EA Forum Bot Site
EA Forum

Comment Permalink
River1
0
0

I love this intro! I especially like that it defines EA in terms of finding the most effective interventions, the ones that do good most efficiently with whatever inputs they take, rather than doing the most good in an absolute sense.

Reply
See in context
by Clifford
2 min read 15

110

Building effective altruismCommunityEffective altruism messagingIntroduction to effective altruism
Frontpage
Show all topics

We’ve released "a new intro essay for a general audience: "What is effective altruism?"

An earlier post shared the essay and mentioned that there were still some changes to make. The essay is now finished and we’d be excited for people to share it on social media and with friends.

The goal of the essay is to accurately get across what effective altruism is, rather than to be as inspiring as possible to new people who might get involved. 

Our hope is that this is the go-to explanation of what effective altruism is for someone who has already heard about the idea, and wants to better understand what it involves (e.g. someone actively searching “effective altruism” on google).

We also imagine it being useful to people outside of the community such as journalists or university professors, and wanted to present EA in a way that’s clear and puts our best foot forward to those kinds of audiences.

In order to serve these aims, we decided to lead with a clear description of what EA is, followed by concrete examples of EA work, then the values that define EA, and then an FAQ responding to common misunderstandings or objections.

In contrast, a more inspirational article might have started with a striking example or story. But we think this is better left to a wide range of articles with strong but narrow appeal, rather than the central explanation of what EA is. (Though we also think a relatively direct explanation can be inspiring to at least some readers, especially those with the most affinity for the ideas.)

The article also doesn’t aim to give people a ‘full’ understanding of EA. Instead, we imagine people clicking through to materials in the resources pages, like Doing Good Better, the 80k intro to EA podcast series, or the handbook / introductory course

This project took several months; we’ve spent time figuring out appropriate aims for the essay, drafting the key messages we wanted to get across, and working through several iterations of drafts from a number of authors.

Some of the things we especially struggled with included: striking a balance between being engaging & concise, but also clear & defensible; figuring out which canonical examples to use and how to illustrate them visually; deciding how to frame the four values & several sentence description of EA.

I’m really grateful to everyone who helped with this project, and to Ben Todd for writing the final version of the essay.

Feedback is welcome, especially from people who didn’t know much about EA prior to reading the essay. We might not work on significant changes in the near future, but expect to make iterations in the coming year or two, so we’re collecting all the feedback we receive for then.

Read the essay. 

110

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Mentioned in
Comments15


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Phil Tanny10
0
0

The article seems well written, thumbs up, nothing to add from here.

Speaking more generally, it seems wise for the EA community to present a wide variety of introductions so as to appeal to as many different types of visitors as possible.

First impression, this site seems to do an excellent job of connecting with visitors who are intellectually inclined.  But that's not most people.  On the net especially, most readers are power scrolling through tons of data, and patience is not an asset rewarded by the click happy nature of the Internet.

If this is not already happening, some writers might focus on putting together what is sometimes called "an elevator speech".   Imagine you're riding up to the 23rd floor with someone you'd like to connect with, and you have 30 seconds to make your case.   

Can you summarize EA philosophy on a single screen, and then present a specific call to action on the 2nd screen?

Is there an EA fund which visitors can contribute to?  If yes, the call to action could be to ask for an automated $1 per month contribution to that fund, managed by Paypal.  Such a request would help EA identify those willing to take some modest action.   Once these folks are identified ongoing communications can develop the relationship  further over time, explain the EA philosophy in more detail in a series of emails etc.

The key concept to this approach is to present as few obstacles to action as possible at the beginning.   Don't require the new visitor to think too much (that can come later).  Don't present them with a lot of options (that can come later).   Don't ask for much (that can come later).    Make the case on a single screen, ask for a dollar, and then follow up over time with those who  respond to build the relationship.

If someone wants to take this approach further, the next step can be to relentlessly tweak and test the presentation to find out what works best.   Advertising pros have learned that even small tweaks to headlines etc can sometimes have a big effect on the conversion rate.  This is a big subject which I'm not expert on, and even if I were, it's way too involved a subject to dive in to here.

I'm not suggesting the above as a "one true way", only as one approach which may be effective with large numbers of net users who are somewhat interested, but not very patient, and not yet ready for a full immersion in to EA philosophy.    It seems relevant to reflect on the fact that most of the money in the world is controlled by people who aren't intellectual or philosophical.  

Reply
Mike Pool1
0
0

I'm also curious to know if anyone is or has worked on an elevator pitch for EA and agree that capturing someon's attention/ interest enough to convince them to read through a full article is tricky. The idea of increasing someone's engagement with EA in a step-by-step manner is definitely worth consideration. Any info on efforts like this would be greatly appreciated!

