Do you have moral ambition?

0:00:01 Sue Bird here.
0:00:04 I am thrilled to announce I’m launching a brand new show,
0:00:07 Bird’s Eye View, the definitive WNBA podcast.
0:00:10 Every week, we’ll dig into the WNBA stories
0:00:11 that actually matter with guest interviews,
0:00:14 candid takes, and in-depth analysis from around the league.
0:00:16 It’s a show I’ve wanted to make for a while,
0:00:18 and I’m so excited it’s finally happening.
0:00:20 Whether you’re new to the WNBA or a longtime fan,
0:00:21 pull up.
0:00:22 This show is for you.
0:00:24 Bird’s Eye View is coming May 16th.
0:00:25 Follow the show on YouTube
0:00:27 or wherever you listen to your podcasts.
0:00:33 Support for this show comes from ServiceNow,
0:00:36 a company that helps people do more fulfilling work,
0:00:38 the work they actually want to do.
0:00:40 You know what people don’t want to do?
0:00:41 Boring, busy work.
0:00:44 But ServiceNow says that with their AI agents
0:00:46 built into the ServiceNow platform,
0:00:49 you can automate millions of repetitive tasks
0:00:50 in every corner of a business.
0:00:54 IT, HR, customer service, and more.
0:00:57 And the company says that means your people
0:00:59 can focus on the work that they want to do.
0:01:02 That’s putting AI agents to work for people.
0:01:03 It’s your turn.
0:01:08 You can get started at servicenow.com slash AI dash agents.
0:01:16 We’re told from a young age to achieve.
0:01:17 Get good grades.
0:01:19 Get into a good school.
0:01:20 Get a good job.
0:01:22 Be ambitious about earning a high salary
0:01:24 or a high status position.
0:01:28 Some of us love this endless climb.
0:01:31 But lots of us, at least once in our lives,
0:01:33 find ourselves asking,
0:01:35 what’s the point of all this ambition?
0:01:37 The fat salary or the fancy title?
0:01:40 Aren’t those pretty meaningless measures of success?
0:01:46 One proposed solution is to stop being ambitious
0:01:48 and start being idealistic instead.
0:01:51 You hear this from a lot of influencers.
0:01:52 Follow your passion.
0:01:54 Small is beautiful.
0:01:57 The idea is that you should drop out of the capitalist rat race
0:01:58 and do what you love.
0:02:00 Yoga, maybe.
0:02:01 Or watercolor painting.
0:02:05 Even if it makes very little positive impact on the world.
0:02:09 But what if instead of trying to be less ambitious,
0:02:14 we try to be more ambitious about the things that really matter?
0:02:16 Like helping others.
0:02:19 In an era when there’s so much chaos, injustice,
0:02:22 and frankly, a feeling of widespread despair,
0:02:24 it’s worth asking.
0:02:27 What would the world look like if we start measuring our success,
0:02:29 not in terms of fame or fortune,
0:02:32 but in terms of how much good we do?
0:02:38 I’m Sigal Samuel, and this is The Gray Area.
0:02:45 Today’s guest is historian and author Rutger Bregman.
0:02:50 He’s probably best known for what he yelled at policymakers at Davos a few years ago.
0:02:52 Taxes, taxes, taxes.
0:02:55 He’s tried to get billionaires to pay their fair share in taxes,
0:02:59 and he’s also argued for other policies that could make life better for everyone,
0:03:02 like a universal basic income.
0:03:07 Now, he’s written a new book called Moral Ambition,
0:03:10 which urges us to stop wasting our talents on meaningless work
0:03:13 and start trying to do more good for the world.
0:03:17 He wants us to be both ambitious and idealistic,
0:03:21 to devote ourselves to solving the world’s biggest problems,
0:03:25 like malaria and pandemics and climate change.
0:03:29 I invited Rutger on the show because I find his message inspiring.
0:03:34 And, to be honest, I also have some questions about it.
0:03:37 I want to dedicate myself to work that feels meaningful,
0:03:41 but I’m not sure that work that helps the greatest number of people
0:03:43 is the only way to do that.
0:03:47 So in this conversation, we’ll explore all the different things
0:03:48 that can make our lives feel meaningful
0:03:52 and ask, are some objectively better than others?
0:03:58 Hey, Rutger, welcome to the show.
0:04:00 Thanks for having me. Good to see you.
0:04:02 Your book is called Moral Ambition.
