Effective Altruism

Origins of a Novel Giving Philosophy

The idea behind an organized EA movement first emerged at Oxford in the 2000s, when philosophy student William MacAskill (1987-) discovered the work of Australian ethicist Peter Singer (1946-). Singer’s beliefs are rooted in utilitarianism, a system of ethical thought that seeks to produce the maximum benefit for the largest number of people. After reading Singer’s 1972 essay “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” – which argues that prosperous individuals have a moral duty to donate their surplus earnings to people living in poverty – MacAskill became inspired to devote his life to helping others.

In collaboration with a group of like-minded students, McAskill used Singer’s philosophy as a springboard for a new philanthropic project. In 2009 McAskill helped launch Giving What We Can, an organization through which people commit to donating at least 10 percent of their income to effective charities. A consulting group called 80,000 Hours, which advises aspiring philanthropists on how to maximize the benefits of their giving, followed in 2011. That same year, McAskill founded the Centre for Effective Altruism to serve as an umbrella organization for EA programs.

EA considers three principle criteria when assessing the efficacy of a philanthropic initiative. The first concerns the issue of scale, weighing the overall scope of what a particular program might achieve relative to others. Adherents of EA also examine a proposed solution’s tractability, undertaking a rigorous analysis to assess the likelihood of its success. Finally, EA evaluates the extent to which a particular cause has been neglected by other philanthropic investments, with the aim of filling the void.

The EA movement argues that impartiality is critical to effective giving. EA philanthropists claim to avoid personal bias in order to remain focused on the most rational outcomes. Further, EA advocates believe that donors must suppress any sense of personal well-being associated with charitable giving in order to maintain strict objectivity in their decision-making.

Evolution of a Philanthropic Movement

As the EA movement spread, its data-based giving model began to attract adherents within the science and technology sector. Within a few years, the tech industry became the largest source of EA funding. By 2021, Open Philanthropy, a nonprofit managed by Facebook billionaire Dustin Moskovitz, accounted for $450 million of all EA charitable giving.

Meanwhile, some people involved with EA began to shift their attention from more immediate problems – such as global hunger, disease eradication and disaster relief – to long-term issues like climate change, nuclear war and risks associated with artificial intelligence (AI). The movement eventually split into two factions: “neartermists,” who seek to remedy critical issues in the present day; and “longtermists,” a group dedicated to confronting future threats.

While EA has achieved tangible results with its data-driven approach, its organizational style has prompted criticism. Opponents of EA have asserted that a small class of funders has come to dominate the movement, making its decision-making process opaque and unaccountable to the larger community. This insularity also makes it difficult to introduce new ideas and approaches into the EA movement, stifling further growth and innovation. EA also suffered a major public relations blow in 2024, when Samuel Bankman-Fried (1992-) – one of the movement’s most prominent advocates – was convicted of federal fraud charges. These events have led some critics to question whether EA adheres to principles of impartiality and quantitative rigor as thoroughly as its proponents claim.

Despite these issues, EA’s unique approach to generosity might well produce meaningful change over time. As of 2024, more than 200 local EA chapters had formed across the world, while nearly 9,000 individuals had signed the Giving What We Can Pledge. With its steadfast commitment to a giving model based on reason and analysis, EA has the potential to radically reshape the global philanthropic landscape.

Contributor: Stephen Meyer