Effective Altruism | Beth Barnes | TEDxExeter

------
Effective altruism is a growing social movement founded on the desire to make the world as good a place as it can be, the use of evidence and reason to find out how to do so, and the audacity to actually try. This video explains some of the core ideas of effective altruism and discusses some of the ways we can fix the world's biggest problems.
Read more here: www.effectivealtruism.org/ www.effectivealtruism.org/
TEDxExeter 2015 took the long view both back into the past and ahead into the future. We asked our speakers to help us understand the challenges that face us now - how they shape the way we live, make decisions, and innovate.
Video Production Chromatrope (chromatrope.co.uk/ chromatrope.co.uk/)
Production Manager Andy Robertson ( / familygamertv / familygamertv )
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at ted.com/tedx ted.com/tedx

[@TobiasLeenaert12]

thank you for your wonderful talk. your passion for caring shines through. good luck

[@bethbarnes5345]

You can see the references and calculations for the talk here: docs.google.com/document/d/1iIdA7PnjSVQAv6E75QWocmCeq62lU2YUwOz1pVlY42Q/edit?usp=sharing

[@effectivealtruism312]

+Beth Barnes Great video. I wonder how you'd respond to criticisms by Angus Deaton or Bill Easterly that aid in fact does more harm than good? Deaton for example says that giving more or tithing is not the solution. Instead if you want to do the most good, then go to Washington (or whatever the political capital of your country is). Please take a look at this other video on Effective Altruism *The Price of Saving a Life ... is $3,340* and leave a comment.

[@ChrisWaterguy]

+Effective Altruism Bill Easterly is much more nuanced than that. He argues that grand plans do more harm than good, and that targeted programs solving specific problems can be effective. Which sounds a lot like some of GiveWell's top charities. (I don't know Deaton.)

[@DoctorFastest]

+Effective Altruism Chris Watkins is right. Easterly and Deaton both have important and valid criticisms of some of the ways that foreign aid gets used. However, neither of them raises significant arguments against the types of activities focused on by top EA charities. Here is a link to a GiveWell post discussing this very issue: blog.givewell.org/2015/11/06/the-lack-of-controversy-over-well-targeted-aid/

[@dadt8009]

The current most viewed YT video is Depacito at 6.6 billions, and that is near 180k times more than this video. We should get the Depacito singers on board Effective Altruism and ask them to talk about it.

[@effct]

Marvelous talk, Beth! Thank you!

[@AkilnathanLogeswaranX]

Amazing talk, well done Beth!

[@djanzzdjanzz1459]

Beth you're awesome!!

[@demoversion4375]

A great introduction to the topic! Very inspiring..

[@kylewalker3685]

Good thing Sach's Millenium Cities project worked out so well (not to mention his trainwreck in Russia). We should probably take more of his advice!

[@awaresoul1389]

Beautiful speach!! Hope people stop using differences as a weapon for personal gain.

[@wrayy10]

Absolutely wonderful presentation Beth. Keep up the great work!

[@charityentrepreneurship6301]

Great talk!

[@Dandidodos]

I absolutely love this talk!

[@alexsorto8100]

"out of poverty" figures are silly. Poverty is a very complex social issue that wont be fixed by throwing money at them.

[@susananderson5029]

Very fine!

[@sebastianfox1424]

excellent

[@stillnesssolutions]

Nice talk!

[@TheEternalOuroboros]

But it’s not as simple as donating money. We have given to charities before and the third world countries’ leaders take it for themselves. What are we to do about that?

[@vascoamaralgrilo]

Thanks!

[@mindset_kanal]

Great!

[@graemethorne4540]

But who takes care of the billions of dollars that is donated ,or would it just end up like FTX donating to governments'or there own account Of shore somewhere??.

[@mas-udal-hassan9277]

lmao 🤣 🤣

[@riser9644]

Effective altruism taken to extreme becomes a way to hord power

[@dancedancedance2458]

This was really illuminating. Thank you very much!

[@o_gabrielsales]

Comment in this video its the best charity you can give today.

