Helping more people is best achieved when you are not trying to defend your ideas, but by working with others and understanding the world better while doing that.

"but if we want to really understand the world, it’s worth seeking the truth and trying to become clearer thinkers." In what context and to what extent?

"I fervently hope that one day we will be able to save everyone. In the meantime, it is irresponsible to pretend that we aren’t making life and death decisions with the allocation of our resources."

How to not produce overthinking?

Confirmation Bias is quite intuitive because the every person wants to trust their judgement and sense. So having to give up that consistently, especially in emotionally charged situations, it is a hard skill to master. Nowadays with the personalised online experience, I can only imagine the confirmation bias becoming more and more difficult to manage. 

You often see people passionately defending their ideas, even when all the evidence shows they're wrong. I really appreciate the mindset of actively seeking to be proven wrong.

This reading is challenging me in ways I didn't expect.

The quote "pretending there is no choice only makes our decisions worse" really struck me. I've always approached helping others with the mindset that everyone deserves help and they do. But this reading is asking me to accept something difficult: that I can't help everyone, and that choosing to help 98 people effectively might mean I can't reach the other 2.

That's a hard pill to swallow. My instinct is to worry about those 2 people, to feel like I'm leaving someone behind. I want to live in a world where everyone gets help, where all lives are saved. The scout mindset and scope sensitivity concepts are pushing me to accept reality that with limited resources, I can do more good by being strategic, even though it goes against everything that feels natural to me.

I'm still processing this shift in perspective. The realization that acceptance is necessary doesn't make it easier, but I understand now that it's the first step toward actually maximizing the good I can do. It's about being honest with myself about what's possible, rather than spreading myself too thin and helping fewer people as a result.

This is uncomfortable, but I think that means I'm learning something important.

Our organization has been exploring how to do more effective altruism by focusing more geographically and population-specific.   This requiring us to say No to those we have said Yes to before.  We need to find better ways to communicate this so that those we are saying No to understand our logic and those we are saying Yes to understand the impact we hope can be achieved by working together.

I really wish to live in a world where no one needs to be save, I'm excited to be in this community and learning a lot.

The most important things I learned in this world is that we always have a choice, because believing that you don't have a choice is choice that you choose to made.

Moving past the need or instinct to defend one's own ideas requires an environment that encourages a scout mindset and is a safe place to release established perspectives. 

Effective Altruism is about finding the most impactful way to make a change and impact wouldn’t be found in guesses, we have to take scientific approach—weather surveys or research. 

As much as the world is so skeptical about scout mindset facts, we thus, should be curious about why they’re and actively encourage them to be heard. As we find out why they’re disagreeing with facts? We’ll then explore more avenues of helping others deeply acknowledging the scope sensitivity and effectively utilizing our tradeoffs.

Collaboration is a catalyst to impactful assistance of others in light of resource constraints in respect of time and finances.

I am happy to have a clearer understanding in ways of how I can make meaningful impact towards giving help the right way.

"Seeking the truth and saving more lives without being bias"

I give you a thumb up.

"Pretending there is no choice only makes our decisions worse."

I love this!

In the Quran, surat AlMa'idah verse 32, “if anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he had saved the lives of all mankind.”

It's about the effect one could have even by doing small, good deeds to people, plants, and animals. It could resonate to the whole world. That's what I firmly believe.

"But there should be great shame in letting more people suffer and die than you need to because you can’t look past your own feelings. This is the kind of narrow empathy that Paul Bloom is against". This statement has got me thinking... I really need an effective mindset. 

Reading through this material again, the Scout Mindset appeals differently to me- "Finding the truth, rather than trying to defend our ideas". Conventional wisdom has told us to be bold and outspoken about our convictions. This statement here presents a clash of convictions, to hold on to my ideas or to seek the truth outside of them! If this is what EA is all about, then i am game and willing to challenge and explore these truths.

The Scope sensitivity concept is a challenging one. Sometimes the argument i have made over time is if you can save one life, better save one life rather than trying to save 10 and not do it well. Wow. Again i will reflect more on this concept. Complex!

Sometime, the trade-off is pressured by the funder - the SROI (social ROI) definitions/scope & realities need to be discussed and agreed early. The agree that scoping needs to be done well, otherwise there is wasteful use of resources. Adopting the scout mindsef is excellent for all stakeholders to be open-minded and agile.

I deeply hope that one day, no one will need saving anymore. Meanwhile I am keen in learning from this community how to do better in understanding the world, be better at helping others and definitely to become a clearer thinker. Thanks for the opportunity to be part of this, thanks for all your contributions!   

If you want to follow these concepts, especially towards "truth" then empirical defining is important.  Life is qualified very differently - in human terms in QUALS - quality in and over time; animals potentially as a biomass including sentience %; ecosystems have not yet been empirically evaluated.  Despite the discomfort of defining "value" in this way, unless we do so priorities cannot be made and only apportioned according to biases and beliefs.  Equally if we want true "impact" this needs to be empirically given.   

The chapter prompts readers to adopt a collaborative and truth-seeking approach for effective altruism. The call to prioritize clarity of thought and the pursuit of truth resonates as a fundamental principle for comprehending and positively impacting the world around us.