0:04:05 Why should people be morally ambitious?
0:04:10 My whole career, I’ve been fascinated with the waste of talent
0:04:13 that is going on in modern economies.
0:04:17 There’s this one study from two Dutch economists
0:04:18 done a couple of years ago,
0:04:23 and they estimate that around 25% of all workers
0:04:27 think that their own job is socially meaningless,
0:04:30 or at least doubt the value of their job.
0:04:33 That is just insane to me.
0:04:35 I mean, this is five times the unemployment rate.
0:04:39 And we’re talking about people who have often excellent resumes,
0:04:41 you know, who went to very nice universities.
0:04:45 I’m going to Harvard tomorrow to speak to students there.
0:04:47 And, well, it’s an interesting case in point.
0:04:51 45% of Harvard graduates end up in consultancy or finance.
0:04:54 Not saying all of that is totally socially useless,
0:04:58 but I do wonder whether that is the best allocation of talent.
0:05:01 And as you know, we face some pretty big,
0:05:03 obvious problems out there,
0:05:05 whether it’s, you know, the threat of the next pandemic
0:05:07 that may be just around the corner.
0:05:10 Terrible diseases like malaria and tuberculosis
0:05:11 killing millions of people.
0:05:15 The problem with democracy breaking down.
0:05:17 I mean, the list goes on and on and on.
0:05:20 And so I’ve always been frustrated
0:05:23 by this enormous waste of talent.
0:05:27 Now, I’m not saying that morality should suck up everything.
0:05:29 I’m personally a pluralist.
0:05:32 I think that there are many things that are important in life,
0:05:34 you know, family, friends, music, art.
0:05:37 And you don’t want to let morality dominate everything.
0:05:40 But I think in a rich, well-rounded life,
0:05:42 it does play an important role.
0:05:44 And if we’re going to have a career anyway,
0:05:46 we might as well do a lot of good with it.
0:05:49 What about that question specifically about,
0:05:51 you know, someone comes to you and says,
0:05:52 I’m a third grade teacher.
0:05:54 I’m a social worker.
0:05:57 Am I not being morally ambitious enough?
0:06:00 So half of the country already works
0:06:02 in these so-called essential jobs.
0:06:04 We discover that during the pandemic,
0:06:07 that, you know, when some people go on strike,
0:06:07 we’re in real trouble.
0:06:10 So my point here is that half of the country
0:06:12 doesn’t need a lecture from me
0:06:14 about being morally ambitious.
0:06:15 They’re already working in essential jobs.
0:06:18 I’m indeed more interested in preaching
0:06:20 to my own people,
0:06:24 to honestly quite a few of my friends.
0:06:26 We used to have big ideals and dreams
0:06:28 when we were still in university.
0:06:31 You know, we wrote these beautiful application essays
0:06:33 about how we were going to fix
0:06:35 tax avoidance and tax evasion,
0:06:37 how we were going to tackle global hunger
0:06:39 and work at the United Nations
0:06:40 and look at us.
0:06:41 What has happened?
0:06:43 It’s pretty sad, isn’t it?
0:06:45 Now we’re old and wrinkled and complacent.
0:06:47 Yeah, yeah, yeah.
0:06:50 Something has gone wrong, I would say.
0:06:53 So that doesn’t mean that I don’t think
0:06:54 anyone can be morally ambitious.
0:06:57 Rosa Parks was a seamstress.
0:06:59 Le Kualesa, you know,
0:07:01 the great social revolutionary in Poland.
0:07:04 He was an electrician.
0:07:06 So, I mean, history is littered with examples
0:07:08 of people who weren’t very privileged
0:07:10 and still did a lot of good.
0:07:13 But they don’t need a lecture from me, I think.
0:07:16 I’m mainly talking to people
0:07:18 who shouldn’t just check their privilege,
0:07:21 but also use that privilege
0:07:22 to make a massive difference.
0:07:26 What role does personal passion play in that?
0:07:27 You write in the book,
0:07:29 don’t start out by asking,
0:07:30 what’s my passion?
0:07:32 Ask instead, how can I contribute most?
0:07:34 And then choose the role that suits you best.
0:07:35 Don’t forget,
0:07:37 your talents are but a means to an end.
0:07:39 Yeah, I think follow your passion
0:07:41 is probably the worst career advice out there.
0:07:44 We, at the School for Moral Ambition,
0:07:45 an organization I co-founded,
0:07:48 we deeply believe in the Gandalf-Frodo model
0:07:49 of changing the world.