[@free510]

i really like her talk and her enthusiasm but we live in a jungle

[@leohumbarelly861]

I fell for her.

[@marksteve8373]

Dreams...

[@lailaabdelaziz9853]

Here's a novel idea--tax the rich

[@MartinLichtblau]

I am with you, but if you take the money out of the system: 1. it can't be reinvested 2. has unpredictable consequences And it's not all about money. But yes, if that were the case it would be as easy as said.

[@asthmatictuna]

How is redirecting investment taking money out of the system?

[@juanortiz5808]

help with money from others

[@jomoeiviem7619]

Like taxes?

[@JE-ee7cd]

😊👍

[@MrMikkyn]

I know this isn’t Christianity, but it reminds me of Christianity.

[@caseymckenzie4760]

IT'S A TRAP!

[@victorcosta5120]

Why not just tax every worker on a global scale....a global charity tax a tax that goes yearly to these individualized charities

[@katykt3010]

If it is required then it's A) not altruistic B) going to be met with major (probably violent) opposition

[@mas-udal-hassan9277]

lol 😂 😆 🤣

[@sarahs.3094]

Sam bankman f*** this movement

[@avadakedavra80]

Hate to be that guy: Assumption here is, if people give more (effectively) it will solve the problems. That is too idealistic and not well tested! That doesn't take into account 1) real reasons for poverty 2) choices people make against their own well-being 2) fairness to donors 3) misuse of charity by many (even poor) that breeds resentment among informed donors, 4) a very REAL nature of MAJORITY (if NOT ALL) of the humans to receive something in return (benefit, pleasure, good feeling, recognition, favors). We have tried making societies based on charity, altruism, for millennia. It hasn't worked that well, especially it doesn't work well when there is competition for resources, i.e it doesn't work well in the poverty stricken area. Leave the 1st world bubble and go see/live in a poor area where people have to compete for basic needs. You'll understand how the primal survival instinct takes over, and altruism is limited to one's kin, family, or tribe. I think the solution to our human problem is something else. I am still thinking about it. I think it will involve education, teaching life skills, teaching mutually beneficial co-operation, teaching the benefits of giving forward.... I don't know... I am still thinking. But whatever is the solution it HAS to be compatible the very REAL nature of MAJORITY of the humans to receive something in return (benefit, pleasure, good feeling, recognition, favors). If you forget that, then your ideals will fall like the ideals of communism.

[@elliotgreen9642]

I don't quite understand? We can still be human and show compassion at every moment of the day, whilst still making an effort to be as effective as possible when doing good? It's about comparing different ways of giving back and choosing the most effective ones. I notice this was written a year ago - I wonder if you are still 'thinking' of a better way to save the world or if you have spent that time actually using your resources to do as much good as you can? Just food for thought.. no offence intended!

[@MartinLichtblau]

Yes: Fixing symptoms != Solving causes And it's not all about money. But still, they EA folks are good people, and we have to work together. Yet they should push their effectiveness arguments too hard since that may offend many other existing altruistic actors.

[@iche9373]

The solution is world socialism

[@neilb13]

Good talk, very inspiring, but as we click the link to visit the mentioned charity's the top 10% are laughing at us on their billion dollar yachts.

[@stillnesssolutions]

Well, then it's on us to be part of a movement that helps them to see how they could spend their money differently.

[@jonathanerickson1543]

Why do they have to be the ones to give money. True altruists do not care about the choices others are making, only themselves.

[@Mr.LaughingDuck]

Couple EA w/ Effective Financial Transparency, and then maybe this idealistic joke of a philosophy will avoid future hacks like Sam Bankman-Fried. Still, can't wait for Netflix's doc on you clowns lol

[@theredknight6583]

someone send this to elon

[@theboomandbang1]

"Giving money to charity makes you happier then spending it on yourself." Ah haa! Gotcha. Putting the needs above others that you do not love (unless you do in which case, do help others) even for the sake of creating a better world is a very poor motivation. Happiness can only come from within but that doesn't mean helping others at the cost of your time and effort is frowned upon. If you truly do want to help someone by giving money or generally helping them then do. But self sacrifice, personal rejection for the supposed belief that the world will be better at the cost of your happiness and/or will is counter productive and can be quite dangerous given the right circumstances. Focus on you as a human being, love yourself and express your love unto others that you admire for their beliefs and values, not from an obligation standpoint.

