I’m sharing the below as part of the EA Strategy Fortnight.  I think there’s value in discussing what the role of effective giving in the EA community should be, as (1) I expect people have quite different views on this, and (2) I think there are concrete things we should do differently based on our views here (I share some suggestions at the bottom of this post).These claims or similar ones have been made by others in various places (e.g. here, here, and here), but I thought it'd be useful to put them together in one place so people can critique them not only one-by-one but also as a set. This post doesn’t make a well-supported argument for all these claims and suggestions: many are hypotheses on which I’d love to see more data and/or pushback.Full disclosure: I work at Giving What We Can (though these are my personal views).Claim 1: Giving effectively and significantly should be normal in the EA communityMore concretely, I think it would be desirable and feasible for most people who currently self-associate with EA to give at least 10% of their income to high-impact funding opportunities (e.g. by taking the GWWC Pledge) or to be on their way there (e.g. by taking the Trial Pledge).[1]I think this is desirable for three reasons: (1) effective giving is — in absolute terms — an incredibly efficient way for us to convert resources into impact,[2] (2) even for individuals who may have more impact directly through their careers, giving effectively is often highly cost-effective on the margin[3] and is not mutually exclusive with their direct impact (so worth doing!)[4], and (3) there are many positive effects for the EA community as a whole from having effective giving as a norm.[5]I also think this is feasible. There are good reasons for some people to not give at some points in their lives — for instance, if it leaves someone with insufficient resources to live a comfortable life, or if it would interfere strongly with the impact someone could have in their career. However, I expect these situations will be the exception rather than the rule within the current EA community,[6] and even where they do apply there are often ways around them (e.g. exceptions to the Pledge for students and people who are unemployed).Claim 2: Giving effectively and significantly should not be required in the EA communityI think we should positively encourage everyone in the EA community who can give effectively and significantly to do so, and celebrate people when they do — but I don’t think that this should be an (implied) requirement for people in order to “feel at home” in the community, for a couple of reasons: EA is about using one's resources to try to do the most good, and its community should be accessible to people who want to use different types of resources to do this (e.g. money, time, network, expertise).Moreover, we don’t want the EA community to intentionally or unintentionally select only for people who have significant financial resources: we would be missing out on many (if not most) of the people we [...]
Source:
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/zohs3eYHd8WdhF88M/four-claims-about-the-role-of-effective-giving-in-the-ea
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
Share feedback on this narration.