[woodruffw]

I don't know to what extent "mainstream" EA can rest on Singer's plaudits: I got a decent amount of pushback from EAs (or EA-sympathetic people) on this site just last week for pointing out that they've diverged significantly from Singer's original altruistic positions.

It seems a little hypocritical to use him as ethical cover without adhering more closely to his specific ethical proscriptions (which don't, to my knowledge, include Internet Rationalist stuff like AGI and colonizing the galaxy).

[spindle]

I agree with you about Singer. And about hypocrisy.

If you got pushback, then I guess it must be controversial what "EA" refers to at the moment. I hope it shakes out in a sensible way.

[woodruffw]

I hope so too! I think Singer (and the school he's produced) have made some very important contributions to applied ethics, and it would be a shame to have those contributions imploded or overwhelmed by a small group of conscience-plagued billionaires.