Peter singer helped start the effective-altruism movement with a 2013 TED talk that has been viewed more than 1.1 million times. Effective altruists apply data and reason, rather than passion alone, to identify actions they can take and donations they can make that will accomplish as much good as possible.
This month, Mr. Singer, an ethicist at Princeton University, is releasing a new book about the movement, The Most Good You Can Do: How Effective Altruism Is Changing Ideas About Living Ethically. The book provides examples of people who have made conscious changes in how they lead their lives after embracing effective altruism, and it serves as Mr. Singer’s platform for explaining how philanthropy could change for the better. To get more money flowing to what he views as the most worthy charitable causes, such as groups trying to solve health and poverty in developing countries, Mr. Singer believes donors should cut back on the amount they give to other charities — including elite universities (even his employer) and arts organizations.
Here are excerpts from Mr. Singer’s talk with The Chronicle about the book:
What are interesting ways that people are doing “the most good” that they can?
Some people are trying to earn as much as possible can so they can donate as much as possible. There are people who are living modestly in order to be able to give more. ... Some are working as advocates for effective altruism — setting up organizations to get more people thinking about it. And there are a handful of people who are donating part of their body — generally a kidney — to help somebody who would otherwise have a miserable or shortened life.
You write that effective altruists are able to “take on the point of view of the universe.” How does that affect their giving?
You often hear in the philanthropic sector people talk about following their passion: “My mother died of breast cancer, so I want to donate to breast-cancer research.” People who take the point of view of the universe can see that their connection with somebody who had breast cancer isn’t really the right basis for making decisions like this. It isn’t about them; it isn’t about their passion. It’s about making the biggest difference from that universal perspective.
Giving consultants receive plenty of criticism in your new book. Why?
What is unfortunate about the philanthropy advisers is their neutrality in terms of which cause is the best cause to donate to. I think that’s a mistake. I suppose in part they take that point of view because they want clients. If someone comes and says “I’m passionate about dogs and want to give to stray animals,” they don’t want to be in the position of saying “You might want to think about whether there are better causes that might do the most good.” The client might say “Thank you very much, but that’s what I care about and I’m going to go somewhere else.”
You’ve called charities like Guidedogs for the Blind and the Make-a-Wish Foundation less deserving of gifts than charities addressing health and poverty issues in developing countries. Why do you call out charities that you view as less-deserving beneficiaries?
It’s so obvious that it’s better to prevent people from going blind than to provide a guide dog to someone who is blind. When you add in that you can do it much more cheaply — you can prevent hundreds of people from going blind [through relatively cheap treatments for trachoma, which causes blindness in developing countries] or give one person a guide dog, it seems clear that this is not the best use of our money. If people see that and think about it more, we’ll get more money going where it will do the most good.
You acknowledge that some effective altruists have made choices that the typical donor may view as “extreme.” What are some of the ideas underlying effective altruism that everyday donors can learn from?
You need to have a knowledge base so that you know you’re giving in a way that is highly effective. Whether you’re giving 2 percent of your income or 15 percent, you’re not just giving it to the cause you’re passionate about, but you’re looking at research that others have done.
You’re saying, I can be highly confident that this is going to be a good use of my money and that this will make a difference. There’s $300 billion going to charity each year in the United States, primarily from individuals. To redirect that into things that are more highly effective would have a very large impact.