0:07:51 So I always like to say that
0:07:52 Frodo, you know,
0:07:54 he didn’t follow his passion.
0:07:55 Gandalf never asked him,
0:07:57 oh, what’s your passion, Frodo?
0:07:58 He said, look,
0:08:00 this really needs to be done.
0:08:01 This needs to be fixed.
0:08:02 You got to throw the ring into the mountain.
0:08:05 If Frodo would have followed his passion,
0:08:08 he would have probably, you know,
0:08:09 been a gardener,
0:08:10 having a life, you know,
0:08:11 full of second breakfasts,
0:08:13 pretty comfortable in the Shire,
0:08:15 and then the orcs would have turned up
0:08:16 and murdered everyone he ever loved.
0:08:19 So I think the point here is pretty simple.
0:08:22 Find yourself some wise old wizard,
0:08:23 a Gandalf.
0:08:27 Figure out what are some of the most pressing issues
0:08:28 that we face as a species
0:08:29 and ask yourself,
0:08:30 how can I make a difference?
0:08:32 And then you will find out
0:08:33 that you can become
0:08:34 very passionate about it.
0:08:37 It’s just don’t start
0:08:39 with looking at your navel
0:08:39 and thinking,
0:08:41 oh, what is it for me?
0:08:44 Just ask smart people out there
0:08:45 and become passionate
0:08:46 about what they say.
0:08:47 So you’re saying,
0:08:49 do the work first,
0:08:51 trust that the passion will come later?
0:08:52 Absolutely, yeah.
0:08:54 And I’ve got a couple of examples
0:08:55 of that in the book.
0:08:59 One school I’ve got a whole chapter on
0:09:01 is called Charity Entrepreneurship.
0:09:03 They’ve since rebranded
0:09:04 as Ambitious Impact,
0:09:06 but it’s a school that I like to describe
0:09:08 as the Hogwarts for do-gooders.
0:09:10 So they recruit
0:09:14 really driven entrepreneurial people
0:09:15 who want to start
0:09:17 a highly effective nonprofit.
0:09:19 And they continuously
0:09:21 research this question.
0:09:22 It’s called prioritization research,
0:09:23 thinking about,
0:09:23 yeah,
0:09:25 what are some of the most pressing issues
0:09:25 we face?
0:09:28 And then they find these founders
0:09:29 of these nonprofits,
0:09:31 and they basically match the founders
0:09:32 not only with each other
0:09:34 so that you have a co-founder,
0:09:36 but also with these tasks, right?
0:09:38 You basically get a mission.
0:09:40 And one of the most successful charities
0:09:41 they’ve launched
0:09:41 is called
0:09:43 the Lead Exposure Elimination Project.
0:09:44 I believe you guys
0:09:45 have also written about them.
0:09:45 That’s right.
0:09:47 one of the co-founders
0:09:47 is Lucia Coulter.
0:09:49 She used to be a doctor
0:09:49 at the NHS.
0:09:51 Loved her work.
0:09:52 But at the same time,
0:09:53 she was like,
0:09:55 can’t I do more good, right?
0:09:57 I’m currently working as a doctor
0:09:58 in a very rich country,
0:10:00 mostly treating patients
0:10:02 who are already relatively old.
0:10:03 It’s beautiful work,
0:10:04 but I want to do more good.
0:10:06 And you should talk to her now.
0:10:06 I mean,
0:10:08 she’s incredibly passionate
0:10:09 about the work she does.
0:10:10 OK, but so that’s a good example.
0:10:11 So it’s not that
0:10:13 she completely ditched
0:10:14 what she was already doing
0:10:16 and her existing passions, right?
0:10:17 She found a way
0:10:17 to take her passion
0:10:19 for health care
0:10:20 or for global health
0:10:21 and sort of
0:10:23 put it on a different scale,
0:10:24 but still using
0:10:26 her existing core passion
0:10:27 and skill set.
0:10:28 That’s a good point.
0:10:31 Maybe we got to be passionate
0:10:32 on a meta level,
0:10:32 you know,
0:10:34 about our higher level goals.
0:10:36 You can be really passionate
0:10:37 about making the world
0:10:37 a better place,
0:10:38 helping a lot of people,
0:10:39 improving,
0:10:40 global health,
0:10:41 something like that.
0:10:43 But it’s quite risky
0:10:44 if you get too attached
0:10:46 to a certain intervention
0:10:47 or something like that.
