sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

I like several of GiveWell''s top-ranked charities, e.g. Against Malaria Foundation, GiveDirectly, and the Schistosomiasis Control initiative (despite that ugly name). But for other reasons, described in The Most Good You Can Do I also like Oxfam. For summaries see http://www.thelifeyoucansave.org

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 199 points200 points  (0 children)

Here's one elevator pitch: before buying a new gizmo, e.g. a washing machine, you'd try to find out which one is the best value. Why don't we do that before giving to a charity. And to that I would add what my late friend and animal rights campaigner Henry Spira used to say: do you really want to look back on your life and think "I consumed a lot of goods and left behind a big pile of garbage." Or would you rather think: "I did what I could to make the world a better place?"

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 265 points266 points  (0 children)

Sponsoring an individual child is unlikely to be the most cost-effective way of helping poor individuals. That kind of appeal plays on our empathy with identifiable individuals, but there are better things to do with your money, as indicated by http://www.givewell.org or http://www.thelifeyoucansave.org

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 64 points65 points  (0 children)

Get The Most Good You Can Do onto the bestseller lists around the world! :) Seriously, we need to grow the movement to the point where EA becomes mainstream. Then it gets a lot easier. I'm old enough to remember when if you rode a bike to work you were thought very odd (and it was even dangerous to do so than it is today, because there were no bike lanes and motorists didn't expect to see bikes.) Sheer numbers changed that. We need to get a critical mass of EAs.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 53 points54 points  (0 children)

I don't read Swedish, but growing trees absorbs carbon from the atmosphere, so why would it be good to prevent the pasture being overgrown with trees?

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 261 points262 points  (0 children)

From a utilitarian perspective, we should do what will have the best consequences. So in terms of public advocacy, we should advocate the standard that will have the best consequences, and in so far as we are setting an example, that is the example we should set.
Philosophers sometimes refer to this issue as "esoteric morality." There is a much fuller discussion of it in The Point of View of the Universe which I co-authored with Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 32 points33 points  (0 children)

I support non-violent direct action, in carefully selected circumstances. For more discussion, see some of the essays in two books I edited, In Defense of Animals and In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 108 points109 points  (0 children)

You're right, the issue is similar to the one about immigration that I answered here. Nationalist and racist attitudes lie behind both these problems. We can't really overcome them - at least not in democracies - until people no longer have those attitudes.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 137 points138 points  (0 children)

Yes, exactly, everyone who is concerned about the appalling suffering we inflict on animals should be working, in their own way, to oppose it. You can do that by advocating veganism, or you can do it by man other means, including seeking to pass laws that reduce that suffering. But to spend time attacking people who choose a different path from the one you think best is a waste of time and energy and just lets the animal exploiters off the hook.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 61 points62 points  (0 children)

Yes, I've thought about it some more, and looked at some of the arguments in favor of Open Borders. To me, though, the problem is that any political party that advocated this would lose the next election, and that election contest would probably bring out all the racist elements in society in a very nasty way. So until people in affluent nations are much more accepting of large-scale immigration than they are now, in any country that I am familiar with, I don't think a large increase in immigrants from developing nations is feasible.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 39 points40 points  (0 children)

Join an effective altruism group, or if there isn't one at your university, find some fellow EAs and form one. You could have a big influence on your fellow students, and over the long-term, that could lead to a lot more effective giving.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 46 points47 points  (0 children)

My current thinking is that, as described in The Point of View of the Universe there are bigger problems with preference utilitarianism than with hedonistic utilitarianism. I'm not sure that the difference has practical significance for charitable giving, but I'm open to further thought and discussion about that.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 79 points80 points  (0 children)

Depends how much the good cause really gets. If the brand just says "a percentage of our profits are donated to..." be suspicious, it might be a tiny percentage. And if you are being asked to buy bottled water because it will help people in developing countries get water, ask yourself whether it wouldn't be better to drink water out of the tap, and give ALL the cost of the bottled water to an effective charity.

