Future humans matter, and most of EA's priorities are absolutely clear, but it is very unfortunate that the two silliest cases are seen the most. AI might be our end, or our salvation. Anyone who is certain about which, is delusional because we have no crystal ball. Also most of us have little, if any, power to derail AI disaster- which makes scare-mongering the very opposite of effective. Projects based on AI education and effective use might be a way to increase the power of the poor. EA should recognise that whilst most lives have some value (vanishingly small, in the case of pathogens) human lives are of by far the greatest intrinsic worth. The closest counter-case is that the last female white rhino was the last chance for her entire species to exist, but no chicken is ever going to be anywhere near the value of a human. Reasons, if they aren't obvious to you: 1) the loss of almost every human is a long-term personal loss to more than that individual, other lives are damaged by the emotional trauma of the loss, 2) The loss of a human is the loss of all the good that human could have done for others over a lifespan that should cover several decades, 3) Discounting human life relative to pets or stock animals is a shock-tactic to exercise power, and be interesting, but is both disingenuous and insulting to poor people, because those making such claims would not value their own lives less than a chicken, let alone a prawn. 4) No prawn is hurt by the knowledge that I judge its life to be much less than a human. Humans are hurt by the knowledge that other humans prefer chickens to them.
SchoolKits for Congo is a small but effective charity providing school equipment to children who cannot afford both school fees and school equipment. Our processes are very transparent. Medical Access to Central Africa is almost too new to be an investment option, but it will be implementing GiveWell approved programs in partnership with established providers.
I live in Cooma so you are my nearest group. I disagree with the change you are proposing in this case. I think that trying to make chicken campaigning tax-deductible, threatens the tax-deductibility of human rights work, at a time when Australia is already far too parochial.
This is not to say that you should not campaign for animals. But we should not be messing with the fragile mechanisms we have to help other humans who, uniquely in the animal kingdom, are aware of our indifference, and are hurt by it.
I look forward to collaborating with the Canberra EA folk on another project.
Future humans matter, and most of EA's priorities are absolutely clear, but it is very unfortunate that the two silliest cases are seen the most.
AI might be our end, or our salvation. Anyone who is certain about which, is delusional because we have no crystal ball. Also most of us have little, if any, power to derail AI disaster- which makes scare-mongering the very opposite of effective. Projects based on AI education and effective use might be a way to increase the power of the poor.
EA should recognise that whilst most lives have some value (vanishingly small, in the case of pathogens) human lives are of by far the greatest intrinsic worth. The closest counter-case is that the last female white rhino was the last chance for her entire species to exist, but no chicken is ever going to be anywhere near the value of a human. Reasons, if they aren't obvious to you: 1) the loss of almost every human is a long-term personal loss to more than that individual, other lives are damaged by the emotional trauma of the loss, 2) The loss of a human is the loss of all the good that human could have done for others over a lifespan that should cover several decades, 3) Discounting human life relative to pets or stock animals is a shock-tactic to exercise power, and be interesting, but is both disingenuous and insulting to poor people, because those making such claims would not value their own lives less than a chicken, let alone a prawn. 4) No prawn is hurt by the knowledge that I judge its life to be much less than a human. Humans are hurt by the knowledge that other humans prefer chickens to them.
SchoolKits for Congo is a small but effective charity providing school equipment to children who cannot afford both school fees and school equipment. Our processes are very transparent.
Medical Access to Central Africa is almost too new to be an investment option, but it will be implementing GiveWell approved programs in partnership with established providers.
Hi,
I live in Cooma so you are my nearest group. I disagree with the change you are proposing in this case. I think that trying to make chicken campaigning tax-deductible, threatens the tax-deductibility of human rights work, at a time when Australia is already far too parochial.
This is not to say that you should not campaign for animals. But we should not be messing with the fragile mechanisms we have to help other humans who, uniquely in the animal kingdom, are aware of our indifference, and are hurt by it.
I look forward to collaborating with the Canberra EA folk on another project.
PV