0:10:49 I think that’s a very sure way
0:10:51 of massively limiting your impact.
0:10:52 And you see it a lot, sadly.
0:10:54 I’ve been walking around
0:10:55 in the world of philanthropy
0:10:56 for the past two years
0:10:58 and it just drives me nuts
0:11:00 how many of these rich people
0:11:01 are all the time,
0:11:02 you know,
0:11:03 they’re gazing at their navel.
0:11:03 And like,
0:11:05 you don’t have to come up
0:11:06 with the answer yourself.
0:11:07 The research has already been done,
0:11:08 right?
0:11:12 Why do you have to be the one,
0:11:12 you know,
0:11:14 who needs to have this epiphany
0:11:14 about,
0:11:15 oh!
0:11:16 Right.
0:11:17 It’s the pandas
0:11:18 in this specific region
0:11:19 that really need our help.
0:11:22 There are already Gandalfs
0:11:22 and Dumbledores
0:11:24 working on it for you,
0:11:24 figuring it out.
0:11:25 Exactly, exactly.
0:11:27 And it takes a team
0:11:28 to make a big difference.
0:11:31 I think it can be
0:11:32 quite liberating as well
0:11:33 to not have to fight
0:11:34 your passion anymore.
0:11:35 I speak to quite a few
0:11:38 teenagers and people
0:11:39 in their 20s
0:11:41 about what they should do
0:11:41 with their career
0:11:43 and a lot of them
0:11:45 find a lot of relief
0:11:46 in this message
0:11:47 that they don’t have
0:11:48 to find their passion.
0:11:49 That there are other people
0:11:50 out there
0:11:51 who have a job
0:11:52 for them to do, right?
0:11:53 That they can just
0:11:53 sign up for it.
0:11:55 Interesting.
0:11:56 In your book,
0:11:59 there is one Venn diagram
0:12:00 that caught my eye.
0:12:01 It’s, you know,
0:12:02 these three circles.
0:12:04 The first is labeled sizable,
0:12:06 the second is solvable,
0:12:08 and the third is sorely overlooked.
0:12:09 And in the middle
0:12:10 where they all overlap,
0:12:12 it says moral ambition.
0:12:13 Explain that to me.
0:12:14 What does that mean?
0:12:15 Yeah, so this is
0:12:16 the triple S framework
0:12:17 of making the world
0:12:18 a wildly better place.
0:12:20 And it’s connected
0:12:22 to this simple point
0:12:23 that choosing the cause
0:12:25 you work on
0:12:26 is probably
0:12:27 the most important question
0:12:28 you’ve got to answer.
0:12:29 And so,
0:12:30 at the School for More Ambition,
0:12:32 we work with this framework
0:12:35 in selecting these causes.
0:12:37 Take something like
0:12:38 climate change, for example.
0:12:39 Climate change is obviously
0:12:41 a very sizable problem.
0:12:41 It’s very big.
0:12:44 Threatens a lot of people.
0:12:46 It’s also very solvable, right?
0:12:47 We know what we can do.
0:12:49 We’ve got a huge toolbox,
0:12:50 a lot of solutions out there
0:12:51 that are waiting
0:12:52 to be implemented.
0:12:54 And then the question is,
0:12:56 is it also sorely neglected?
0:12:57 And the good news here
0:12:59 is less and less so.
0:12:59 You could ask yourself,
0:13:01 what was the best time
0:13:02 to be a climate activist?
0:13:03 And the answer is not now.
0:13:05 30 years ago.
0:13:05 Exactly.
0:13:06 That was the moment.
0:13:08 So if you, again,
0:13:09 want to maximize your impact,
0:13:10 if you want to ask
0:13:11 the morally ambitious question,
0:13:12 then the question is,
0:13:13 okay,
0:13:15 what would the climate activists
0:13:16 of the 70s
0:13:17 have done today, right?
0:13:19 Or what is the problem
0:13:20 that’s currently
0:13:20 where climate change
0:13:22 was in the 1970s?
0:13:23 You see what I mean?
0:13:27 That is an entrepreneurial way
0:13:29 of looking at doing good.
0:13:31 You are really looking
0:13:31 for the gap in the market.
0:13:32 You could also do that
0:13:34 within a cost area,
0:13:34 by the way.
