Hi Glenn. I hope you read this. I have a PhD and I have studied nine languages and dreamt in three. I read about 200 books a year. I wouldn't call myself intellectually lazy, and yet I very much enjoy Jeff Tiedrich's substack. He obviously reads the news compulsively (oh boy!)and he collects any developments that reflect badly on the MAGA movement. He documents and links to everything he presents in his sub stack, and if he makes a mistake, he issues a correction. Like thousands, I find his writing style highly entertaining.
I'm not going to Jeff for novel insights on our rapidly developing culture. I'm going to Jeff as an effective and highly entertaining news aggregator, who has helped me understand more about the pathology of MAGA and the inadequacy of the MSM.
Even though I subscribe to and read the NYT, the WaPo, AP, and the Economist on a daily basis, Jeff keeps me up to speed on the sewers in which Mega dwells. He goes places that I really rather not have to go myself.
BTW, I agree that with you that GW Bush hasn't received enough appreciation for saving millions of lives in Africa from the AIDS epidemic.
I agree that Bush has not been given his due on the assistance re: AIDS. Might’ve been overlooked by those of us watching in horror at what he and Cheney wrought in Iraq
what if there were about 20 million different children drowning in a ridiculously big pond, but you only have the agency to help one child? would it be your own child, kinda dangerously struggling swimming right now, calling for your help? would it be the foreign kid you don't like anyways, 300 meters out, currently actively drowning?
would it be any of the other kids, by some weird mechanism all lined up in inverse according to distance to yourself and gravity of their issues?
Guess what? 🥇🥇🥇Jeff Tiedrich was recognized by Frank Bruni 🥇🥇🥇
in "For the Love of Senences" feature.
Regarding the gubernatorial race in North Carolina, Jeff wrote: “Sorry, Republicans, it looks like you’re going to be forced to carry Mark Robinson to term — even if doing so endangers the life of your party.” (nominated by Linda Edmundson, Cranston, R.I.)
I look at the SBF crap a lot like I do rampant messes within the Catholic church. The bad behavior of a whole lot of the leadership does not invalidate Christian morality. But it does point out how it’s application can go terribly wrong
What's your actual response to the initial argument? It seems pretty similar to a common anti-utilitarian argument that it's difficult, if not-impossible, to objectively gauge the utility of various actions. This is exacerbated by dishonest actors.
Or what's the response to the other arguments? Isn't it possible that domination by outsiders is worse than those outsiders allowing a community to die? And what if you can only help some people and by doing so you do create a hierarchy that leads to more suffering later on?
My view is that these questions are usually asked in bad-faith and the questioner just doesn't want to feel obligated to do anything. Or they feel self-conscious about their altruistic choices. Intellectually I know that my donation to the senior cat shelter would be more effective going to mosquito nets in Africa, but emotionally I think of those cute whiskers and sad eyes. But the questions could still be answered.
This is a ridiculous argument. If you decide to send money to a cat charity, then send your money. If you want to give kids in South America food and education, send your money. If you decide that God wants you to move to Asia to give aid and preach the Gospel, then go. Your priorities are yours, alone.
But in everything, balance your ideas and wishes with the inherent value of who you are supporting, understanding that you do not have to totally understand the cultural differences, but you do need to be aware that they exist and account for them.
Do NOT let this head fake (colonialism, cultural differences, whatever) freeze you into inaction. There is a kid in Bolivia that wants to go to law school, and I will do what I can to help (which is not much). There is a professor in South Sudan that is helping his country through hard times, because a whole lot of people gave of their time and money to give him opportunities for an education (and survival).
The counter-argument is sophistry (which is just a fancy way of calling BS).
Hey Kevin, thanks for responding (and responding to yourself).
I'm not sure if I expressed myself clearly.
I understand that my priorities are my own, but the drowning child argument is meant for me to reevaluate my priorities. So I wanted to understand it and the counterarguments better.
The colonialism argument is more that meddling in exotic places can lead to long term issues. For example, what if the professor in South Sudan is Dinka and believes that the best way to help his country through hard times is to fund Dinka institutions until they can dominate Nuer institutions? Long term, directing external support to only one ethnic group could cause suffering than is prevented.
