I intend to publish several posts on the Effective Altruism Forum in the coming weeks. Some of these articles seem to me like they would be apply to topics of rationality, i.e., assessing options and possibilities well to make better decisions. So, this is an open call for reviewers for these various posts. For topics for which I have insufficient content or information, I’m seeking coauthors. Reply in a comment, or send me a private message, if you’d be interested in reviewing or providing feedback on the any of the following. Let me know what how I can send you the text of the posts.
Does It Make Sense to Make A Multi-Year Donation Commitment to A Single Organization?
Essentially, this already published comment.
Neglectedness, Tractability, And Importance/Value
The idea of heuristically identifying a cause area based on these three criteria was more or less a theme of the 2014 Effective Altruism Summit. This three-prong approach was independently highlighted by Peter Thiel, not just for non-profit work but entrepreneurship and and innovation more generally, and Holden Karnofsky, as the basis for how the Open Philanthropy Project asks questions about what cause areas to consider. I would go over these three-prong approach in more detail.
What Different Types of Organizations Can Do
At the 2014 Effective Altruism Summit, I met multiple entrepreneurs who suggested start-ups and for-profit efforts can produce through their goods or services provide an efficient mechanism for positive social impact in addition to the money to be donated that they generate for their owners or employees. Since then, I’ve noticed this idea popping up more. Of course, start-ups contrast with bigger corporations. Additionally, I believe there are different types of non-profit organizations, and their differences are important. Charities doing direct work (e.g., the Against Malaria Foundation), foundations (e.g., Good Ventures, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation), research think tanks (e.g., Givewell, RAND), advocacy and awareness organizations (e.g., Greenpeace, the Future of Life Institute), scientific research projects (e.g. the International Panel on Climate Change), and political advocacy (Avaaz.org, Amnesty International) are all different.
To lump all “for-profit” types of work, and all “non-profit” types of work into two categories underrates the advantages and disadvantages of how to structure an organization driven toward a goal.
Different types of organizations differ across nations and law codes, the cultures and traditions of their respective sectors, and their structural limitations. It makes sense to me to be aware of such so those intending to pursue a goal(s) organizationally can figure out how best effectively achieve their goal(s).
I intend to publish several posts on the Effective Altruism Forum in the coming weeks. Some of these articles seem to me like they would be apply to topics of rationality, i.e., assessing options and possibilities well to make better decisions. So, this is an open call for reviewers for these various posts. For topics for which I have insufficient content or information, I’m seeking coauthors. Reply in a comment, or send me a private message, if you’d be interested in reviewing or providing feedback on the any of the following. Let me know what how I can send you the text of the posts.
Does It Make Sense to Make A Multi-Year Donation Commitment to A Single Organization? Essentially, this already published comment.
Neglectedness, Tractability, And Importance/Value The idea of heuristically identifying a cause area based on these three criteria was more or less a theme of the 2014 Effective Altruism Summit. This three-prong approach was independently highlighted by Peter Thiel, not just for non-profit work but entrepreneurship and and innovation more generally, and Holden Karnofsky, as the basis for how the Open Philanthropy Project asks questions about what cause areas to consider. I would go over these three-prong approach in more detail.
What Different Types of Organizations Can Do At the 2014 Effective Altruism Summit, I met multiple entrepreneurs who suggested start-ups and for-profit efforts can produce through their goods or services provide an efficient mechanism for positive social impact in addition to the money to be donated that they generate for their owners or employees. Since then, I’ve noticed this idea popping up more. Of course, start-ups contrast with bigger corporations. Additionally, I believe there are different types of non-profit organizations, and their differences are important. Charities doing direct work (e.g., the Against Malaria Foundation), foundations (e.g., Good Ventures, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation), research think tanks (e.g., Givewell, RAND), advocacy and awareness organizations (e.g., Greenpeace, the Future of Life Institute), scientific research projects (e.g. the International Panel on Climate Change), and political advocacy (Avaaz.org, Amnesty International) are all different. To lump all “for-profit” types of work, and all “non-profit” types of work into two categories underrates the advantages and disadvantages of how to structure an organization driven toward a goal. Different types of organizations differ across nations and law codes, the cultures and traditions of their respective sectors, and their structural limitations. It makes sense to me to be aware of such so those intending to pursue a goal(s) organizationally can figure out how best effectively achieve their goal(s).