0:13:36 So if you look at climate change,
0:13:37 then you can think,
0:13:38 okay,
0:13:40 what is the part of the problem
0:13:40 that is currently
0:13:41 most neglected?
0:13:42 Okay,
0:13:43 so looking at the neglected
0:13:44 or sorely overlooked,
0:13:45 looking at the solvable
0:13:47 and looking at the sizable.
0:13:48 I do wonder about
0:13:50 the sizable part of that.
0:13:51 Does moral ambition
0:13:53 always have to be about scale?
0:13:55 Yeah,
0:13:55 I think so.
0:13:55 Yeah.
0:13:56 Yeah.
0:13:57 It’s about making
0:13:58 the biggest possible impact.
0:14:00 And if you can achieve
0:14:01 your goals
0:14:02 during your lifetime,
0:14:02 then you’re probably
0:14:04 not thinking big enough.
0:14:05 Look,
0:14:06 I’m not saying
0:14:06 that everyone
0:14:07 has to be morally ambitious
0:14:08 or something like that.
0:14:09 I’m not like
0:14:11 preaching with my finger
0:14:11 and saying,
0:14:11 oh,
0:14:12 if you don’t live
0:14:13 this kind of life,
0:14:14 you’re a bad person.
0:14:15 I am saying,
0:14:18 if you are ambitious anyway,
0:14:19 you know,
0:14:21 why not redirect that energy
0:14:22 to do a lot of good?
0:14:23 I think it will make your life
0:14:24 much more meaningful.
0:14:25 If you’re going to have
0:14:26 a burnout anyway,
0:14:27 you know,
0:14:27 you might as well
0:14:28 get that burnout
0:14:30 while you help
0:14:30 a lot of people,
0:14:31 right?
0:14:33 And the same is true
0:14:34 for some people
0:14:36 who are very idealistic
0:14:36 but not very ambitious.
0:14:37 Like,
0:14:38 wouldn’t it be nice
0:14:39 to actually achieve a lot?
0:14:40 I mean,
0:14:41 I personally come
0:14:42 from the political left
0:14:43 and,
0:14:45 yeah,
0:14:45 there’s this weird
0:14:46 leftist obsession
0:14:48 with being pure
0:14:48 and irrelevant,
0:14:50 right?
0:14:52 Calling out a lot of people,
0:14:53 winning the debate
0:14:54 in the group chat,
0:14:55 but not actually
0:14:55 making a difference
0:14:57 for the people you say
0:14:57 you care so much about.
0:14:58 I think that’s
0:14:59 what you call in the book
0:15:00 the noble loser,
0:15:01 right?
0:15:01 Yeah,
0:15:01 yeah,
0:15:02 yeah,
0:15:02 yeah.
0:15:04 But I guess
0:15:04 what I’m wondering is,
0:15:05 do you believe
0:15:06 that there is sort of
0:15:07 a moral imperative
0:15:09 to do the most good
0:15:10 you possibly can do
0:15:11 to have the most impact,
0:15:12 the most scale?
0:15:14 Well,
0:15:15 obviously at some point
0:15:17 you’ve done enough.
0:15:19 I talk about
0:15:20 Thomas Clarkson,
0:15:21 my favorite abolitionist.
0:15:23 He was
0:15:25 a British writer
0:15:25 and activist
0:15:28 and when he was 25
0:15:29 he had this epiphany
0:15:30 that slavery
0:15:31 was probably
0:15:31 the greatest moral
0:15:33 atrocity of his time
0:15:33 and he was like,
0:15:34 you know what,
0:15:34 maybe I can make
0:15:35 a difference.
0:15:36 Maybe I can
0:15:38 spend my life
0:15:39 fighting this
0:15:40 horrible institution
0:15:42 and that’s basically
0:15:42 what he did.
0:15:43 The first seven years
0:15:44 he traveled across
0:15:45 the United Kingdom
0:15:46 35,000 miles
0:15:47 spreading his abolitionist
0:15:48 propaganda everywhere
0:15:49 and then
0:15:50 he had a total
0:15:51 nervous breakdown.
0:15:53 Utter burnout.
0:15:53 He couldn’t walk
0:15:54 the stairs anymore.
0:15:55 He couldn’t speak.
0:15:56 He started sweating
0:15:57 profusely whenever
0:15:59 he wanted to say something
0:16:00 and I read that
0:16:00 in his memoirs
0:16:01 and I was like,
0:16:02 Thomas, Thomas, Thomas.
0:16:04 Remember your
0:16:05 breathing exercises.
