AGB comments on Against segregating EAs - Effective Altruism Forum
posted by
on
21 January 2016 04:15PM
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (91)
First off, a comment I left on Facebook on this:
"I would also strongly advocate for describing the "softcore" EAs as simply 'EAs' or 'effective altuists' and then inventing a new term for the more 'hardcore' among us (how many of us are there anyway? Can't we all just agree to use a code word when talking to each other and otherwise not worry about this issue?). Fears of being judged or looked down on because they aren't 'hardcore' enough in some form or other are still the most common reasons I hear for people who basically agree with EA staying at a distance from the movement. I wish I could more easily to communicate to those people just how terrible a job most EAs do of living up to their ideals."
So yeah, I don't like the word 'softcore'. In fact, because I expect 80%+ of EAs and rising to be 'softcore' for the foreseeable future I don't see the point in having a word for them at all. They're the baseline and don't need a special descriptor.
It would be useful to have a descriptor for those who make EA large part of their 'life's work' in some way. I actually don't mind 'hardcore' here. Hardcore is already used in this context in many other movements (hardcore socialists, hardcore environmentalists, hardcore fan of X) and has weak negative connotations, which I consider desirable here because I would like there to be more distance between perception of the movement and perception of its most committed members (for why I care about that, see the comment).
However, there are other terms that could hit these points, e.g. 'dyed in the wool', 'extreme'. 'Full-time' was already suggested below and has the benefit of being most self-explanatory given what I want to describe.
Thanks for pasting that comment here - I was sure there had been a really good discussion on this, with a general consensus that "softcore" needed to disappear. Perhaps I was just really persuaded by your comment and assumed others were likewise.
I agree there's less an issue a designation for "very involved" being a bit negative, but I'm moderately opposed to "hardcore" because although it is used as you describe, I think its strongest association is with porn.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/effective.altruists/permalink/979061645483526/
I think Will Macaskill and I both advocated for the same position and got a lot of likes, so I understand your impression. I was sort of surprised to see the word wheeled out again, especially given I don't think 'softcore' was ever really intended for widespread use in the original post, just to contrast to the (more widely used) word 'hardcore'.
And fair enough re. hardcore. I don't have that association at all really (I recognise it, but it's far from the first example-usage I think of), but I'm not averse to ditching the term or at least using it selectively based on audience if multiple people have that association given this is all a PR/perception question in the first place.
So....'full-time' it is?