And I understand that a lot of anti-EA arguments are sophistry, either by people that don't want to do charity or don't want to question their charitable giving (like funding cat surgery). But since there's sophistry, there should be good responses.
First. Major props for knowing Dinka vs Nuer tribes! Yes, we did have to learn that, and one of the projects the prof wanted to do back in Sudan wasn’t able to work because of inter-tribe conflict.
I don’t want to say that those arguments are invalid (so ‘sophistry’ was not a good term), but such arguments should not be considered as anything but instructive for future decisions. Those who are wise listen to multiple counselors, so the best response would be, “Thank you for your insights. You’ve given me something to think about.” And then, act.
Not so fun fact. My great grandfather, a father to a young son and another on the way was with his little brother swimming and another person and the little brother started to drown and my great grandfather attempted to rescue him and they both ended up drowning. This ended up causing a lot of generational pain and poverty to that part of my family. Yet at the time I’m sure it was unthinkable in his mind not to try. There are just no simple answers to these kind of moral dilemmas. In the long run it would have been better for his widow and children if he hadn’t but I doubt he could have lived with himself for the rest of his life.
There's a lot of good stuff here and it reads like an academic textbook.
If that's not the goal, please read some Stephen Pinker and then his style book. It's possible to be intellectually thorough and entertaining at the same.
You should stop writing this blog. Instead listen and learn
Hi Glenn. I hope you read this. I have a PhD and I have studied nine languages and dreamt in three. I read about 200 books a year. I wouldn't call myself intellectually lazy, and yet I very much enjoy Jeff Tiedrich's substack. He obviously reads the news compulsively (oh boy!)and he collects any developments that reflect badly on the MAGA movement. He documents and links to everything he presents in his sub stack, and if he makes a mistake, he issues a correction. Like thousands, I find his writing style highly entertaining.
I'm not going to Jeff for novel insights on our rapidly developing culture. I'm going to Jeff as an effective and highly entertaining news aggregator, who has helped me understand more about the pathology of MAGA and the inadequacy of the MSM.
Even though I subscribe to and read the NYT, the WaPo, AP, and the Economist on a daily basis, Jeff keeps me up to speed on the sewers in which Mega dwells. He goes places that I really rather not have to go myself.
BTW, I agree that with you that GW Bush hasn't received enough appreciation for saving millions of lives in Africa from the AIDS epidemic.
"I have studied nine languages and dreamt in three" is a beautiful phrase.
I agree that Bush has not been given his due on the assistance re: AIDS. Might’ve been overlooked by those of us watching in horror at what he and Cheney wrought in Iraq
what if there were about 20 million different children drowning in a ridiculously big pond, but you only have the agency to help one child? would it be your own child, kinda dangerously struggling swimming right now, calling for your help? would it be the foreign kid you don't like anyways, 300 meters out, currently actively drowning?
would it be any of the other kids, by some weird mechanism all lined up in inverse according to distance to yourself and gravity of their issues?
Guess what? 🥇🥇🥇Jeff Tiedrich was recognized by Frank Bruni 🥇🥇🥇
in "For the Love of Senences" feature.
Regarding the gubernatorial race in North Carolina, Jeff wrote: “Sorry, Republicans, it looks like you’re going to be forced to carry Mark Robinson to term — even if doing so endangers the life of your party.” (nominated by Linda Edmundson, Cranston, R.I.)
https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/dynamic/render?campaign_id=93&emc=edit_fb_20240926&instance_id=135336&isViewInBrowser=true&nl=frank-bruni&paid_regi=1®i_id=191440926&segment_id=178904&te=1&uri=nyt://newsletter/48a77125-32c9-56cd-8582-b3cb27de45c3&user_id=ce1478ce2e51de14ed53104496dd6d2c
Wasn’t that delicious?
😂😂😂 My sarcasm meter nearly broke, well played
I look at the SBF crap a lot like I do rampant messes within the Catholic church. The bad behavior of a whole lot of the leadership does not invalidate Christian morality. But it does point out how it’s application can go terribly wrong
A fascinating fact about EA is that while being often quite crazy, it is mostly about trying to put rationality into woke identitarianism.
