isntinct though. I have the will to survive but zero desire to have children.
Kurtz79 11y ago
I'd argue that survival, reproduction, and keeping your children alive have more to do with instinct and subconscious, and rationality is trying to go beyond this basic movers.
edanm 11y ago
The objectives of "your genes" do not have to be your objectives. So you can be rational, but have different goals from what you were "meant" to (for some value of the word "meant").
- a3voices 11y ago
  Well perhaps that is true but then you will experience a lot more mental incongruity. For example, gay and transgendered people have much higher suicide attempt rates. The more you deviate from traditional family values, the unhappier you will likely feel. There is a big correlation I bet.
  - edanm 11y ago
    I don't think what you're saying is true re: mental incongruity. And I don't think your example of gay suicides proves it, as it's hard to know what is the cause (and many people will point out, and I would agree, that there are many other causes of gay suicides, e.g. that our culture is oppressive toward gay people).
  - ionised 11y ago
    Traditional family values as we understand them have not always been how families worked. Traditions can change. Traditions that don't serve you any purpose personally should be discarded.
- nine_k 11y ago
  To put in in other words, whatever your (gene-induced) instincts may urge you to do may not be the best strategy to successfully reproduce. Humans are a culture-based species. Helping your culture may be reciprocated by increased chance of your progeny surviving and prospering. Also, cultures (at least microbial ones) with a certain percent of altruists grow faster than cultures without them, even though altruists' genes become less represented: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/323/5911/272.abstract http://www.sciencemag.org/content/323/5911/272.abstract
JoeAltmaier 11y ago
Genes are just part of the picture. Culture is as important - cultures evolve and are selected for fitness in almost the same way as genetics. This is a mammal thing, especially vivid in humans. In fact, culture has been shaping genes far more than genes, culture. In the last 50,000 years Homo Sapiens genetic adaptation has increased manyfold, likely in response to environmental changes brought on by culture (agrarian societies, towns and cities, large-scale cooperative venture etc). So the 'genes rule the organism' idea has been untrue for 1000 generations, for humans.
- a3voices 11y ago
  This should go without saying but if you go against your culture, your chances of finding a life partner and having children are less likely. So genetically you are tailored to "fit in".
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Much of our genetic adaptation agrees with this - growing up with infantile features (like extreme social behavior, empathy, imprinting on other adults for years after birth, smaller face/jaws, far less hair) helps us live in larger groups in close proximity i.e. villages, towns and cities.
  - edanm 11y ago
    You're also genetically tailored to have lots of sex, theoretically in order to reproduce, but that doesn't prevent people from using birth control. You're genetically programmed to eat lots of fat, theoretically because it would better for you, although these days with easy abundance of foo it's much less heathy. Worth mentioning that you might be genetically predisposed to do something to achieve some end goal, but that doesn't mean you have to agree with or actually try to achieve that end goal.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      And remember, genes benefit the line not just the individual. Even insect colonies have non-reproducing members. If some folks don't reproduce but protect and nurture other clan children, this increases the next generation's gene survival, then those genes continue too.
ionised 11y ago
I agree with this but our status as a 'social species' is a factor too. Empathy goes beyond just your family. Giving away money and thus 'helping the group' akin to older elephants protecting the entire herd might flip that feel-good switch in the brain.