Reply
PatrickL9
0
0

I noticed Ali Abdaal referencing some of the examples from this intro in his summary of WWOTF :) 
 

07:50 and 10:45
 

Reply
Clifford2
0
0

That's really cool to see - thanks for sharing Patrick!

Reply
Rafael Ruiz3
0
0

Interesting introduction! I have a couple of first impressions that I'd like to share:

  1. The beginning of the article seems strange to me. This is the first time I have seen "Effective Altruism" defined as "a project". To me, "a project" seems to have the connotation of something happening within a specific organization, rather than an idea, question, ideology, philosophy, or social movement. I think Effective Altruism is not a project. Rather, it contains hundreds or thousands of projects. I think there might be a better concept to encompass the idea.
  2. I find it weird to put "What are some examples of effective altruism in practice?" before outlining the ideas in "What values unite effective altruism?". Although it might be more boring, I think our cause areas are better understood once we outline our core philosophy. Also, we try to be cause neutral, so our projects might change radically in the future.
  3. On a more positive note, I like the bar charts! They're very illuminating regarding the magnitude of the issues. :)
Reply
Jeroen Willems🔸2
0
0

Yeah I'd like to understand point 1 better too. Why 'project' rather than 'movement' or 'community'? I assume a lot of thought was put into it so I'm curious to know what the explanation is!

Personally, point two makes sense to me. "What does EA do?" is a question most outsiders are interested in, and I like that the explanations come with the EA reasoning behind it so it doesn't look like EA is specifically about the mentioned issue.

Reply
Mike Pool1
0
0

I came back to this post specifically to ask the same question as your point 1. - why "project" was used? I'd love hear to hear the reasoning!

Reply
AndreFerretti3
0
0

This update was very much needed, and congrats on the new introduction—I love it and finally have a page I can share introducing EA!

Reply
Clifford1
0
0

Great to hear Andre! :)

Reply
James Herbert2
0
0

Thanks for putting in the work here! 

You mention that feedback from people who didn't know much about EA prior to reading the essay would be particularly valuable - we paid someone to translate it for our national group's website so we've got a bit of that:

'In the English source text I’ve noticed some minor issues with grammar and/or style (such as pronouns without referents, long-winded lines  that could be phrased more efficiently, repetitions in words and examples, the structuring of content and their respective paragraphs).' 

Furthermore, the translator was not a fan of the general structure: 

'The title is "What is effective altruism", then after the intro I'm being presented with all these long examples of things more or less inspired by EA (though never quite sure to what extent), only to be followed with the line: "Effective altruism isn't defined by the projects above, and what it focuses on could easily change." - so why did I spend my time reading these examples then?'

After receiving these comments, I shared the old one with them to see what they made of it:

'It's a better read and keeps me more engaged, addresses some of the key questions one might have about EA-thinking both more directly and more nuanced'

Hope this is useful!

Reply
OscarD🔸2
0
0

I like the structure and style of this piece, and think it makes sense for this central resource to be more formal and less emotional, and leave the more anecdote-y articles to media pieces which will have a wider audience anyway.

I think "greater significance to the industrial revolution" should be "greater significance than the industrial revolution"

Reply
Clifford2
0
0

Thanks Oscar! I've updated the sentence in the essay now to read: "The result would be an enormous transformation, perhaps of a significance similar to or greater than the industrial revolution in the 1800s."

Reply
River1
0
0

I love this intro! I especially like that it defines EA in terms of finding the most effective interventions, the ones that do good most efficiently with whatever inputs they take, rather than doing the most good in an absolute sense.

Reply
Yelnats T.J.1
0
0

"The goal of the essay is to accurately get across what effective altruism is, rather than to be as inspiring as possible to new people who might get involved. "

 

Is there an existing  one that focuses on being inspiring? A link to that would be useful.

Reply
Clifford3
0
0

Good question - I think there are a bunch to choose from but perhaps not one winner. We cover this in one of the FAQs (copy and pasting below).

What resources have inspired people to get involved with effective altruism in the past?

