Reconciling Moral Intuitions with Effective Altruism's Rational Demands

Making Sense with Sam Harris - Invalid feed · December 08, 2025 · Listen to Original Episode →

Original Title:

TL;DR

Effective altruism's core contribution is the principle of maximizing good by directing resources to the most effective causes, potentially yielding a thousand-fold difference in impact compared to less effective charities.
The "earning to give" strategy within effective altruism suggests that individuals can achieve greater positive impact by maximizing their income ethically and donating it, rather than directly working for a non-profit.
Moral intuitions, particularly regarding proximity and identifiable victims, create a psychological bias that makes people feel more obligated to help a drowning child nearby than a distant, statistically larger group in need.
Thought experiments like the "trolley problem" and "shallow pond" highlight a tension between consequentialist ethics, which focuses on outcomes, and deeply ingrained non-consequentialist intuitions about direct harm and personal responsibility.
Criticisms of effective altruism, predating the Sam Bankman-Fried scandal, stem from an implicit judgment of others' actions and a preference for personally linked charitable causes over data-driven effectiveness, leading to hostility.
Angus Deaton's critique suggests that foreign aid, while well-intentioned, can inadvertently foster corruption and dependency, undermining long-term development and government accountability, thus questioning the efficacy of many charitable interventions.
The framing of ethical action in terms of obligation ("ought") can be limiting; viewing actions as simply "better" or "worse" opens up a broader landscape of possibilities for cultural and technological solutions to maximize positive outcomes.

Deep Dive

The philosophy of moral obligations, particularly concerning our duties to strangers in need, is fundamentally challenged by the disconnect between our intuitions and rational analysis, as explored through thought experiments like Peter Singer's "shallow pond." While consequentialism suggests that saving a life is a moral imperative regardless of proximity or personal cost, our ingrained psychological responses often prioritize nearby, identifiable victims over distant, statistical ones. This divergence has profound implications for how we approach altruism, effective aid, and societal well-being, revealing deep-seated "bugs" in our moral reasoning that the Effective Altruism movement attempts to address through rational, data-driven interventions.

The core tension lies in reconciling our immediate, visceral moral intuitions with the demanding logic of consequentialism. Thought experiments, despite their artificiality, serve as crucial tools to isolate moral variables and expose these discrepancies. The trolley problem, for instance, highlights our aversion to direct harm, even when a greater good can be achieved, suggesting a non-consequentialist intuition that we are not obligated to use individuals as mere means to an end. Conversely, Singer's "shallow pond" thought experiment posits that failing to save a drowning child due to the cost of ruining expensive shoes is morally equivalent to failing to donate to a charity that could save a life abroad. This analogy, while powerful, is complicated by the psychological distance, lack of identifiable victims, and diffusion of responsibility inherent in real-world charitable giving, which make it less intuitively reprehensible than ignoring a drowning child. This gap between what consequentialism dictates and what our intuitions accept reveals a significant challenge: are our intuitions flawed, or does consequentialism, in its purest form, fail to account for all relevant consequences, such as the psychological impact of certain actions or the societal implications of widespread callousness?

The Effective Altruism (EA) movement, emerging from Singer's work, attempts to bridge this gap by emphasizing not just the intention to do good, but the effectiveness of the action. EAs advocate for a rational, evidence-based approach to altruism, encouraging individuals to donate to charities that demonstrably save the most lives per dollar. This strategy, exemplified by the "earning to give" principle--where individuals maximize their income to donate more to effective causes--directly confronts the inefficiency of traditional charitable giving. However, EA faces criticism for its perceived detachment from personal connection and its potential to foster a sense of judgment toward those who prioritize local or personally meaningful causes over statistically more impactful ones. Furthermore, critiques like those from economist Angus Deaton question the efficacy of foreign aid itself, arguing that it can foster corruption and dependency, thereby undermining the very outcomes it aims to achieve. This introduces a meta-level problem: even if our intentions are good, are we truly effective in our altruism, or are we inadvertently causing harm through well-intentioned but ill-conceived interventions?

Ultimately, the discussion underscores that our moral landscape is shaped by a complex interplay of rational principles and deeply ingrained psychological heuristics. The "shallow pond" and its real-world parallels highlight that while the obligation to alleviate suffering may be logically clear, our capacity and willingness to act are heavily influenced by factors like proximity, identifiability, and perceived efficacy. The Effective Altruism movement represents a significant attempt to systematically address these "bugs" in our moral psychology, pushing for a more rational and impactful approach to doing good. However, the ongoing debates surrounding EA's methods and the effectiveness of aid demonstrate that the path to truly effective altruism is fraught with challenges, requiring continuous critical examination of both our ethical frameworks and the practical consequences of our actions.

Action Items

Audit 10 core ethical frameworks: Identify potential conflicts with consequentialist principles and document findings (ref: trolley problem, shallow pond).
Create a decision-making rubric: Incorporate psychological biases (e.g., identifiable victim effect, proximity) and their impact on moral judgments.
Measure the effectiveness of 3-5 charitable giving strategies: Track outcomes against cost and compare to baseline metrics (ref: effective altruism).
Design a system to track the long-term societal consequences of aid programs: Focus on macro-level impacts beyond immediate project outcomes (ref: Angus Deaton's critique).
Draft a personal ethical framework: Explicitly address the demandingness objection and define acceptable trade-offs between personal well-being and global welfare.

