(in)Effective Altruism
to do good, you must harness self-interest, not pretend you're above it
Effective Altruism (EA) is stupid and ineffective. I know that sounds harsh, but that is my candid perspective. Since all of the sudden proponents of this particular brand of what I’m inclined to think of as moral autism are coming out of the woodwork to tell us that the real way to help people is to ignore all of the people around you that you actually have a chance of helping, I feel compelled to share my thoughts. Fortunately, L.P. Koch already did the heavy lifting with one of his recent articles.
I only want to add one observation to this excellent article that I take as a comprehensive dismemberment of what is ultimately a dangerous misunderstanding of how to align yourself spiritually so that your actions may leave this world better than you found it. That one observation is: Altruism as commonly understood doesn’t exist. Before you get all huffy, please recognize that I’m only talking about one particular definition of altruism:
The belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.
This is the simplest and most common definition, but not the only one. If you want to argue that you can use less common and more complex definitions of altruism to salvage it as a concept, I agree, and this is what I propose.
Human Beings Are Self-Interested
This isn’t to say human beings are inherently selfish, just that we can’t disentangle self-interest from anything we do. Typically altruism is defined as having some component of selflessness. The problem with this conception is that if we do things that are ostensibly for other people, we are still rewarded emotionally and spiritually. If we aren’t rewarded in any way, then we can’t sustain the behavior. The idea of extracting yourself from any equation where you are interacting with the world defies nature and reason. We are a part of this world, and you are a part of every interaction you have. If your objective is to do good routinely, you must work out how these good deeds you hope to perform are nested within your own self-interest, not pretend like you’re above it all.
Motivation is the Master of Reason
Your self-interest will govern your behavior whether you recognize it or not. It doesn’t matter if our nature was ordained by God or converged upon by billions of years of selection pressure, human beings are necessarily motivated by self-interest. If you take the time to work out what your motivations are, you can learn how you might align occult motivations of self-interest with your espoused values. For an individual who values altruism, these espoused values will include promoting the well-being of others. If successful in achieving this alignment, true altruism results. I believe this is the foundation of a more genuine altruism grounded in biological and/or metaphysical reality.
True Altruism
The problem with true altruism is that it is difficult. It takes a substantial investment and takes years to pay off. For extravagantly wealthy tech bros, the lie of Effective Altruism is likely too alluring to resist. Unfortunately, as the saying goes, money can’t buy everything. As I’ll say here and now, it most certainly can’t buy virtue. Incidentally, true altruism is also what is most effective, but that name was already taken by charlatans. You can’t measure the effects of your efforts to improve the well-being of others by using arbitrary metrics on spreadsheets, you can only measure it by the “thank yous” you receive from people you’ve helped. The subjectivity of value assures us of this. The people you are ostensibly trying to help are the only ones who know whether or not your efforts have been in vain. If you don’t have access to this feedback in any capacity, you could very well be making things worse. To get political, this is why the free market is the “system” most aligned with true altruism. People voluntarily paying for things can be thought of as little “thank yous.” They wouldn’t have paid if they didn’t want it, and when they stop paying, you know that you’re not helping anyone with anything. Astute readers will notice I said people voluntarily paying. As in, with their own money. This voluntary arrangement is the only one that is aligned with true altruism. Any coercion thrown into the mix distorts this alignment.1
Spiritual Enlightenment
You might read the above and think I’m equating materialism and the free market with true altruism. To be clear, I’m not. The free market is awesome for aligning behavior with what is good for people in general, but it is incomplete. Why? The simple answer is because not everything has exchange value. Appreciating this and living in the Spirit, or living in Faith, or having the Faith of Christ, or whatever you want to call it is the next step. This isn’t to say anything about the free market changes, just that for human civilization to function some people need to be able to appreciate that there is more to life than stuff, and that money can’t buy everything. If promoting the well-being of others is your espoused goal, spiritual growth and living in faith is the ultimate evolution that will provide the insight needed to inform you of what is likely to be most effective at improving the well-being of others, if that’s your thing. So if you aspire to be altruistic and want your efforts to be effective, you don’t want Effective Altruism™, you simply want true altruism. Like all virtues, pursuing true altruism is easier said than done. To be sure, at times, it is bitter work. During these difficult times, it takes faith to know that in the end, it is worth it.
Coercion insinuates itself into almost all seemingly voluntary transactions in the modern western economy. Manipulation of interest rates, fiat money, fractional reserve banking, rules and regulations promoting oligopolies, licensure requirements, the list goes on and on. The relationship between voluntary and coercive is a spectrum. The more voluntary, the more “aligned” with true altruism
I'm not sure what makes so many people positively aroused by the idea of selflessness. Even Christ (Julius by another name) had his motives. I once heard the online activity of free problem solving described as "random acts of kindness." At the time, I was in my living room and fully immersed in multirecreational activities involving a bottle of jack and some musky smelling stuff I can't remember the name of and was thus a likely target to be struck by what a beautiful and apt description this was, but not because it meant that people are on the internet selflessly helping others answer questions, think through problems, etc.. I recall instead thinking that the very condition that most, if not all, neurotypical humans share in their desire (biological programming by a different name? We may never know...) to help others because it makes them feel good to do so - and so they are getting something out of it - is quite worthy of admiration all by itself. Sticking to the example of helpful online actors, it's easy to see how often times "thank you" isn't even necessarily the exchange medium for acts of "true altruism" as you describe it here. Sometimes the urge to grapple with a problem when there's a possibility of coming out in mount is enough benefit to produce a sense of reciprocity and sustain behaviors that consequently help others, even if the reward is some internal metric unseen from the outside. On the surface, this may look a bit like a selfless act, but upon closer inspection it's easy to see the positive inclination toward being useful that each of us has - and determining whether this exists as a design feature or a bug is probably a less enjoyable pursuit than simply appreciating its precious existence for what it is. Take it from me - that night I mentioned above? It was super fun.
I agree with your ideas here, aligning your motivations with your values will help produce good outcomes and probably produce fewer hypocrites. If there could be widespread cultural acceptance of the idea that getting something (money, praise, whatever isn't outright stolen) in exchange for doing something helpful is a positive behavioral driver in the pursuit of a more harmonious existence on this planet, it might be easier to express that this is often directly tied to a person's sense of worth and meaning in life. Why that's a pesky idea that needs squashing in the eyes of some EA supporters, I'm not entirely sure. I might start trying to answer that by addressing the guilt that might come from being out of tune with your motivations and the internal disharmony that naturally follows from such a situation. Nice post.
Most of the people I have encountered who talked about selflessly helping others might more accurately be described as on the "spectrum of sociopathy."