Caleb Ontiveros

Doing Good Better: Review

If you are reading this review, chances are you in the richest 10% of the world. Luckily, like me, you probably live in a rich country and make more than $16,000 a year. With our money and time we can make a significant difference to the world.

, co-founder of Giving What We Can, argues that we “should expect to be able to do at least one hundred times as much to benefit other people as you can to benefit yourself” (p. 23). This is because recent studies documenting the relationship between subjective well-being and income suggest that the doubling of income will always increase subjective well-being by the same amount. Hence an extra $28,000 for the typical American wage earner already making $28,000 will increase her subjective well-being as much as an extra $220 would for a poor Indian farmer. MacAskill calls this remarkable idea the 100x Multiplier. 

We can do 100x more good for others than for ourselves.

But how? There are, after all, so very many different ways we could spend our time and money. Should one make as much money as one can and donate a significant portion of it? Where should one donate to? Or should one work for an NGO? Which one?

 introduces a framework to think about and answer these sorts of questions. In particular, it explains and defends the idea of effective altruism. Effective Altruism starts with asking “How can I make the biggest difference possible?” and then applies careful reasoning and evidence to find an answer.

According to MacAskill, there are five key questions that characterize the thinking of an effective altruist. Suppose we are thinking of choosing a particular cause, charity, or career with the goal of making a significant difference. First, an effective altruist may ask 

how many people benefit from me doing this, and by how much

? Second, even if an activity is beneficial it may be that other activities are better, hence 

we should ask whether this is the most effective thing we can do

. This question is made pressing by the observation that some charities, careers, or causes are much better and more effective than others. For example, MacAskill compares health programs like treating Kaposi’s sarcoma (a cancer that afflicts many with HIV and which tends to cause purple tumors on the skin and mouth) to groups that provide bed nets to combat malaria. He finds that supporting a group like the 

 is 500 hundred times more effective then treating Kaposi’s sarcoma. This is largely due to the ease, low-cost, and success of providing bed nets.

. If an area is neglected, one’s efforts will have a much greater impact since the most effective activities, the low-hanging fruit as it were, have not been realized yet. On the other hand, for non-neglected causes the low-hanging fruit has typically already been picked and so by spending one’s time or money on these non-neglected causes one will be making less of a difference than one could have by doing something else. Fourth, an effective altruist will be concerned about 

. For example, if you are considering doing good as an aid worker, you do not just want to look at the lives that would directly improve, but what would happen if you do not become an aid worker. Perhaps, someone would have taken your position and done a better job than you would—or perhaps you are especially suited to work as an aid worker since you have an unique ability to focus on making the organization more effective. Or it may be there is just too much uncertainty about what would happen if you do not work as an aid worker. What matters is that thinking about what would have happened otherwise is important in figuring out how to make the biggest difference. An effective altruist will not want to do what would have happened anyway (because the focus is on doing the most good) nor will they want to pass up an opportunity where they are especially suited to make an impact.

what the chances of success are and how good success would be

. Here MacAskill introduces the notion of expected value. Calculating expected value concerns looking at all the outcomes, their value, and the probability of them obtaining. If we are considering flipping a coin and I get $2 when it comes up heads, but lose $1 when it comes up tails, then the expected value flipping the coin is 50¢ because (50% x $2) + (50% x -$1) = 50¢. What this shows is that sometimes working on something which has a low chance of occurring but which would be really good if it did occur can be better than doing good things which have a high-chance of occurring. For example, one might think that it is better to go into politics than to become a doctor even if one knows that it is likely that one could be a doctor but unlikely that one will be a successful politician.

With these five questions of effective altruism in hand, MacAskill goes on to evaluate particular charities, causes, and careers. He argues that we should tend to doubt the effectiveness of domestic charities. One chapter is entitled “The Moral Case for Sweatshop Goods.” He also doubts the efficacy of “green living,” suggesting that it is 

 to offset one’s greenhouse emissions by supporting effective organizations that work on reducing emissions in general.

Needless to say, there is disagreement in the effective altruist community about which causes are the most effective and important. MacAskill lays out the debate between causes that many effective altruists find promising: extreme poverty interventions, US criminal justice reform, international labor mobility, reducing factory farming, climate change interventions, and preventing or addressing global catastrophic risks. In evaluating these causes he focuses on three markers of effectiveness: scale (what is the magnitude of the problem?), neglectedness (is this cause in need of more resources than other causes?), and tractability (can I help make significant progress on this problem?). You might not agree with all of MacAskill’s analysis. For example, I doubt that US criminal justice reform is as tractable as extreme poverty interventions, but I look forward to 

 on the topic. I am also hesitant of his analysis, cautious though it is, of two excellent organizations: 

Central to MacAskill’s approach, and the approach of effective altruism in general, is the combination of critical thinking, open-mindedness, and compassion.