Key Quotes

"You are to imagine that there is a runaway train. It's careering down the track. There were five people tied to the track. And in the simple case, you are on the side of the track and there's a switch, and you can flick the switch, and you can divert the train down a spur. Unfortunately, on that spur, one person is tied to the track. So the question is, should you turn the switch and divert the train away from the five to kill the one?"

David Edmonds explains the classic "trolley problem" thought experiment, which is used to explore moral intuitions about saving lives. Edmonds highlights that most people believe it is permissible to divert the train to kill one person to save five. This scenario is foundational for discussions in moral philosophy, particularly concerning consequentialism.

"The objections to thought experiments tend to be directed particularly at thought experiments in the moral realm. I would say. So for example, in the area of consciousness, there's a very famous thought experiment called the Chinese room... and on the whole, there's a not, I mean, they are contentious and they're very heavily debated, but they don't arouse the kind of suspicion I think that many moral thought experiments arouse."

David Edmonds discusses the controversy surrounding thought experiments, particularly in moral philosophy. Edmonds notes that while thought experiments in other areas of philosophy are debated, those in moral philosophy often face greater suspicion. This suspicion arises because moral thought experiments can present artificial or unusual scenarios that may not accurately reflect real-life moral decision-making.

"The whole point about a thought experiment is you're trying to separate all the extraneous circumstances and factors that might be getting in the way of our thinking and you're trying to kind of focus in particular on one area of a problem. So you might have a thought experiment where there are two scenarios which are different except for the fact that one has a particular factor that the other doesn't have and the point is to try and work out whether that factor is making a difference or not."

David Edmonds defends the utility of thought experiments, explaining their purpose is to isolate specific variables. Edmonds argues that by stripping away complicating factors, thought experiments allow philosophers to focus on the core of a moral problem. This simplification, even if artificial, is crucial for clarifying moral reasoning and understanding the impact of specific elements.

"The shallow pond is a thought experiment that was invented by Peter Singer in 1971. It was published in 1972 and at the time there was a civil war going on in what we now call Bangladesh... and Peter Singer, who by this stage was sitting in Oxford, was wondering what the extent of our obligations were to those people."

David Edmonds introduces Peter Singer's "shallow pond" thought experiment, which explores our moral obligations to distant strangers. Edmonds explains that Singer used the scenario of a drowning child to argue that affluent individuals have a moral duty to donate resources to save lives, even if it means sacrificing personal luxuries. This thought experiment is central to the philosophy of effective altruism.

"What the effective altruists noticed was that as well as just giving money that mattered, what mattered just as much, if not even more, was giving it effectively. And Toby in particular, who likes his spreadsheets, he went through all these charities and he noticed that some of these charities were a thousand times more effective than the least effective charities."

David Edmonds highlights a key contribution of the Effective Altruism movement: the emphasis on effectiveness in charitable giving. Edmonds explains that Effective Altruists, like Toby Ord, analyze charities to determine which ones achieve the greatest good per dollar donated. This focus on measurable impact, rather than just good intentions, distinguishes their approach.

"The effective altruism community has attracted a surprising degree of criticism and and even contempt. And this actually predates the the Sam Bankman-Fried scandal. I mean, what was so noticeable about the fall of Sam Bankman-Fried was the glee with which it was received by so many people who were already contemptuous of effective altruism."

David Edmonds discusses the significant criticism and hostility directed towards the Effective Altruism movement, even before the Sam Bankman-Fried scandal. Edmonds suggests that this contempt stems partly from the movement's implicit judgment that many people, particularly the wealthy, are not doing enough to help others. This perceived moral demand can provoke a defensive or negative reaction.

"Angus Deaton... hates the shallow pond analogy because he thinks that aid just doesn't work. So he thinks that giving money to charity is not cannot be analogous to helping a child out of a shallow pond."

David Edmonds presents Angus Deaton's critique of the shallow pond analogy, focusing on the ineffectiveness of foreign aid. Deaton, a Nobel laureate economist, argues that aid can disrupt local economies, foster corruption, and reduce government accountability to citizens. Edmonds notes Deaton's skepticism that charitable giving in affluent nations can be directly equated to the immediate, localized act of saving a drowning child.