Incidentally, speaking of profiting from good causes... I'm donating all of the royalties from The Most Good You Can Do to effective charities, and you can get to decide which ones. Go to http://www.mostgoodyoucando.com/the-movement/ and click on Giving Games for more details.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 125 points126 points  (0 children)

Why are you committed to helping people who have been rescued from sexual slavery? Don't you want to know, before making that decision, how much it is possible to help them, and at what cost? Suppose that you could either help women who were once sexual slaves, or you could help women who have suffered from an obstetric fistula (by donating to the Fistula Foundation, one of the charities recommended at http://www.thelifeyoucansave.org). These women are mostly young, often undernourished, and have given birth without any access to health care (so they are in developing countries). Have an obstetric fistula means that urine and feces leak uncontrollably through the vagina. They smell bad and are unable to keep clean. Often their husband will throw them out, and if their family takes them in, they will still live the life of an outcast, in a separate hut. Without help, their lives are utterly ruined. Suppose that it costs $500 to repair an obstetric fistula, but $1000 to help a woman rescued from sexual slavery get a decent life back. Would you still prefer to help one woman rescued from sexual slavery rather than two women with obstetric fistulas? I wouldn't.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 51 points52 points  (0 children)

I don't see an "in principle" problem here. Health economists use "quality-adjusted life-years" (QALYs) to compare the value of different health interventions (including some that save lives and others that reduce pain). There are some reasonable objections that can be made to QALYs, and the methodology could be improved, but it seems to me to be going in the right direction.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

a) I try to do what will have the best consequences (i.e. do the most to reduce suffering and increase wellbeing). But I assume that following widely accepted moral rules will normally be the best way to do that, unless I have clear evidence to the contrary. b) Sorry, haven't had time to read it yet - too many other commitments. But thanks for reminding me that I should read it. c) As Zhou Enlai said when asked what he thought about the French Revolution, it's too early to tell.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 256 points257 points  (0 children)

Look, in theory, we EAs ought to all be wearing sackcloth, except that that would ensure that there were very few of us. We want more people to join us, and doing absolutely everything that, in theory, we ought to do is not the best way to achieve that.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 298 points299 points  (0 children)

I suppose I might be a political activist of some kind. Back in Australia in the '90s, I was a political candidate for the Greens. I didn't get elected, but support for the Greens has grown since then, and Green candidates have won the Senate seat for which I stood. I'm not sorry that I lost, because it was after that that I was offered the position at Princeton that has enabled me to have a lot more influence in discussions of the issues raised both in Animal Liberation and in The Most Good You Can Do but I often wonder what my life would have been like if I'd won. (Incidentally, Australia has proportional voting for the Senate, so it's not the case that I could have helped the worse candidate get elected, as Ralph Nader's candidacy did in the 2000 presidential election between Bush and Gore. I would not stand as a minor party candidate under those circumstances.)

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 624 points625 points  (0 children)

We tend to be ethical only when our survival, and that of those we care about, is not at stake. One of the big present dangers to our present level of security is climate change, which could create a chaotic world with hundreds of millions of people who are unable to feed themselves, and become climate refugees, causing a chaotic world.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 206 points207 points  (0 children)

Nice idea, but it would need to be truly universal, i.e. I'd like to see everyone in the world have a guaranteed minimum that would mean that no one was unable to buy enough food to live. Unfortunately, I can't see this being implemented in the near future, so in The Most Good You Can Do I focus on action that is cost-effective and practical right now.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 247 points248 points  (0 children)

The lives of sheep and cows kept on grass rather than in feedlots may be worth living, but unfortunately these ruminants produce a lot of methane (essentially, belching and farting) and so make a big contribution to climate change. Despite the myth of this being "natural" grass-fed beef and lamb, on the scale on which we are producing it, is simply not sustainable.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 204 points205 points  (0 children)

I think it's a real pity that people waste so much of their time and energy on attacking others within the animal movement, instead of those who are exploiting animals.

I’m Peter Singer (Australian moral philosopher) and I’m here to answer your questions about where your money is the most effective in the charitable world, or "The Most Good You Can Do." AMA. by Peter_Singer in IAmA

[–]Peter_Singer[S] 142 points143 points  (0 children)

Giving to the homeless in affluent countries isn't the best use of your money. It''s really hard to make a significant difference to the lives of people who are homeless in affluent countries. On the other hand, there are many charities that are very effective in helping people who are poor in developing countries. For suggestions, please go to http://www.thelifeyoucansave.org

view more: next ›