Peter Singer and William Easterly Bloggingheads

I was looking forward to watching the sparks fly when I first learned of the diavlog. It was still an enjoyable conversation, but there were far fewer sparks than I was expecting.

For those who don't know, Peter Singer is a Princeton philosopher who argues that we as the (relatively) wealthy elite have a moral imperative to sacrifice some of our resources for the less fortunate. He wrote a book on the subject and its promotional web site encourages people to pledge proportionally more of their money to charity as their income rises.

William Easterly is a NYU developmental economist who is well-respected but extremely controversial for his outspoken views that traditional foreign aid efforts should be avoided because they do not work.

The conversation opens with Easterly challenging Singer's metaphor that it would be morally reprehensible for you not to save a drowning child because it would ruin your expensive pair of shoes; similarly, it is reprehensible for you not to sacrifice part of your income for the less fortunate. Easterly says this is oversimplified because, in foreign aid, resources need to go through an intermediary and situations are rarely as simple as pulling a child out of water. From there I thought an intellectual dog fight was about to go down. But no, from there it is all extremely polite, uncontroversial, and "yeah, I agree with that". If you did not know any better, you would think these guys occupy the same philosophical wavelength.

The conversation basically devolved into a compromise where both kept repeating that there should be more demand for accountability in charity. I was disappointed that Easterly did not address more the idea that people are brought out of poverty not through good intentions of "white messiahs" but organically and internally. He mentions this but it is more of a passing thought amidst the "yeah, more accountability" meme.

This, I think, shows the importance of having an interviewer direct the conversation and fan the flames. When you have two intellectual heavyweights conversating for the first time, you cannot expect them to voluntarily step on one another's toes. When subject to social norms of politeness, much goes undiscussed. Therein lies the problem with diavlogs.

Counterpoint: Tyler Cowen has no problem taking on Singer, and does so to great effect. (50 minute bloggingheads)

---

Earlier: My notes from Easterly's presentation at NC State