Resources

External Resources

Books

"Death in a Shallow Pond: A Philosopher, a Drowning Child, and Strangers in Need" by David Edmonds - Mentioned as the subject of the discussion, exploring moral philosophy and effective altruism.
"Parfit: A Philosopher and his Mission to Save Morality" by David Edmonds - Mentioned as a biography of Derek Parfit written by Edmonds.
"Wittgenstein's Poker" by David Edmonds and John Eidinow - Mentioned as a book co-authored by Edmonds.
"Undercover Robot" by David Edmonds - Mentioned as a children's book authored by Edmonds.
"Would You Kill the Fat Man?" by David Edmonds - Mentioned as a previous book by Edmonds about the trolley problem.
"Humanity" by Jonathan Glover - Mentioned for its discussion on how humans are not always disturbed by the most awful things and are immune to differences in scale.
"The Beginning of Infinity" by David Deutsch - Mentioned as a book that argues for the importance of technology and progress in solving problems.
"The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity" by Toby Ord - Mentioned in relation to existential risk and the effective altruism movement.
"Doing Good Better: How Effective Altruism Can Help You Make a Difference" by Will MacAskill - Mentioned as a book that discusses the principles of effective altruism.
"The White Album" by Joan Didion - Mentioned in relation to the idea of "bugs" in moral reasoning.
"The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality" by Angus Deaton - Mentioned for its critique of foreign aid and its impact on developing countries.
"The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time" by Jeffrey Sachs - Mentioned in relation to the debate on aid and development.
"Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa" by Dambisa Moyo - Mentioned for its critique of aid in developing countries.

Articles & Papers

"Famine, Affluence, and Morality" (Peter Singer) - Mentioned as the foundational article for the effective altruism movement, discussing obligations to those in need.

People

David Edmonds - Guest, author, and host of the "Philosophy Bites" podcast, discussing moral philosophy and his book.
Peter Singer - Philosopher whose thought experiment "The Shallow Pond" is central to the discussion, and author of "Famine, Affluence, and Morality."
Derek Parfit - Philosopher whose biography was written by David Edmonds.
Philippa Foot - Philosopher who invented the original trolley problem.
Judith Jarvis Thomson - Philosopher who developed the footbridge variation of the trolley problem.
Will MacAskill - Co-founder of the effective altruism movement and author.
Toby Ord - Co-founder of the effective altruism movement and author of "The Precipice."
Angus Deaton - Nobel Prize-winning economist whose critique of foreign aid is discussed.
Dambisa Moyo - Author critical of aid in developing countries.
Tim Scanlon - Philosopher whose thought experiment involving an electrician and the World Cup final is discussed.
Paul Fitz - Philosopher who developed the "harmless torture" thought experiment.
Sam Harris - Host of the "Making Sense" podcast.
Nigel Warburton - Co-host of the "Philosophy Bites" podcast.
Bentham - Philosopher mentioned in relation to the history of consequentialism.
Mill - Philosopher mentioned in relation to the history of consequentialism.
Sidgwick - Philosopher mentioned in relation to the history of consequentialism.
Joan Didion - Author whose work is referenced in relation to moral psychology.
Theron Pummer - Philosopher who invented the "green button" thought experiment.
Jeffrey Sachs - Economist whose work on poverty and aid is mentioned.
David Deutsch - Physicist and philosopher whose work on technology and progress is referenced.
Warren Buffett - Investor whose wealth and philanthropy are mentioned in the context of "earning to give."
Stalin - Historical figure whose quote about death as a tragedy vs. a statistic is referenced.
Lenin - Historical figure whose quote about death as a tragedy vs. a statistic is referenced.

Organizations & Institutions

Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics at Oxford University - Institution where David Edmonds is a Distinguished Research Fellow.
BBC - Former employer of David Edmonds.
Giving What We Can - Organization founded by Will MacAskill and Toby Ord, encouraging people to pledge a portion of their income to charity.
80,000 Hours - Organization that advises people on careers that maximize their positive impact.
Save the Children - Charity mentioned as an example of an organization that could be supported.
Doctors Without Borders - Charity mentioned as an example of an organization that could be supported.
World Health Organization (WHO) - Implied in discussions of aid and health initiatives.
Metropolitan Museum of Art - Mentioned as an example of a cultural institution that might be supported.

Podcasts & Audio

Making Sense with Sam Harris - The podcast where this discussion is taking place.
Philosophy Bites - Podcast hosted by David Edmonds and Nigel Warburton.

Websites & Online Resources

http://www.davidedmonds.info/ - David Edmonds' personal website.
https://philosophybites.com/ - Website for the "Philosophy Bites" podcast.
https://x.com/DavidEdmonds100 - David Edmonds' X (formerly Twitter) account.
https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/448-the-philosophy-of-good-and-evil - URL for the specific podcast episode.

Other Resources

Consequentialism - Ethical theory discussed as the basis for many of the thought experiments.
The Trolley Problem - A famous thought experiment in moral philosophy.
The Drowning Child Thought Experiment (Shallow Pond) - A thought experiment by Peter Singer about moral obligations.
The Chinese Room - A thought experiment in the philosophy of mind.
What Mary Knew - A thought experiment about physicalism.
Trolleyology - The study of trolley problem variations.
Doctrine of Double Effect - A principle in moral theology and ethics.
Effective Altruism - A movement and philosophy focused on using evidence and reason to do the most good.
Earning to Give - A strategy within effective altruism where individuals maximize income to donate to effective charities.
The Green Button Thought Experiment - A thought experiment by Theron Pummer about moral obligations and demandingness.
Imperialism/Colonialism - Historical factors mentioned as potential causes of poverty in developing countries.