[@jazzianful]

+theboomandbang1 I'm not reallys ure I understand: "is counter productive and can be quite dangerous" - counter productive and dangerous to what?

[@theboomandbang1]

Ian Mikyska Actually dude my view has changed. I was interested in Ayn Rand's take on altruism, basically she claims it is evil because you're putting others needs in from of yours through self sacrifice an this is considered the greatest reason to live ( for others). But then I hear that altruism is not this but rather just simply heloping each other....so now i'm confused. Can you help me out on this issue? What is altruism? Is it really positive?

[@JamesTindaleArt]

+theboomandbang1 Ayn Rand is right - what you are dealing with is the difference between altruism and benevolence. May I suggest you watch a bit of 'Milton Friedman - Free to choose' and if you haven't already - read 'Atlas Shrugged'. Any Rand's philosophy is the basis of our modern economy. An economy that has brought more wealth and freedom to more individuals than any previous social system. If we interrupt it's invisible process, we interrupt the freedom we have all individually worked for.

[@theboomandbang1]

James Tindale I'll get to that when I can but dude, would you kindly tell me what altruism is, in your words? Google def: disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others. Buddhism: helping others (generally). I'm a little lost on who to believe. if our economy is based off Rand's philosophy, why haven't we explored more of her work? made references, discuss in length over social network sites?

[@JamesTindaleArt]

theboomandbang1 In the animal kingdom altruism is when an individual member of the collective (a herd, ant colony etc.) instinctually places the well being of one or more of its collective members above it's own well being, in order to protect the survival of others (that's the definition). This was a challenge for Charles Darwin to explain, as the origin of species focused on "survival of the fittest individual (most adapted to its environment)" altruism it seems should not play a role here. Richard Dawkins hits it on the head however, by observing that the genes of the collective, although not exactly the same as the individual in question, do share a majority of gene similarity and hence it is worth while for individual members of the collective to occasionally sacrifice themselves for the benefit/continuation of the collective. This is fine in the animal kingdom. Humans however are a different story. Yes we are animals but with a very special addition to the latter. We have developed consciousness. Our ability to count, read, conceptualise, vision our immediate future (calendar) are just a few examples of what I mean by consciousness (awareness of our actions). This changes everything - when a gazelle protects a member of its herd, it is not doing it consciously, it is doing it instinctively. We still have some of that instinct - when we see another human suffering in our immediate environment we tend to act like the gazelle, we instinctively want to help, whether we meet our deadline or not (self sacrifice). But thanks to our consciousness theres a new twist - ideals. Every dictatorship relies on the principal of altruism - but this is intellectualised altruism. I will discuss more if interested :)

[@zepedy2]

I hate to be negative but these kind of talks are fucking stupid. The richest 10% did not get there by giving 10% of there income away. So why even entertain the idea. This is not groundbreaking stuff right here, she basically just said with a bunch of money we can do a load of stuff. Speeches like this change nothing, and there are a million of them out there.

[@JamessChoice]

Probably not You're Probably not right ;)

[@mattsharp5999]

Probably not The richest 10% probably got there by being lucky enough to be born in a wealthy country. According to the following calculator, a single person in the UK earning just above minimum wage would count as being in the world's richest 10%: www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/how-rich-am-i Of course, asking people to give money away isn't a ground-breaking idea. But combining altruism with rationality and scientific evidence to actually achieve good outcomes *is* fairly ground-breaking. It is only in the past decade or so that the internet has allowed access to sufficient information on charity performance to ensure that we can support charities that make the biggest difference.

[@MrsFelixina]

Speeches like that made me donate my 10% this year. And I'm from 5% reachest (not for bragging).