Some examples of resources that have inspired people to get involved in effective altruism (but don’t necessarily represent its current form) include:

Reply
More from Clifford
197
Moving community discussion to a separate tab (a test we might run)
Lizka, Clifford
· · 9m read
38
38
135
“Community” posts have their own section, subforums are closing, and more (Forum update February 2023)
Lizka, Sharang Phadke, Clifford
· · 7m read
30
30
199
What we learned from a year incubating longtermist entrepreneurship
rebecca, Jade Leung, Clifford
· · 21m read
28
28
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 13m read
 · 
Notes  The following text explores, in a speculative manner, the evolutionary question: Did high-intensity affective states, specifically Pain, emerge early in evolutionary history, or did they develop gradually over time? Note: We are not neuroscientists; our work draws on our evolutionary biology background and our efforts to develop welfare metrics that accurately reflect reality and effectively reduce suffering. We hope these ideas may interest researchers in neuroscience, comparative cognition, and animal welfare science. This discussion is part of a broader manuscript in progress, focusing on interspecific comparisons of affective capacities—a critical question for advancing animal welfare science and estimating the Welfare Footprint of animal-sourced products.     Key points  Ultimate question: Do primitive sentient organisms experience extreme pain intensities, or fine-grained pain intensity discrimination, or both? Scientific framing: Pain functions as a biological signalling system that guides behavior by encoding motivational importance. The evolution of Pain signalling —its intensity range and resolution (i.e., the granularity with which differences in Pain intensity can be perceived)— can be viewed as an optimization problem, where neural architectures must balance computational efficiency, survival-driven signal prioritization, and adaptive flexibility. Mathematical clarification: Resolution is a fundamental requirement for encoding and processing information. Pain varies not only in overall intensity but also in granularity—how finely intensity levels can be distinguished.  Hypothetical Evolutionary Pathways: by analysing affective intensity (low, high) and resolution (low, high) as independent dimensions, we describe four illustrative evolutionary scenarios that provide a structured framework to examine whether primitive sentient organisms can experience Pain of high intensity, nuanced affective intensities, both, or neither.     Introdu
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
A while back (as I've just been reminded by a discussion on another thread), David Thorstad wrote a bunch of posts critiquing the idea that small reductions in extinction risk have very high value, because the expected number of people who will exist in the future is very high: https://reflectivealtruism.com/category/my-papers/mistakes-in-moral-mathematics/. The arguments are quite complicated, but the basic points are that the expected number of people in the future is much lower than longtermists estimate because: -Longtermists tend to neglect the fact that even if your intervention blocks one extinction risk, there are others it might fail to block; surviving for billions  (or more) of years likely  requires driving extinction risk very low for a long period of time, and if we are not likely to survive that long, even conditional on longtermist interventions against one extinction risk succeeding, the value of preventing extinction (conditional on more happy people being valuable) is much lower.  -Longtermists tend to assume that in the future population will be roughly as large as the available resources can support. But ever since the industrial revolution, as countries get richer, their fertility rate falls and falls until it is below replacement. So we can't just assume future population sizes will be near the limits of what the available resources will support. Thorstad goes on to argue that this weakens the case for longtermism generally, not just the value of extinction risk reductions, since the case for longtermism is that future expected population  is many times the current population, or at least could be given plausible levels of longtermist extinction risk reduction effort. He also notes that if he can find multiple common mistakes in longtermist estimates of expected future population, we should expect that those estimates might be off in other ways. (At this point I would note that they could also be missing factors that bias their estimates of
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
We’ve redesigned effectivealtruism.org to improve understanding and perception of effective altruism, and make it easier to take action.  View the new site → I led the redesign and will be writing in the first person here, but many others contributed research, feedback, writing, editing, and development. I’d love to hear what you think, here is a feedback form. Redesign goals This redesign is part of CEA’s broader efforts to improve how effective altruism is understood and perceived. I focused on goals aligned with CEA’s branding and growth strategy: 1. Improve understanding of what effective altruism is Make the core ideas easier to grasp by simplifying language, addressing common misconceptions, and showcasing more real-world examples of people and projects. 2. Improve the perception of effective altruism I worked from a set of brand associations defined by the group working on the EA brand project[1]. These are words we want people to associate with effective altruism more strongly—like compassionate, competent, and action-oriented. 3. Increase impactful actions Make it easier for visitors to take meaningful next steps, like signing up for the newsletter or intro course, exploring career opportunities, or donating. We focused especially on three key audiences: * To-be direct workers: young people and professionals who might explore impactful career paths * Opinion shapers and people in power: journalists, policymakers, and senior professionals in relevant fields * Donors: from large funders to smaller individual givers and peer foundations Before and after The changes across the site are aimed at making it clearer, more skimmable, and easier to navigate. Here are some side-by-side comparisons: Landing page Some of the changes: * Replaced the economic growth graph with a short video highlighting different cause areas and effective altruism in action * Updated tagline to "Find the best ways to help others" based on testing by Rethink
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
63
Build a walkable campus with fellow EAs
tyleralterman
· · 1m read
4
4
30
Apply to help run EAGxIndia 2025!
Agru, Anubhuti Jain, Dion🔸
· · 1m read
2
2
49
The CEA Events Team is Hiring for Three Program Lead Positions
OllieBase
· · 3m read
0
0
View more