It's the old debate between rationalism and empiricism again. "Rational" is a dangerous word. On the surface, it sounds like "smart". But if you take rationali

It's the old debate between rationalism and empiricism again. "Rational" is a dangerous word. On the surface, it sounds like "smart". But if you take rationalism to the extreme, it becomes epistemological opposition to evidence. You build mental models and make logical conclusions without considering if the conclusions are also valid in the real world. Scientific worldview is closer to empiricism than rationalism. You start by assuming that your mental models are wrong. They may still be useful, but you have to make observations and experiments and consider the evidence to determine that. Effective altruism is a useful concept. It only becomes problematic once you get too deep into rationalism. The effectiveness of your altruism is fundamentally an empirical question, and it should be answered by empirical means rather than by reasoning.