[@AjaxEcthelion]

I'm also giving 10% of my income thanks to speeches like this. As a comfortably middle class Canadian, I fall well within the richest 10% globally.

[@TeaParty1776]

Now there is one word-a single word-which can blast the morality of altruism out of existence and which it cannot withstand-the word: “Why?” Why must man live for the sake of others? Why must he be a sacrificial animal? Why is that the good? There is no earthly reason for it-and, ladies and gentlemen, in the whole history of philosophy no earthly reason has ever been given....The social system based on and consonant with the altruist morality-with the code of self-sacrifice-is socialism, in all or any of its variants: fascism, Nazism, communism. All of them treat man as a sacrificial animal to be immolated for the benefit of the group, the tribe, the society, the state. Soviet Russia is the ultimate result, the final product, the full, consistent embodiment of the altruist morality in practice; it represents the only way that that morality can ever be practiced. -Ayn Rand

[@hanspeterqwe6620]

I was surprised to read such a comment, given how much I despise socialism myself. But it works the other way around: "Why not?" If you told me, that I'm not allowed to donate (I think you're not), you'd be imposing your agenda of a consumption based worldview. Because I would have to sacrifice the act of donating, because it goes against your worldview. But maybe I just like donating, because helping others is fun. Nobody is forcing anyone to do charity (yet?) Ayn Rand is from another time, maybe altruism only really existed in radical ways from his point of view? I mean all of Christianity would be kind of equal to Socialism otherwise? At least according to Jesus, it's all about helping the poor. But you still have a point. I will be thinking later today, how this might drift off into some form of radicalism.

[@TeaParty1776]

@@hanspeterqwe6620 > But it works the other way around: "Why not?" Prove that you did NOT murder somebody. It does not work the other way around. Claims must have evidence for the mind to identify the meaning of the claim. Claims without evidence, even invalid evidence,are mere faith, with no meaning, no referent ,no content. The mind functions by focusing onto reality. The mind cannot function, cannot identify and integrate perceptions when there are no perceptions (claims about reality) to identify and integrate. This disintegrates the mind, mans basic method of survival.

[@hanspeterqwe6620]

​@@TeaParty1776 Absolutely right. Now live by your own words and PROVE that altruism is basically socialism, beyond having FAITH in the quote of some person.

[@gnramires]

> "There is no earthly reason for it" Except there are, too many to count. (1) Improving the world improves our own lives. We are connected to the rest of the world. Eradicating poverty, making people's lives better, etc. increases security (less political instability and wars), increases economic development (because more people can contribute to social and technological development of our world) and improves environmental situation (pollution, climate crisis, etc.) (2) Other lives have value. Metaphysically, we should know that other lives have value as well -- the self is a cultural and evolutionary abstraction over a boundary of information processing. It makes metaphysical sense to assign value to other boundaries of self (including the whole interconnected world), as well as to other individual lives. Most people intuitively agree that you shouldn't torture others for no good reason -- the reality of the lives other than our own, which may suffer just as much as we do, is true. (3) Reciprocation principle. If you don't help other in principle, leading an ethical life, then you can't expect others to help you when you need (i.e. behave effectively altruistically). Conclusions from similar thought chains will be mirrored most of the time. So you should "give what you can", so you can expect others to help you when you need. Sooner or later you will need help of others. (4) Economically optimal. A world where creatures have the maximum chance of survival, and maximum economic productivity, is not one where individuals (or the system itself) are exclusively selfish/self-centered. By sharing resources and caring about the whole, the whole world improves and attains productivity and quality of existence that would not be possible otherwise -- by definition (i.e. having goals aligned with the whole is expected to improve the whole). The experiment has been run. The late 20th century was a period of cultivation of selfishness. We face a world in crises that can only be resolved, and existence can only reach the next level when we include in our motivation a desire for a better Earth, a better entire existence.

[@stuartstuart6080]

What a naive woman.

[@thehomeconstructiontoolcha857]

Grow up, Read Ayn Rand,

[@thehomeconstructiontoolcha857]

No

[@goyonman9655]

The irony of this vomment. Ayn Rand is philosophy for teenagers