In addition to the usual problems with utilitarianism, I am particularly concerned by its epistemic naïveity (esp. in longtermism), use as corporate whitewash, and emptiness in addressing meaningful structural change. [Amia Srinivasan's review](https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v37/n18/amia-srinivasan/stop-the-robot-apocalypse) of _Doing Good Better_ captures this well:

"[E]ffective altruism, so far at least, has been a conservative movement, calling us back to where we already are: the world as it is, our institutions as they are. MacAskill does not address the deep sources of global misery – international trade and finance, debt, nationalism, imperialism, racial and gender-based subordination, war, environmental degradation, corruption, exploitation of labour – or the forces that ensure its reproduction. Effective altruism doesn’t try to understand how power works, except to better align itself with it. In this sense it leaves everything just as it is. This is no doubt comforting to those who enjoy the status quo – and may in part account for the movement’s success."

The entire review is well worth a read if you are interested in EA and ethics.

#effectivealtruism, #longtermism, #ethics, #ftx, #power