The effective altruism (EA) movement has long grappled with a fundamental question: should we prioritize interventions that help people in the near term, or focus on shaping the long-term future of humanity? A compelling argument known as "longtermism" or "future fanaticism" has gained significant traction within EA circles. This view posits that the vast majority of our expected impact comes from how we influence the very long-term future - potentially billions of years from now. According to longtermists, while helping humans and animals in the near-term certainly matters, it primarily only matters via its effects on far-future outcomes. However, a thought-provoking paper by Brian Tomasik titled "How the Simulation Argument Dampens Future Fanaticism" presents a novel challenge to this longtermist paradigm. By considering the implications of Nick Bostrom's simulation argument, Tomasik suggests that short-term interventions may matter far more than naive longtermism would imply. This article will explore Tomasik's key arguments and their potential ramifications for cause prioritization in effective altruism. This is an AI generated conversation about the article found here: https://theexperiencemachine.com/articles/tomasiks-twist-how-simulated-realities-affect-altruistic-priorities/

Read and listen to more at TheExperienceMachine.com