Effective altruism

Effective altruism (EA) is a 21st-century philosophical and social movement that advocates impartially calculating benefits and prioritizing causes to provide the greatest good. It is motivated by "using evidence and reason to figure out how to benefit others as much as possible, and taking action on that basis".^[1]^[2] People who pursue the goals of effective altruism, who are sometimes called effective altruists,^[3] follow a variety of approaches proposed by the movement, such as donating to selected charities and choosing careers with the aim of maximizing positive impact. The movement gained popularity outside academia, spurring the creation of research centers, advisory organizations, and charities, which collectively have donated several hundred million dollars.^[4]

Effective altruists emphasize impartiality and the global equal consideration of interests when choosing beneficiaries. Popular cause priorities within effective altruism include global health and development, social and economic inequality, animal welfare, and risks to the survival of humanity over the long-term future. Only a small portion of all charities are affiliated with effective altruism, except in niche areas such as farmed-animal welfare, AI safety, and biosecurity.^[5]

The movement developed during the 2000s, and the name effective altruism was coined in 2011. Philosophers influential to the movement include Peter Singer, Toby Ord, and William MacAskill. What began as a set of evaluation techniques advocated by a diffuse coalition evolved into an identity.^[6] Effective altruism has ties to elite universities in the United States and United Kingdom, and became associated with Silicon Valley's technology industry.^[7]

The movement received mainstream attention and criticism with the bankruptcy of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX as founder Sam Bankman-Fried was a major funder of effective altruism causes prior to late 2022. Some in the San Francisco Bay Area criticized what they described as a culture of sexual misconduct.

^ MacAskill, William (January 2017). "Effective altruism: introduction". Essays in Philosophy. 18 (1): eP1580:1–5. doi:10.7710/1526-0569.1580. ISSN 1526-0569. Archived from the original on August 7, 2019. Retrieved February 8, 2020.
^ The quoted definition is endorsed by a number of organizations at: "CEA's Guiding Principles". Centre For Effective Altruism. Retrieved December 3, 2021.
^ The term effective altruists is used to refer to people who embrace effective altruism in many published sources such as Oliver (2014), Singer (2015), and MacAskill (2017), though as Pummer & MacAskill (2020) noted, calling people "effective altruists" minimally means that they are engaged in the project of "using evidence and reason to try to find out how to do the most good, and on this basis trying to do the most good", not that they are perfectly effective nor even that they necessarily participate in the effective altruism community.
^ Adams, Crary & Gruen 2023, p. xxii.
^ Piper, Kelsey (February 9, 2024). "Can effective altruism stay effective?". Vox. Retrieved May 31, 2025. But within various niche areas that ordinary Americans generally ignore and that have few other funders — like farmed-animal welfare, AI safety, and biosafety and biosecurity — the movement's influence has been much larger.
^ Cite error: The named reference reluctant-prophet was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Tiku, Nitasha (July 5, 2023). "How elite schools like Stanford became fixated on the AI apocalypse". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved May 31, 2025.

[MacAskill-intro-1] MacAskill, William (January 2017). "Effective altruism: introduction". Essays in Philosophy. 18 (1): eP1580:1–5. doi:10.7710/1526-0569.1580. ISSN 1526-0569. Archived from the original on August 7, 2019. Retrieved February 8, 2020.

[2] The quoted definition is endorsed by a number of organizations at: "CEA's Guiding Principles". Centre For Effective Altruism. Retrieved December 3, 2021.

[3] The term effective altruists is used to refer to people who embrace effective altruism in many published sources such as Oliver (2014), Singer (2015), and MacAskill (2017), though as Pummer & MacAskill (2020) noted, calling people "effective altruists" minimally means that they are engaged in the project of "using evidence and reason to try to find out how to do the most good, and on this basis trying to do the most good", not that they are perfectly effective nor even that they necessarily participate in the effective altruism community.

[FOOTNOTEAdamsCraryGruen2023xxii-4] Adams, Crary & Gruen 2023, p. xxii.

[5] Piper, Kelsey (February 9, 2024). "Can effective altruism stay effective?". Vox. Retrieved May 31, 2025. But within various niche areas that ordinary Americans generally ignore and that have few other funders — like farmed-animal welfare, AI safety, and biosafety and biosecurity — the movement's influence has been much larger.

[reluctant-prophet-6] Cite error: The named reference reluctant-prophet was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[7] Tiku, Nitasha (July 5, 2023). "How elite schools like Stanford became fixated on the AI apocalypse". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved May 31, 2025.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]