About Us (2 minute read)

The Effective Altruism movement begins with Peter Singer's 1972 paper Famine, Affluence, and Morality, where he ingeniously compared the state of global poverty to a simple ethical dilemma: 

1) Imagine you are wearing a suit that's worth, say, $500 dollars (USD). 

2) Then, imagine you walk past a child who is drowning in a pond, in need of immediate help, and you are the only person in the vicinity who is capable of saving them. 

Jumping into the pond will ruin your 500-dollar suit. If you jump in the pond, though, you will save the drowning child. What will you do?

The answer is obvious: you would jump in, save the drowning child, and ruin your 500-dollar suit. There is no material cost (at least as far as 500 USD goes) that is worth neglecting this drowning child. It is expected that you would jump in, without second thought. 

But: 

What if the suit was worth between 3500 USD and 5000 USD? 

Would you still jump in?

Peter Singer meets us at our own moral intuitions, and challenges us at our pressure points. The answer is: You would jump in and sacrifice even your most expensive suit. Saving the child becomes a priority. We would save the child, who is at risk of losing their life, so long as our life is not threatened in the process. This is called Peter Singer's Strong Moral Principle: 

"If it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do it."

Why, then, should the case be any different in the context of global poverty? We can save a life, according to EA's calculations, for as little as $3500 USD. There was a dress made for 30 million called the "Nightingale of Kuala Lumpur." We could save more than 8,000 people living in extreme poverty with this money. And this is where EA comes in: 

• If you are reading this you are of the top one percent wealth in the globe. 

• If you are a Penn student without financial aid, you are likely in the top one percent of the top one percent.

• You could save lives now, you could have saved lives in the past, and you can save lives in the future. 

Effective Altruism is more than just a movement. It's an ethical duty.

However, it isn't just common philanthropy. Consider the case of the PlayPump: a proposed philanthropy project, that recieved millions in funding, actually ended up harming the water-scarce communities it set out to help. The idea was that children would play in a merry-go-round contraption, which would in turn pump water for the community —  this would give the children something fun to do while providing a much-needed resource.

The design failed. Women ended up spinning the merry-go-round after the children became bored or tired. This was humiliating. Additionally, many communities favored and returned to the normal pumps over the newly-implimented Play Pumps. The design was extremely inefficient. 

If you think donating to any charity is the most moral, generous act one can do, history proves our intuitions are misguided. EA exists to correct ineffective charity-giving. If you are already a charity-giver, you should certainly consider EA: What looks good on paper is likely not so in real life, and it may actually be hurtful to the communities you are trying to help. 

--

Since Singer's paper, the movement has evolved. From my experiences with EA, it will continue to evolve. The baseline, though, will stay the same: 

Cause prioritization — focusing on problems where resources can do the most good

Evidence & reason — using data, research, and careful analysis to guide decisions

Cost-effectiveness — comparing interventions by impact per dollar

Impartiality — valuing all lives equally, regardless of location or time

Scalability & tractability — favoring problems that can realistically be improved

Continuous improvement — updating beliefs and strategies as new evidence emerges

When welfare-maximization becomes uncertain (or risks compromising impartiality), EA has endorsed:  

Global poverty alleviation and animal welfare.

Long-term future (longtermism) — safeguarding humanity’s future

AI risk, biosecurity, climate change,

and more.

⬇️

You will find your place in EA — but it's more than "jumping in the pond." We are not perfect. Immerse yourself in this movement, do what you can, and build a community around a shared altruistic drive. At Penn, we aim to do just that: 

• Get involved in our events

• Explore this website

• Read EA literature

• And visit GiveWell to explore EA's current evidence-driven charities. 

If you have made it this far, EA recommends starting with MacAskill's book Doing Good Better. You can request a free copy online. 

Lastly, every journey with EA is unique. The underlying moral intuitions that inspire us to do good are not unique; EA is driven to do good in the best possible way. Penn EA is leading this charge at the University. 

Make your commitment unforgettable!

Section by Julius Olavarria, Jan 7, 2026. Contact julius.olavarria@gmail.com for further information, questions, or discussion.