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/r3f45au7ewEkypygf/wokism-rethinking-priorities-and-the-bostrom-case
I hope you don't mind that I shared these devastating criticisms with Suno, and now there is an anti-EA anthem, 'Crypto Fraud':
https://suno.com/song/58cd4741-c9f8-4e2f-81e5-1bea9c1a9f18
I won't do the emotional labour of explaining to you why you're wrong.
The author refuses to stay in xir's lane, and I'm here for it
I was going to comment and then, decided against it.
What's your actual response to the initial argument? It seems pretty similar to a common anti-utilitarian argument that it's difficult, if not-impossible, to objectively gauge the utility of various actions. This is exacerbated by dishonest actors.
Or what's the response to the other arguments? Isn't it possible that domination by outsiders is worse than those outsiders allowing a community to die? And what if you can only help some people and by doing so you do create a hierarchy that leads to more suffering later on?
My view is that these questions are usually asked in bad-faith and the questioner just doesn't want to feel obligated to do anything. Or they feel self-conscious about their altruistic choices. Intellectually I know that my donation to the senior cat shelter would be more effective going to mosquito nets in Africa, but emotionally I think of those cute whiskers and sad eyes. But the questions could still be answered.
This is a ridiculous argument. If you decide to send money to a cat charity, then send your money. If you want to give kids in South America food and education, send your money. If you decide that God wants you to move to Asia to give aid and preach the Gospel, then go. Your priorities are yours, alone.
But in everything, balance your ideas and wishes with the inherent value of who you are supporting, understanding that you do not have to totally understand the cultural differences, but you do need to be aware that they exist and account for them.
Do NOT let this head fake (colonialism, cultural differences, whatever) freeze you into inaction. There is a kid in Bolivia that wants to go to law school, and I will do what I can to help (which is not much). There is a professor in South Sudan that is helping his country through hard times, because a whole lot of people gave of their time and money to give him opportunities for an education (and survival).
The counter-argument is sophistry (which is just a fancy way of calling BS).
Hey Kevin, thanks for responding (and responding to yourself).
I'm not sure if I expressed myself clearly.
I understand that my priorities are my own, but the drowning child argument is meant for me to reevaluate my priorities. So I wanted to understand it and the counterarguments better.
The colonialism argument is more that meddling in exotic places can lead to long term issues. For example, what if the professor in South Sudan is Dinka and believes that the best way to help his country through hard times is to fund Dinka institutions until they can dominate Nuer institutions? Long term, directing external support to only one ethnic group could cause suffering than is prevented.
And I understand that a lot of anti-EA arguments are sophistry, either by people that don't want to do charity or don't want to question their charitable giving (like funding cat surgery). But since there's sophistry, there should be good responses.
First. Major props for knowing Dinka vs Nuer tribes! Yes, we did have to learn that, and one of the projects the prof wanted to do back in Sudan wasn’t able to work because of inter-tribe conflict.
I don’t want to say that those arguments are invalid (so ‘sophistry’ was not a good term), but such arguments should not be considered as anything but instructive for future decisions. Those who are wise listen to multiple counselors, so the best response would be, “Thank you for your insights. You’ve given me something to think about.” And then, act.
Wow. Triggered much, Kevin?
Not so fun fact. My great grandfather, a father to a young son and another on the way was with his little brother swimming and another person and the little brother started to drown and my great grandfather attempted to rescue him and they both ended up drowning. This ended up causing a lot of generational pain and poverty to that part of my family. Yet at the time I’m sure it was unthinkable in his mind not to try. There are just no simple answers to these kind of moral dilemmas. In the long run it would have been better for his widow and children if he hadn’t but I doubt he could have lived with himself for the rest of his life.
I laughed at this or something
I love the sarcasm. https://marlowe1.substack.com/p/the-day-the-pig-fell-into-the-well
I get it now. Good and bad are unknowable.
There's a lot of good stuff here and it reads like an academic textbook.
If that's not the goal, please read some Stephen Pinker and then his style book. It's possible to be intellectually thorough and entertaining at the same.