Sort of glossed over this sorry but agreed on the last part. Haven't look much at that "movement" but I did notice Wikipedia, specifically User:Nogbert and everyone after them on this pageOgnistysztorm wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2023 9:49 pmthe biggest losers are the Effective Altruism movement where many people are now viewing it as indistiguishable from cults and FTX even though logically that's doesn't hold water at all
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1145862218
are utilizing FTX over other criminal financial fraud to denigrate secular/rationalist altruism or 'effective altruism' as an idea.
Now, the only people I know who are ideologically are opposed to altruism are:
* 1) sociopaths
**a1) right-libertarians
**a2) neoliberals
Religion doesn't have a monopoly on altruism, secular people like Peter Singer are perfectly in their right to advocate it as a 24/7 lifestyle without being browbeaten by weird wiki sociopaths trying to defame him and others with some tiny crypto exchange owner.
Fried wasn't even an altruist, he explicitly stated he was amoral in a DM exchange to a journalist. And yet Wikipedians still wanna hurt secular altruists because Fried was allegedly a donor to something related to MacAskill at some point.
Also from Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruismA 2023 Bloomberg article interviewing some self-described altruists criticized altruism's philosophy as masking a culture of predatory behavior
Jesus christ