Although ESG may not be as "buzz-worthy" as it was a few years ago - and some folks will say one can never trust corporate America anyway, there could be some merit to the idea expressed (in the same vain as a given company being lobbied by a shareholder to consider use of cryptocurrency - or stablecoin - as an alternative to U.S. Dollar holdings for its treasury); perhaps there is some way to further refine the idea, such that it behooves a given foundation (and the staff who know its finances best) to at least study the matter?
(Regardless thereof, kudos for sharing a quick read & interesting read!)
Not "changes your character" but - rather - reveals character; it's called an "ask" because the call to sacrifice is both general and (per the individual's sacrifice) personal - and it serves many functions (as mentioned).
In any case, one of the other replies (from '@Ben Auer') mentioned that "Value drift is not about losing sight of whetheryour actions are effective, but losing the motivation to care about whether your actions are effective."; in other words, what is being called a "sacrifice portfolio" is - in truth - effort (i.e. not a portfolio of sacrifices but a set of willful conscious actions, often at abstaining from a mentality as much as a behavior). Â One can argue the merits, but there is nothing compulsory thereabouts - which is why people undertake such effort voluntarily, sometimes take a break, and often return after a break (gamification & a high score isn't the ultimate goal).
Any luck? Â (Happy to share first-hand perspective, if that's of any help... but "context is key" - so just wanting to roll with your post & its momentum, i.e. before filling that part in...)
PS: Â Per your other recent post (and a priori knowledge of animal advocacy roles being both highly sought after & scarce), the results you've managed to achieve thus far are "nothing to sneeze at"! (Seriously, half of your applications resulted in some expression of further interest - and half of those an actual interview; that's unbelievable!)
7. The communities differ in key personality traits and demographics. Alignment skews much more heavily male (9:1) and younger compared to EA (2:1 male:female).
Though the article does disclaim this point ever-so-slightly ...
"While this gender distribution is not unfamiliar in engineering spaces ..."
... it would be difficult to understate how profoundly a simple skew in gender can profoundly skew everything that results therefrom; one should keep the 'base-rate fallacy' concept in mind when drawing conclusions (as the sample may/may not reflect the EA community as a whole, e.g. in the case of the forums introducing an implicit bias in sample). Â Note the lack of comments pertaining to the findings regarding gender...!
Miriam-Webster says "authentic" is the 2023 'word of the year'; how apt! Â (Note how a theme running through just about each individual comment is what the given poster was made to feel, i.e. the way in which your spirit resonated with them. Â Human beings remember how others make us feel - and all the more so when that authenticity resonates in interactions which are personal and empathetic.)
In short: independent of the material (quantitative) success of GWWC, there is much to be thankful for with respect to such leadership (here's to hoping GWWC is as lucky in succession - Luke Freeman is one-of-a-kind!)...
This thread gets at some part of the crux of the matter - but doesn't illuminate it completely.
As a moral philosopher, Peter Singer would have a hard time being taken seriously were he not vegetarian/vegan: too many people live in this world without consuming animals - and, culturally, there is little to sustain the practice aside from norms (most of which are quite far from any economic defensibility, to say nothing of their non-secular roots). Â Indeed (per the original posting's conclusion), such a Peter Singer would have a hard time taking himself seriously - because he descends from a long line of moral philosophers (and, indeed, activists) who have all recognized the very same truth - and can see how it manifests in their world. Â One could suspect folks who align with EA feel much the same, i.e. that being true (perhaps just) to one's own self is the ticket.
Although ESG may not be as "buzz-worthy" as it was a few years ago - and some folks will say one can never trust corporate America anyway, there could be some merit to the idea expressed (in the same vain as a given company being lobbied by a shareholder to consider use of cryptocurrency - or stablecoin - as an alternative to U.S. Dollar holdings for its treasury); perhaps there is some way to further refine the idea, such that it behooves a given foundation (and the staff who know its finances best) to at least study the matter?
(Regardless thereof, kudos for sharing a quick read & interesting read!)
Not "changes your character" but - rather - reveals character; it's called an "ask" because the call to sacrifice is both general and (per the individual's sacrifice) personal - and it serves many functions (as mentioned).
In any case, one of the other replies (from '@Ben Auer') mentioned that "Value drift is not about losing sight of whether your actions are effective, but losing the motivation to care about whether your actions are effective."; in other words, what is being called a "sacrifice portfolio" is - in truth - effort (i.e. not a portfolio of sacrifices but a set of willful conscious actions, often at abstaining from a mentality as much as a behavior). Â One can argue the merits, but there is nothing compulsory thereabouts - which is why people undertake such effort voluntarily, sometimes take a break, and often return after a break (gamification & a high score isn't the ultimate goal).
Go Bears!
Any luck? Â (Happy to share first-hand perspective, if that's of any help... but "context is key" - so just wanting to roll with your post & its momentum, i.e. before filling that part in...)
PS: Â Per your other recent post (and a priori knowledge of animal advocacy roles being both highly sought after & scarce), the results you've managed to achieve thus far are "nothing to sneeze at"! (Seriously, half of your applications resulted in some expression of further interest - and half of those an actual interview; that's unbelievable!)
Though the article does disclaim this point ever-so-slightly ...
... it would be difficult to understate how profoundly a simple skew in gender can profoundly skew everything that results therefrom; one should keep the 'base-rate fallacy' concept in mind when drawing conclusions (as the sample may/may not reflect the EA community as a whole, e.g. in the case of the forums introducing an implicit bias in sample). Â Note the lack of comments pertaining to the findings regarding gender...!
Miriam-Webster says "authentic" is the 2023 'word of the year'; how apt! Â (Note how a theme running through just about each individual comment is what the given poster was made to feel, i.e. the way in which your spirit resonated with them. Â Human beings remember how others make us feel - and all the more so when that authenticity resonates in interactions which are personal and empathetic.)
In short: independent of the material (quantitative) success of GWWC, there is much to be thankful for with respect to such leadership (here's to hoping GWWC is as lucky in succession - Luke Freeman is one-of-a-kind!)...
Â
Â
Â
This thread gets at some part of the crux of the matter - but doesn't illuminate it completely.
As a moral philosopher, Peter Singer would have a hard time being taken seriously were he not vegetarian/vegan: too many people live in this world without consuming animals - and, culturally, there is little to sustain the practice aside from norms (most of which are quite far from any economic defensibility, to say nothing of their non-secular roots). Â Indeed (per the original posting's conclusion), such a Peter Singer would have a hard time taking himself seriously - because he descends from a long line of moral philosophers (and, indeed, activists) who have all recognized the very same truth - and can see how it manifests in their world. Â One could suspect folks who align with EA feel much the same, i.e. that being true (perhaps just) to one's own self is the ticket.
https://www.effectivealtruism.org/virtual-programs/career-planning-program
Will the program be offered again @Cian M?Â
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Z5KZ2cui8WDjyF6gJ/some-thoughts-on-toby-ord-s-existential-risk-estimates#The_table