= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
juliawise comments on The curse of identity - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (296)
Do you mean that people around you would not believe you were donating? Or would not think your cause a good one? Or would tell you that large donations are strange or a bad idea?
I'd really be interested to know, since I've recently started writing on the topic. Hardly anyone is willing to say why they don't give.
In my case, reducing existential risks isn't high on my priority list. I don't claim to be an altruist. I donate blood, but this has the advantage from my point of view that it is bounded, and visible, and local in both time and space.
I understand why visibility is an advantage, and possibly boundedness. What is better about local?
I'm guessing that reciprocity is more likely to work locally. If nothing else, it is spread across a smaller population. (I should add: Locality isn't cleanly orthogonal to visibility as a criterion. I'd guess that they have a considerable correlation.)