 Effective altruists care about doing good for others and because of this they want to figure out how to do the most good for others. This demands reasoning carefully about different causes and also demands an open-mind—dogma and ideology will not do. Hence, friendly and evidence-based disagreement with an eye toward progress is welcomed. Doing Good Better is a model for thinking about and making progress in these debates.

I would happily recommend this book to anyone interested in making the world a better place. It is the best book of its sort.

Peter Singer's The Most Good You Can Do

, is now out in both the US and the UK. Visit the website for the book 

 and take part in the giving game to decide which effective charities the profits from selling the book get donated to - and encourage your friends to do the same - 

 presents the following case: suppose you can choose to visit an art museum. On one option, you will see the museum and visit an enticing new wing while on the other option you will see the museum without visiting the new wing. However, there is an evil demon that despises the new wing and so inflicts fifteen years of blindness on one random person out of every hundred people who visit the new wing. Would you visit the new wing? Definitely not!

If you wouldn’t then you are suggesting that the harm of fifteen years of blindness outweighs the benefit of one hundred people visiting the new wing. Now suppose you can make a donation to a museum that will allow one hundred people to see a new wing or donate to a charity that prevents fifteen years of blindness—which should you donate to?

These questions are of central importance to effective altruists. Effective altruism is a philosophy and social movement which applies evidence and reason to working out the most effective ways to improve the world. Singer’s book 

 serves as a fine introduction to the emerging movement. The book is divided into four sections: the first defines and offers a backdrop for effective altruism, the second considers how to do the most good, the third focuses motivation and justification, and the fourth discusses choosing causes and organizations.

Aiming to do the most good, many effective altruists live fairly modestly and give the rest of their income to effective charities. One may 

, that is, attempt to make a very high income in order to give that income away. For example, by 

 one can save hundreds of lives. Others may 

 that others give and effectively make the world a better place. Promoting or working for groups like Giving What We Can, or even making an effective altruism meet-up could be a fantastic way to spread effective altruist ideas, and so make the world a better place through advocacy. Similarly, one may 

 causes or organizations in order to assess how effective they may be. Other promising routes include working as a 

, directing funds to the most effective projects, or starting an effective organization.

One of the best aspects of the book is that Singer focuses on actual people who carry out these strategies. 

These goals are not unattainable nor do they demand burdensome sacrifices

. Nonetheless, one may worry that behaving as an effective altruist is too much of a sacrifice. Happily, however, 

effective altruists take joy in their altruistic projects

 and find doing good, as do most people, sincerely rewarding and meaningful. As Singer states, “We can regard people as altruists because of the kind of interests they have rather than because they are sacrificing their interests” (103).

Why should one be an effective altruist? Many altruists see it as a moral matter: we can give to others, without damaging our own lives in the process, in order to save lives—shouldn’t we do this? And 

shouldn’t we save as many lives and prevent as much suffering as we can

? Singer and many others have, and continue to, persuasively argue that the answer to both questions is yes. But there are other reasons to be an effective altruist: as mentioned, most people find that doing good promotes meaning and happiness in their lives and others. This is illustrated by the altruists who “walk cheerfully over the world.”

But, if we are to give, where should we give to? What causes or organizations do the most good? Can we make judgements about what charities do more good than others? The initial case involving the new wing of a museum suggests that we can. We can compare the good of donating to a museum or to a charity which prevents blindness.

There will, however, be less clear cases. Effective altruists tend to be concerned about global poverty and health, animal welfare, and existential risk. They want to decrease the suffering of human and nonhuman animals as well as prevent the extinction of sentient life. There is much debate between effective altruists about which of these causes are the most important—where can we do the most good? Singer provides an excellent introduction to the nuances of this debate, though people who are familiar with and active within the community will find little new here.

Those who are not familiar with effective altruism will benefit greatly from this book. It is exceptionally lucid, engaging, and careful. Singer helpfully addresses some of the most prevalent concerns people tend to have about effective altruism and persuasively argues why it is such an important movement. I would encourage anyone who is unfamiliar with or who would like to know more about effective altruism to read this book. Similarly, those who want to peak others interest in effective altruism would do well to recommend or give this book to others.

 largely conveys ideas that many effective altruists will be familiar with. Nonetheless, I would still suggest that people already very familiar with effective altruism read the book. It is 

brilliantly inspiring and provides an excellent model for how to present effective altruist ideas

Effective Altruism makes for an exciting movement and The Most Good You Can Do should propel this excitement as the movement grows.

Caleb Ontiveros

Articles

Doing Good Better: Review

Peter Singer's The Most Good You Can Do