0.5, leaning towards 0 here. I think this might be happening with Will Macaskill, but for the most part EA has a semi-healthy relationship with it’s leaders.
.
The group suppresses skepticism
This one is a 0, for the most part. EA isn’t perfect at getting and integrating criticism, but it is far better than most organizations at criticism.
The group delegitimizes former members
Again, more or less a 0. I haven’t seen this behavior from EA.
The group is paranoid about the outside world
0.5. Ultimately, I actually don’t think EA is fearful about the outside world, but X-risk and to a lesser extent longtermism being at least considered prevents it from being a 0.
The group relies on shame cycles
Again, a 0 fits here. Thankfully, EA doesn’t rely on shame cycles, nor have leaders used shame as a weapon in the way the post talks about.
The leader is above the law
More or less a 0 for this one. Yes, women have been assaulted in EA spaces, but EA more or less doesn’t make excuses for that.
The group uses “thought reform” methods
More or less a 0, as far as I can tell.
The group is elitist
I’m giving this a 0.5-1 as far as this is concerned.
There is no financial transparency
0.5 is I think the rating I’d give.
The group performs secret rites
Definitely a 0 for this criterion.
So overall it’s 1.5-2.5 depending on how you shake out the randomness. This is an okay sign for EA, for the most part. It has a few elements of cults, but not many elements of them.
Analyzing whether EA is a cult is really interesting, so I will give it a shot:
Here’s a link to signs of cults:
https://medium.com/@zelphontheshelf/10-signs-youre-probably-in-a-cult-1921eb5a3857
For EA
The leader is the ultimate authority
0.5, leaning towards 0 here. I think this might be happening with Will Macaskill, but for the most part EA has a semi-healthy relationship with it’s leaders.
.
The group suppresses skepticism
This one is a 0, for the most part. EA isn’t perfect at getting and integrating criticism, but it is far better than most organizations at criticism.
The group delegitimizes former members
Again, more or less a 0. I haven’t seen this behavior from EA.
The group is paranoid about the outside world
0.5. Ultimately, I actually don’t think EA is fearful about the outside world, but X-risk and to a lesser extent longtermism being at least considered prevents it from being a 0.
The group relies on shame cycles
Again, a 0 fits here. Thankfully, EA doesn’t rely on shame cycles, nor have leaders used shame as a weapon in the way the post talks about.
The leader is above the law
More or less a 0 for this one. Yes, women have been assaulted in EA spaces, but EA more or less doesn’t make excuses for that.
The group uses “thought reform” methods
More or less a 0, as far as I can tell.
The group is elitist
I’m giving this a 0.5-1 as far as this is concerned.
There is no financial transparency
0.5 is I think the rating I’d give.
The group performs secret rites
Definitely a 0 for this criterion.
So overall it’s 1.5-2.5 depending on how you shake out the randomness. This is an okay sign for EA, for the most part. It has a few elements of cults, but not many elements of them.
You don’t know about the secret rites? They must be too secret.