No simple answers
It’s a struggle to reconcile what we do with those inner thoughts that we should be doing more and doing it better. Those inner thoughts, our moral sense or conscience of right and wrong, guide our behaviour, and should make us reflect to learn what really matters to us.
Peter Singer’s 1972 essay Famine, Affluence and Morality includes the drowning child moral argument and call to action. It asks us to imagine walking past a shallow pond where a child is drowning. Most people would immediately help, even if it meant getting wet or ruining their clothes. Singer’s question is: if we would do that for a nearby child, why don’t we do the same for people in distant countries who need our help just as badly? We could easily provide some aid to save a life or lives. By our inaction are we doing the equivalent of walking past the shallow pond with a drowning child every day? Decades later, reconciling this dilemma triggered the ‘effective altruism’ movement.
David Edmonds’ explainer is informative and thoughtful storytelling. He reflects on this thought experiment about morality to discover the thinking of philosophers and their critics, but also considers many of the psychological, economic, and sociological perspectives for taking or not taking action.
The first half of the book tells the story of how the shallow pond thought experiment arose and its impact. The second half is more focused on the rational and irrational objections to it.
Marx wrote that ‘The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.’ Singer did seek to change the world. He is often described as the world’s most influential moral philosopher. The first chapters follow Singer’s life story from Australia to England to the US, charting his thoughts, those of his contemporaries, and how his ideas evolved alongside world events from the 1970s to today. Along the way, Edmonds picks up the origin stories of quality-adjusted life years in 1974, building effective altruism and Give Well in 2006. Using evidence to figure out how to best help others and match charitable donations with the most effective value for money interventions combines the head and the heart. The background of the main protagonists and tools are described along the way. The ‘earning to give’ idea was popularised by Giving What We Can, 80 000 Hours, and The Centre for Effective Altruism. These organisations promote donations like the 10% pledge, and the idea that philanthropically minded individuals can do more good by working in a high-income career and donating a percentage of their large income each year rather than working directly for a charity.
Edmonds also examines why effective altruism attracts both support and criticism. The critiques of effective altruism are full of analogies and references trying to understand the general theory underlying our thinking about these moral issues. Many critics question whether its logic oversimplifies morality or ignores human emotion and context. He looks at why effective altruists sometimes face hostility, and why their approach can seem cold. The book ends with an update on Singer’s later work and continuing influence.
There may be some perspectives not discussed in Edmonds’ exposition of the shallow pond argument that help explain why effective altruism has not changed the world yet. There seems to be little discussion about how the risks of inaction dictate our behaviour. For example, we could become excluded from our social networks if it became known or suspected that we did not rescue the drowning child. There is no similar risk if we fail to address suffering elsewhere. Humans are social animals. This evolutionary advantage has made us the controlling species on the planet. Our brains are hardwired (our nature) to promote group working. In addition, we have had rules like that of the ‘golden rule’ (the principle that we should treat others as we would like to be treated ourselves) added to our development (our nurture) to guide our behaviour. We need our supportive network of humans (for example, our family, our community, and our tribe) to thrive. Another flaw is that individuals may feel they are already making substantial contributions that benefit others both in the UK and abroad. The typical wage-earner in the UK is already committed to pledge >30% of their gross income via direct and indirect tax. The UK currently spends about 0.58% of its gross national income on official development assistance (foreign aid), but plans to reduce this to 0.3% in 2027.
There is no simple answer to the moral question posed about how you should live your life, but you can become better informed when making decisions. The simplest reflection is to ask yourself three questions: What? So what? What now? Edmonds reflects that the fundamental ethical question is that the shallow pond asks for more than almost all of us are prepared to deliver. It therefore poses a challenge. Are we psychologically equipped to embrace an obligation that few of us currently acknowledge?
