I remember listening to Sam Bankman Fried’s interview with Tyler Cowen in March of 2022. The conversation inevitably moved from his growing crypto empire to his efforts in the realm of effective altruism (EA) - I became increasingly suspicious of SBF as a result.

EA is a movement rooted in the philosophy of utilitarianism with the goal of using evidence and reason to figure out how to help others in the most effective way possible - usually through philanthropy and charity.

The promise of EA is seductive: why shouldn’t we use objective standards and rational measures to compare and weigh the impact of philanthropic efforts against each other?

To an extent we should. However, doing good is not just a matter of What but at least to an equal degree a matter of How. I deeply believe that a friendly interaction with a fellow human at the train station can have a greater ripple effect than a large sum of money dispassionately allocated to the right cause.

EA’s focus on the What is symptomatic of our very cerebral approach to most things. It is missing the importance of the spiritual component of human interaction. Homeless people in our western world rarely have a true shortage of material necessities. What they really need is to be treated like equal human beings again so that they can then satisfy their material needs through their own means.

The fact that SBF was able to rationalize giving away stolen money through the framework of Effective Altruism, and was celebrated for it without any second thoughts says a lot about the awkwardness of this movement.