On incentives, status, and the erosion of moral seriousness

I’ve written ad nauseam about the cruelty of climate cultists (if you have 7 or 8 hours, search on “climate,” or just read this, or Hannah Ritchie). And I’ve also written how the loudest EAs create more suffering by trying to one-up each other in their Expected Value game.   

A New Line Crossed

But I just came across a vegan who is planning to torture animals to “save the Earth.”   

Actively and intentionally seeking to expand the factory farming of chickens – the practice that is “in both magnitude and severity, the single most severe, systematic example of man’s inhumanity to another sentient animal” – that’s a new one. 

Applause and Silence

When this vegan announced his “torture more chickens” company, nearly 100 people gave it a thumbs up (as of the time of this writing). Only one person – Dr. Amit Tewari – publicly pushed back, making the obvious but ignored point about “the Earth” vs actual suffering.  

Abstract causes, planetary or cosmic narratives, and feel-good moral identities have long been used to ignore or excuse concrete cruelty to real individuals. “Let’s torture more chickens” is just the latest, and perhaps most naked, example of that pattern.

Incentives Reliably Rot Moral Judgment

Vegans want to think Veganism is The One Truth, and many will repeat lies and exaggerations to feel superior. (And will attack anyone who dares to question The One Truth.)

Effective Altruists will lie to show just how big – so very, very massive – their expected value is.  

Doomers want to believe they just happen to live at The Vital Moment, that their actions will have cosmic consequences. 

And liberals know, consciously or not, they can get clicks, status, and money by worshiping “the Earth.” 

The Work that Actually Helps

It is not all bad, of course. There has been real progress for farmed animals, including meaningful wins that rarely make headlines. 

But the work that actually reduces suffering usually happens quietly, incrementally, and without applause. It doesn’t generate viral posts, moral grandstanding, or dopamine hits.

The algorithms don’t reward boring, behind-the-scenes work that pushes the peanut forward. They reward spectacle, certainty, and stories that flatter the people telling them. 

So if you care about reducing real suffering, you have to actively seek out serious efforts – not just the emotionally satisfying and flattering ones.

But whatever you value, please don’t support work that actively causes cruelty for some abstract “Greater Good.”