Introduction
The Peace and Conflict Science Institute (PACS Institute) is an independent, non-profit research organization dedicated to deepening our understanding of peace and its potential to create a better world. The PACS Institute conducts interdisciplinary research at the intersection of philosophy, behavioral science, cognitive neuroscience, and political science. As the Effective Altruism (EA) community shares the goal of reducing suffering and promoting well-being on a global scale, the PACS Institute is looking to integrate its work under the EA umbrella and attract funding from EA funding bodies. This blog post seeks reflections, insights, and advice from the EA community on how to best achieve this integration.
Shared Goals and Interconnectedness
As Emil Wasteson, Executive Director of EA Sweden, has noted, peace studies and effective altruism share a common goal of reducing suffering and promoting well-being on a global scale. Both fields recognize the interconnectedness of global issues and the importance of considering the long-term consequences of our actions. Integrating the PACS Institute into the EA movement can help address problems like reducing the risk of great power war, increasing collaboration for a safer development of AI, and other emerging technologies, as well as helping more people out of poverty.
Peace Engineering and Longtermism
Anders Sandberg, Senior Research Fellow at the Future of Humanity Institute, has emphasized the potential of "peace engineering" to reduce the risk of conflict. Given the significant human-caused disasters such as wars and democide, finding interventions that reduce the harm caused by armed conflict can be high-impact. Moreover, considering the long-term implications, reducing the risk of great power war is a high-priority goal for the EA movement to reduce the risk of extinction or astronomical suffering.
Seeking Reflections and Advice
As the PACS Institute looks to integrate its work into the EA movement, we seek reflections and advice from the community on the following questions:
- How can the PACS Institute effectively communicate the alignment of its mission with the goals of the EA movement?
- What strategies can the PACS Institute adopt to attract funding from EA funding bodies?
- Are there any specific projects or research areas that the PACS Institute should prioritize to align with EA principles and focus areas?
- How can the PACS Institute collaborate with existing EA organizations and initiatives to maximize its impact?
- Are there any challenges or concerns that the PACS Institute should be aware of when integrating into the EA movement?
Conclusion
The PACS Institute is excited about the prospect of joining forces with the Effective Altruism community, as both fields share a common vision of creating a better, more peaceful world. By seeking reflections and advice from the EA community, the PACS Institute aims to strengthen its integration into the movement and more effectively work towards the shared goals of reducing suffering and promoting well-being on a global scale. Your insights and suggestions are invaluable in this endeavor, and we look forward to a fruitful collaboration.
Hi, welcome to the EA Forum.
I see that your post has received a mixed reception so far, with some people downvoting your post. I don't know why they did this, but I'd guess it's because they perceived your post as motivated by money.
I suspect that integrating into the EA community will happen effectively if you engage with EA thinking at an intellectual level. EAs notoriously love having their cherished beliefs challenged, and if you wrote some content which educated the community in the right ways, it would probably be very much appreciated. When I say "the right ways", I'm thinking of content which (a) rests on enough EA common knowledge to be meaningful to people in EA (b) leverages things you know which the community might not know.
Examples which I suspect would go down well:
If you could make claims like these, and back them with careful argument, in a way which demonstrates understanding of EA thinking on cause prioritisation, then I would certainly consider you very much integrated into the EA movement, and I suspect others would too.
Yeah, I strong downvoted because the post doesn't explain what the institute actually does but instead tries to pull public quotes of EAs and try to shoe horn said quotes into PAC Institute. The website is also very opaque. I feel like I got further away from understanding what peace engineering was while reading this post. The money thing I presumed more was an inelegant turn of phrase on the part of the author but did play a part in downvoting.
I think some clear descriptions of what the poster's organization has accomplished, or at least of who it is affiliated with and some concrete near-term plans, would significantly help this post.