I'd be doing less good with my life if I hadn't heard of effective altruism
Hearing about effective altruism eventually led to me taking the 10% pledge. I would never have donated this amount (or had the focus on effectiveness) had I not heard about EA.
Greetings from the future. I’ve come to learn that you are currently the owner of a slave. With all of the love in my heart, I’d like to appeal to you to free her.
With that in mind, I’d first like to ask you a question; When you observe other people in the world and think to yourself, “that person did a good thing” or “that person did a bad thing”, by what metric are you judging the goodness or badness of their actions? Whatever your answer, are you applying that metric and a consistent manner? Please take some time to really think it over.
My intention is not to tell you “you are wrong” or “my answer is the correct one”. But rather I’d like you to come to your own conclusion on this matter. To help you along the way, I’d encourage you to consider the work of other clever people from throughout history who have dedicated their lives to this question (and other related questions). People like Aristotle, Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham. They will each attempt to provide a clear answer to this question, and give compelling reasons to adopt their viewpoint. Their views are wildly different from each other and here in the future, there is still no consensus regarding who is ultimately correct.
Lastly, I’d like to tell you about a man who will live in the future. A man named John Rawls will be born in the year 1921 and in 1971 he will publish a book called “A Theory of Justice”. In that book he will suggest that the best way to design a just world is from a position of impartiality. He notes that in life we do not get to choose when or where we are born, or to which parents. You and I are fortunate in that we were born into relatively comfortable circumstances for our time. Others are less fortunate and are born into very difficult circumstances through no fault of their own. I ask you; is it fair or just to punish somebody for circumstances that are entirely out of their control?
Rawls presents a thought experiment. Imagine you are a god-like figure floating in the clouds trying to design a just society. Tomorrow you will enter this world (the one you create today), but you have no idea who you will be. You could be a person of colour, or a woman, or a chicken or a rock. From this position, go ahead and design the best utopian society you can possibly imagine.
If it turns out you are a rock, presumably you won’t know you’re a rock (you won’t know anything), and so it doesn’t really matter what kind of society you design. But suppose you are a woman of colour. In that scenario, you will have interests, such as avoiding pain and your own freedom. You will have an interest in not being a slave. The nature of the society you are born into will matter to you very deeply indeed. And so, this suggests we ought to design a society in which owning slaves is not allowed (because, after all, it could have been you).
I sincerely hope you’ll take this letter seriously and adjust your actions accordingly. If you're still not convinced, I hope that this letter will at least leave you with some doubts about the moral status of slavery, and at a minimum, you might treat your slave better than you would have done otherwise.
Your friend from the future, Ben
P.s. Malaria is transmitted from person to person via mosquito bites.
Great article! However, I noticed the following text appears twice: "...a meaningful portion of your income to help improve the lives of others. It can help you live up to your values, meet like-minded people, and inspire others to follow suit."
Hearing about effective altruism eventually led to me taking the 10% pledge. I would never have donated this amount (or had the focus on effectiveness) had I not heard about EA.
Dear friend,
Greetings from the future. I’ve come to learn that you are currently the owner of a slave. With all of the love in my heart, I’d like to appeal to you to free her.
With that in mind, I’d first like to ask you a question; When you observe other people in the world and think to yourself, “that person did a good thing” or “that person did a bad thing”, by what metric are you judging the goodness or badness of their actions? Whatever your answer, are you applying that metric and a consistent manner? Please take some time to really think it over.
My intention is not to tell you “you are wrong” or “my answer is the correct one”. But rather I’d like you to come to your own conclusion on this matter. To help you along the way, I’d encourage you to consider the work of other clever people from throughout history who have dedicated their lives to this question (and other related questions). People like Aristotle, Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham. They will each attempt to provide a clear answer to this question, and give compelling reasons to adopt their viewpoint. Their views are wildly different from each other and here in the future, there is still no consensus regarding who is ultimately correct.
Lastly, I’d like to tell you about a man who will live in the future. A man named John Rawls will be born in the year 1921 and in 1971 he will publish a book called “A Theory of Justice”. In that book he will suggest that the best way to design a just world is from a position of impartiality. He notes that in life we do not get to choose when or where we are born, or to which parents. You and I are fortunate in that we were born into relatively comfortable circumstances for our time. Others are less fortunate and are born into very difficult circumstances through no fault of their own. I ask you; is it fair or just to punish somebody for circumstances that are entirely out of their control?
Rawls presents a thought experiment. Imagine you are a god-like figure floating in the clouds trying to design a just society. Tomorrow you will enter this world (the one you create today), but you have no idea who you will be. You could be a person of colour, or a woman, or a chicken or a rock. From this position, go ahead and design the best utopian society you can possibly imagine.
If it turns out you are a rock, presumably you won’t know you’re a rock (you won’t know anything), and so it doesn’t really matter what kind of society you design. But suppose you are a woman of colour. In that scenario, you will have interests, such as avoiding pain and your own freedom. You will have an interest in not being a slave. The nature of the society you are born into will matter to you very deeply indeed. And so, this suggests we ought to design a society in which owning slaves is not allowed (because, after all, it could have been you).
I sincerely hope you’ll take this letter seriously and adjust your actions accordingly. If you're still not convinced, I hope that this letter will at least leave you with some doubts about the moral status of slavery, and at a minimum, you might treat your slave better than you would have done otherwise.
Your friend from the future,
Ben
P.s. Malaria is transmitted from person to person via mosquito bites.
Great article! However, I noticed the following text appears twice: "...a meaningful portion of your income to help improve the lives of others. It can help you live up to your values, meet like-minded people, and inspire others to follow suit."