During the week of March 23 – 29^[1], we’ll be debating the statement:

“If AGI goes well for humans, it’ll probably^[2] go well for animals”

I'm open to minor changes to the phrasing of this statement, but the general shape is locked in, since people might want to start writing posts for the debate week this weekend. 

In this post, I’ll give some background on why this topic matters and share some tips and resources to help you form a view on the topic, before the debate week begins. But first:

How does a debate week work?

During an EA Forum debate week, we put a debate slider on the frontpage banner. It looks something like this:

Anyone who logs into the Forum can then vote on this banner. When you vote, you’re also asked if you want to leave a comment, which will appear on a discussion thread, and be attached to your icon on the banner.

Alongside the conversation in the discussion thread, Forum users also write posts which might influence readers towards agreeing or disagreeing with the statement.

Past debate weeks:

1. AI Welfare Debate Week (Jul 1–7, 2024) — "AI welfare should be an EA priority"
2. Animal Welfare vs Global Health Debate Week (Oct 7–13, 2024) — "It would be better to spend an extra $100m on animal welfare than on global health"
3. Existential Choices Debate Week (Mar 17–23, 2025) — "On the margin, it is better to work on reducing the chance of our extinction than increasing the value of the future where we survive"

Why this conversation matters

Basically - it is extremely neglected. 

A relatively tiny group of people put serious odds on AGI radically transforming the world. Almost nobody thinks about how to influence outcomes for the better in a post-AI world. Even in that group, the conversation is focused on humans, and/or digital minds. 

And yet, the consequences of a post-AGI world might be terrible for animals. The field of AI alignment aims to produce an AGI which is aligned to human values, but such values, as they stand, do not necessary include concern for animal suffering. 

Even with an aligned AGI then, we could be facing a future full of bad outcomes for animals: continued farming, the spread of wild animal communities to new planets, or perhaps simply a lack of attention to what a flourishing future looks like for species other than human. 

It's also absolutely possible that all marginal EA-influenced work should go towards surviving the transition to a post-AGI world/ general flourishing post-AGI (for that discussion, see last debate week). But I'd argue that the sheer number of animals, and the almost total lack of serious thinking^[3] about the impact of AGI on them justifies us entertaining an alternative. That's what this week is for. 

Questions to consider

To help you form a view on the debate statement, I'll list a few (non-exhaustive) questions which might nudge you one way or the other. 

As a reminder, the statement is: “If AGI goes well for humans, it’ll probably^[2] go well for animals”

• How transformative do I expect AGI to be? Are we talking about a productivity speed-up, or a total reshaping of society?
  • Many of the concerns listed in this post are more relevant in a less transformed world - for example the risk of marginally more efficient factory farming increasing stocking density and thus suffering.
• In worlds where AGI goes well, does that mean a total moratorium until we have a better understanding of AGI, or is it possible to ensure 'goes well' levels of alignment in the next decade?
• What does it mean to go well for animals? Does the ideal future contain animals? In what way?
• Would an AGI 'aligned to human values' be bad for animals? Are human values bad for animals?

Suggest more questions in the comments, I might add them. 

Reading list

A list of posts which might help inform your understanding of the topic, and influence your cruxes.

• Animals in AI-transformed futures: will progress be made on this issue?
• A shallow review of what transformative AI means for animal welfare.
  • Lizka and Ben expect a very transformative form of AI which will change the global economy and overturn most of our assumptions. One interesting takeaway: they don’t expect factory farming to exist in this transformed post-AI future, so they don’t think we should align present-day AIs to particular views on farming.
• Animal advocates should respond to transformative AI maybe arriving soon
• How should we adapt animal advocacy to near-term AGI?

Please suggest more in the comments, I'll add them. 

How to contribute to debate week

1. Consider writing a post! A great debate week post illuminates a consideration which can help the reader change their mind, or deepen their understanding of the central debate topic. A great debate week post does not have to be directly about the statement.
2. Message me or comment below if you have suggestions for people who should write posts or take part in the discussion during the debate week. I'll be reaching out to a bunch of possible authors next week. 

PS- thanks to everyone who has already contributed to this debate week, including all the commenters here, and Forum users who voted on our Forum-Choice debate week poll. 

1. ^{^}

   Add it and other Forum events to your google calendar by clicking this link. 

2. ^{^}

    We need a ‘probably’ here because the claim is that in most possible worlds where AGI goes well, it’ll go well for animals. Without 'probably', the claim is far too certainly phrased - no one should actually agree with it. If you'd like a precise definition, let's call 'probably' 70%.  

3. ^{^}

   See the reading list below for several exceptions.