3 ms·
I would take longtermists seriously if they were one of those poor people they talk so much about. But right now, there is an obvious conflict of interest when
by FranchuFranchu 3y ago
I would take longtermists seriously if they were one of those poor people they talk so much about. But right now, there is an obvious conflict of interest when they speak about longtermism.
- handoflixue 3y agoKeep in mind that Longtermism is a branch of Effective Altruism, which is also doing things like supporting Malaria nets to save lives: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/topics/against-malaria-foundation https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/topics/against-malaria-f....
- xg15 3y agoThe Anthroposophy movement has also produced a number of unquestionably good things - i.e. Waldorf schools - but still has an esoteric quasi-religion at its core. One does not preclude the other.
- Dig1t 3y agoI think we should be able to talk about ideas independently of the people who are talking about them. A speaker's biases have no bearing on the actual merits of the idea.
- FranchuFranchu 3y agoI agree with you regarding many areas of thought, where conclusions can be reached by deductive or inductive reasoning from premises. However, these people are proposing a "new axiom set" of sorts, where lives now have the same utility as the possibility of saving life in the future. Ethical principles have no further premises and are derived entirely from one's ideas and feelings. The ideas and feelings here are obviously biased. I think we should look critically at ideas that spring up from biased people.