Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.07 AVERAGE
4.07 AVERAGE
Singer's entire work challenged me, personally, in ways that I have never before experienced with a book. Singer challenges each and every one of us, through sound philosophical and moral reasoning, to be better people and to truly care for each other. An intensely emotional and inspriational book, very well written, and one that I consistently think about almost daily since having read it a few months back.
UTILITARIANISM!!! Now that I’ve got your attention, this is a really interesting little book about the most effective of effective altruism. It might also make you feel bad for the fancy stuff you do!
Also, it’s a free eBook for everyone, so you are for sure a coward if you don’t read it. Sorry.
Also, it’s a free eBook for everyone, so you are for sure a coward if you don’t read it. Sorry.
Good points but pragmatic to the point that it's sometimes a bit douchey.
This book makes a lot of, frankly, uncomfortable questions. Why do we spend money on things we don't really need when there are thousands of people living in extreme poverty, and we can do something to help them? Singer's argument is very compelling, and has inspired me greatly to make a change.
I read [b:The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty|4722934|The Life You Can Save Acting Now to End World Poverty|Peter Singer|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1439433749l/4722934._SX50_.jpg|4787382], [b:Doing Good Better: How Effective Altruism Can Help You Make a Difference|23398748|Doing Good Better How Effective Altruism Can Help You Make a Difference|William MacAskill|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1414351487l/23398748._SY75_.jpg|42955303], and [b:The Most Good You Can Do: How Effective Altruism Is Changing Ideas About Living Ethically|23168483|The Most Good You Can Do How Effective Altruism Is Changing Ideas About Living Ethically|Peter Singer|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1424307874l/23168483._SX50_.jpg|42713701] back to back, so this is a sort of comparative/roundup review of all three.
This one isn't technically about Effective Altruism per se, it is trying to motivate people to donate to end global poverty. Singer marshals a lot of effective arguments and data and covers a lot of ground while still keeping it a brief book. He makes the ethical case, he shows that the US doesn't give very much, he argues that most aid isn't "wasted", the scale of the problem, and more.
There were two parts that were most interesting to me. One, he argues against the current culture of keeping giving secret. The basis seems to be "I should be donating to charity because it is the right thing to do, not something you should post on Facebook to get Likes." But he makes a case that by talking about it publicly & frequently we can make a "culture of giving". He describes Bear Sterns where (apparently) senior managing directors were required to donate 4% salary and bonus and were required to hand over their tax returns each year to prove it.
The other part I found interesting was he comes across generally as very pragmatic. While he shows that most ethical philosophers find that each of should be giving a lot he realizes that will scare most people off and instead offers a different giving standard.
He recognizes that giving should follow a progressive scale -- in the same way taxation does -- due to the decreasing marginal utility of money. He looks at the estimated total cost for the Millennium Development Goals ($189 billion a year) and uses that to derive a "giving calculator".
People making under $40,000 have no obligation to give. People making $40,000-80,000 should give 1%. People making $80,000-140,000 should give 1% of the first $80,000 and 5% of the remainder. People making $140,000-320,000 should give 1% of the first $80,000, 5% of the next $59,000, and 10% of the remainder.
(There's a calculator on their website.)
That means for someone making $100,000 the recommendation is $1,760 or just $146 a month.
If you are paying for something to drink when safe drinking water comes out of the tap, you have money to spend on things you don’t really need.
This one isn't technically about Effective Altruism per se, it is trying to motivate people to donate to end global poverty. Singer marshals a lot of effective arguments and data and covers a lot of ground while still keeping it a brief book. He makes the ethical case, he shows that the US doesn't give very much, he argues that most aid isn't "wasted", the scale of the problem, and more.
Therefore the contribution needed to make up the shortfall [to raise those living in extreme poverty above the line] is 0.62 percent of income, or 62 cents of every $100 earned. A person making $50,000 per year would owe just over $300.
There were two parts that were most interesting to me. One, he argues against the current culture of keeping giving secret. The basis seems to be "I should be donating to charity because it is the right thing to do, not something you should post on Facebook to get Likes." But he makes a case that by talking about it publicly & frequently we can make a "culture of giving". He describes Bear Sterns where (apparently) senior managing directors were required to donate 4% salary and bonus and were required to hand over their tax returns each year to prove it.
Isn’t it more important that the money go to a good cause than that it be given with “pure” motives? And if by sounding a trumpet when they give, they encourage others to give, that’s better still.
The other part I found interesting was he comes across generally as very pragmatic. While he shows that most ethical philosophers find that each of should be giving a lot he realizes that will scare most people off and instead offers a different giving standard.
The ultimate purpose of this book is to reduce extreme poverty, not to make you feel guilty.
He recognizes that giving should follow a progressive scale -- in the same way taxation does -- due to the decreasing marginal utility of money. He looks at the estimated total cost for the Millennium Development Goals ($189 billion a year) and uses that to derive a "giving calculator".
People making under $40,000 have no obligation to give. People making $40,000-80,000 should give 1%. People making $80,000-140,000 should give 1% of the first $80,000 and 5% of the remainder. People making $140,000-320,000 should give 1% of the first $80,000, 5% of the next $59,000, and 10% of the remainder.
(There's a calculator on their website.)
That means for someone making $100,000 the recommendation is $1,760 or just $146 a month.
Lolly, have you noticed how many of the books you read I add to MY to-read list? You have the best taste in books.
Ohhhh the ableism! I was okay with this book until he said, "it's better to restore the sight of a blind person than to give them a seeing eye dog. Just ask any blind person if they would like their sight restored". WHOAH. I'm not familiar with the Blind community, but I do have ties to the Deaf community. And Deaf people do not want their hearing restored. They are perfectly fine, thank you very much. They have their own culture. So I can only assume blind people are the same way. They're fine, thank you very much. They do not need to be fixed. So, while I understand the idea of this book saying give strategically where it will do the most good, I do not like his ableist opinions of what is best for people.
I listened to the audio book which I don't often do. For the 10th anniversary, you can go to the website and download the ebook or the audio book for free. I highly recommend it to everyone.
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced