Peter Singer on the movement that's taken over Silicon Valley
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024
- Elon Musk, Sam Bankman-Fried and Peter Thiel - these are all men that at one point or another have been associated with the 'effective altruism' movement. The philosophy advocates for improving the world by doing what you're best at and strategically sharing the fruits of your labour - for some, that might be making a lot of money and donating to the best charities out there. Here, The Spectator's online commissioning editor Max Jeffery interviews the philosopher Peter Singer, the father of the philosophy.
// SUBSCRIBE TO THE SPECTATOR
Get 12 issues for £12, plus a free £20 John Lewis/Waitrose voucher
www.spectator....
// FREE PODCASTS FROM THE SPECTATOR
Hear more from The Spectator's journalists on their podcasts, covering everything from the politics of the UK, US and China, to religion, literature, lifestyle and more.
www.spectator....
// FOLLOW US
/ spectator
/ officialspectator
/ the-spectator
/ spectator1828
/ thespectatormagazine
![🎤 จับฉลากร้องเพลง x P’ #XXSIVK [EP.1] (2/2) เพื่อนจับได้คำไหน..ต้องร้องคำนั้น เริ่ม! 💓🎶 #MXFRUIT](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1bJvMJXmeS4/mqdefault.jpg)
Moral control.
Not moral concern,
which tyranny hides behind.
Tyler Cowen is correct….’Human Nature’.
Sick of listening to academics and their lofty idealistic notions almost always failing to factor in the human condition.
Constantly banging on about humanity yet so far removed from it.
Sam Harris years ago posted a scenario based on this philosophy. It was a person has a collection of Picasso that they have sold and the money will go to malaria prevention in Africa that will save 100k children. A fire starts in the house and the way it spreads the person can either save their own 3 children or the paintings. For the scenario you can presume that they would be able to do either successfully but not both and the selling of the paintings is ensured. According to Singers philosophy the moral action would be to save the paintings. I personally think you can falsify it just with formal logic. But either way it gives me the shivers that a bunch of rich people and young people agree with it.
Bit fed up of Harris at the moment, however, interesting scenario. I ran it through my mind several times and each time…I save my children. Even if I have to die to do it. Base human instinct I guess.
The reason the painting is worth so much is because of the asset inflation following quantitative easing and low interest rates since about 2008. So the inflated cost of the painting has come at a massive price in terms of people priced out of property and mounting government debt which needs servicing. This scenario seeks to redeem something that doesn't deserve it. Let it burn. And anyway, of course a person would save their own 3 children. There's no genetic link, no sense of duty, no knowing, no physical proximity, no empathy with unknown people in Africa however big the number. Anyone that saves 100k children in Africa over their own 3 children is self-evidently morbid and should be reported to social services. Only a computer geek on the autism spectrum would find this scenario even slightly ticklish.
@@Fee_V Yes, I was very keen to see anything Harris put out but Harris has lost his mind over Trump. Everything he said about Trump was true. Sadly when Biden was everything he had said that made Trump a bad candidate, and even more so, Harris stuck with Biden. Harris seems to have given up on rational thought and the ideals of democracy. For a man who wrote a book on Truth Telling, he was entirely happy that true facts about the lap top were censored out of public view. Gad Saad has him as, "The Malibu Meditator".
The paintings will be insured.
What I have really learned is that if only I had written down my shower thoughts and falling asleep thoughts then I too could be great philosopher with tenure at Oxford. Some of the assertions, assumptions and logic fails of these people and their subsequent exultation, are more baffling than any of the 'thought experiments' or 'moral dilemmas' they propose.
Hallelujah!!! I’m favored and blessed with $60,000 every week! Now I can afford anything and also support the work of God and the church.
Oh really? Tell me more!
This is what Ana Graciela Blackwelder does, she has changed my life.
After raising up to 60k trading with her, I bought a new house and car here in the US and also paid for my son’s (Oscar) surgery. Glory to God.shalom.
I know Ana Graciela Blackwelder, and I have also had success...
Absolutely! I have heard stories of people who started with little or no knowledge but managed to emerge victorious thanks to Ana Graciela Blackwelder.
I think Effective Altruism is better when comparing like with like. It's useful when you're asking questions like _"Which of these charities is best at tackling homelessness?"_ It rather disappears up its own backside when you start trying to mathematically calculate things like _"Is researching nuclear non-proliferation more important than building wells?"_
I love these champagne socialist.
Prosecco Marxists.
This is so theoretical as to be practically useless. I want specifics of how the money is accrued and how is it disseminated penny by penny
What would be more practical and useful about that information? What effective change would you make with this information?
Effective Altruism makes great sense. However, it prioritises people from other countries. These "Any-Where's" seem to care little for the people of their own country & least of all, the indigenous population if they happen to be Caucasian. Rich people care a great deal for people in other countries while perhaps not treating their own workforce well. I bet Jeff Bezo's is into Effective Altruism while treating his own employees like machinery. Likewise the board of Nike & Apple probably also indulge in Effective Altruism, while employing slave labour in China. Did Madonna and Angelina Jolie, take a child out of care from their own countries and of their own race? No, they went shopping overseas for their fashion accessory kids.
It’s colonialism in a different way
Ahh, yes. This is actually quite an interesting argument. I've often thought _"Charity begins at home."_ is a flawed rubric. And that charity should begin where it's needed most. But one could certainly make a case that concentrating some altruism locally is necessary to maintain social capital.
A major problem with these lofty ideals is that they often focus on people who's circumstances they know little to nothing of.
If they were really trying to be effective they would start with those closest to them, their families, friends and local community.
Instead it should be renamed to affective altruism, because its ironically really driven by emotions.
That is not always the case. For example, if you donate to GiveDirectly, that money can do much more good than if you gave the same amount to a friend. It all depends on the charity; some can do significantly more good because some people only earn $2 a day, so even a small amount of money can make a huge difference for them.
I'm not sure how it's altruistic to address hypothetical risks to humanity while ignoring the real suffering that happens now.
If that is your view, you can still be an effective altruist and donate 10% of your income.
For example, you could donate to GiveDirectly or the Humane League.
It makes a lot of sense to apply the best value for money, based on sound data, evidence, logic etc, approach, which the Ideologues, such as JSO, are incapable of, but since the thing is never the Thing, what can one expect?
Peter Singers’ influence is not that great. His position that infanticide is morally justified on an utilitarian point of view is not widely accepted, nor is his advocacy of bestiality.
'There is still a need for a debate on what effects technology will have'... no shit! Only a philistine entirely unacquainted with human history, ideas, politics, and literature could rehearse these sorts of pie in the sky ideas. Where is it that moral 'philosophers' abide?
looked it up, yes. every single time
Altruism in its plain sense is totally destructive.
It is NOT a Christian virtue.
This post-Christian utilitarian is literally a danger to his fellow humans.
Paid back? How is that possible
Sam Kennison had one of the best plans for ending famine and hunger. Look him up.
prince harry's real brother.
an old man adding nothing to the discourse. Clearly the silly season. Sam Bankman-Fried ha ha ha !
Money laundering
bs
Altruism rot.