3 ms·
Smells like EA. The "Evidence stance" measure in particular, which purports to gauge a study's rigorousness as a simple percentage, is rank pseudoscience.
by xhevahir 3mo ago
Smells like EA. The "Evidence stance" measure in particular, which purports to gauge a study's rigorousness as a simple percentage, is rank pseudoscience.
- mattgrice 3mo agoIt's just trying to visualize bang for buck. Not science, much less pseudoscience. EA ended up getting coopted by people who weren't interested in altruism at all but that doesn't seem like this.
- xhevahir 3mo agoIt's an arbitrary metric that creates an illusion of rigor. That looks to me like an instance of the quantitative (or McNamara) fallacy, and a pretty typical application of pseudoscience.
- cyanydeez 3mo agoeffective altruism is about saying to yourself "I deserve this" and then pretending there's some divine right to deserve it because you'll go outrace capitalisms broad damage.
- mlyle 3mo ago> which purports to gauge a study's rigorousness as a simple percentage That's not what it does. Some of the studies showed a causal relationship clearly. Some showed merely an association with a plausible argument about why it was mostly causal. You can decide what proportion of the unproven effects to include. In reality, there's more causal effects than those that are proven, but not all of these measured associations are causal.