0:16:05 You can take things
0:16:06 too far.
0:16:07 Now, the reason I say
0:16:08 that only at the end
0:16:08 of the book
0:16:10 because, you know,
0:16:11 most of us first
0:16:12 deserve a kick in the butt.
0:16:13 So, yeah,
0:16:14 there are some
0:16:15 do-gooders out there.
0:16:17 I think they, you know,
0:16:18 take morality
0:16:19 a little bit too seriously.
0:16:20 As I said,
0:16:22 I’m personally a pluralist.
0:16:22 I’m a father
0:16:23 of two young children.
0:16:24 I think they’re
0:16:25 way more important
0:16:26 than, you know,
0:16:27 my career.
0:16:29 But I am
0:16:31 pretty ambitious, right?
0:16:32 I do want to make
0:16:33 a mark on this world
0:16:34 and I think there are
0:16:35 a lot of people out there.
0:16:36 We are all,
0:16:37 or most of us,
0:16:38 are scared to death.
0:16:40 And what do you want
0:16:41 to look back on
0:16:42 when you lie on your deathbed?
0:16:44 All the PowerPoints,
0:16:44 you know,
0:16:46 you hated to make
0:16:47 or all the reports
0:16:48 you wrote
0:16:48 that no one ever
0:16:49 wanted to read,
0:16:50 all the products
0:16:51 that you didn’t believe in
0:16:52 that you still spend
0:16:53 a lifetime selling?
0:16:54 Seems pretty sad to me.
0:16:56 I think this is touching
0:16:57 on something really honest,
0:16:58 which is that
0:16:59 I think a lot of
0:17:01 the desire
0:17:02 for this sort of
0:17:03 big impact
0:17:04 may actually come
0:17:05 from our fear
0:17:07 of our own mortality
0:17:08 and this desire
0:17:09 to leave a legacy
0:17:10 that will outlast us
0:17:11 so that we feel like
0:17:11 in some sense
0:17:12 it actually mattered
0:17:13 that we lived it all.
0:17:15 And I remember
0:17:17 dealing with this myself.
0:17:20 I’m a journalist now
0:17:20 but before that
0:17:21 I was a novelist
0:17:23 and I didn’t care
0:17:25 how many people
0:17:26 my work impacted, right?
0:17:27 It was for me
0:17:28 really not about scale.
0:17:29 My feeling was,
0:17:30 look, if my novel
0:17:31 deeply moves
0:17:32 just one reader
0:17:34 and helps them feel
0:17:35 less alone in the world,
0:17:36 helps them feel
0:17:36 more understood,
0:17:38 I will be happy.
0:17:40 So I guess
0:17:42 my question for you
0:17:42 as someone who has
0:17:43 personally struggled
0:17:44 with this issue of scale
0:17:45 is, you know,
0:17:46 are you telling me
0:17:47 I shouldn’t be happy
0:17:47 with that?
0:17:49 The title of chapter one
0:17:50 in your book
0:17:50 is literally
0:17:52 no, you’re not fine
0:17:52 just the way you are.
0:17:55 So I think
0:17:56 there is absolutely
0:17:57 a place for
0:17:59 as the French say
0:18:00 art pour l’art,
0:18:01 right?
0:18:03 It’s just music
0:18:04 or art
0:18:04 for the sake
0:18:05 of art itself.
0:18:07 I don’t want to,
0:18:07 you know,
0:18:09 let everything succumb
0:18:09 to kind of
0:18:12 utilitarian calculus.
0:18:14 I think
0:18:15 it’s better
0:18:16 to help a lot of people
0:18:17 than just a few people
0:18:17 people.
0:18:20 So, and as I said,
0:18:21 in any rich life,
0:18:22 morality does play
0:18:23 a big role.
0:18:25 I wouldn’t want
0:18:26 to live in a society
0:18:26 where everyone
0:18:27 is like Thomas Clarkson,
0:18:27 you know,
0:18:28 running around
0:18:29 on his horseback
0:18:31 doing morally
0:18:31 ambitious work.
0:18:33 But on the margins,
0:18:35 I think in the world
0:18:35 today,
0:18:36 we need a lot
0:18:37 more ambition.
0:18:38 We need much more
0:18:39 moral ambition
0:18:39 than we currently have.
0:18:41 Yeah, I mean,
0:18:41 I personally
0:18:42 would not want
0:18:42 to end up
0:18:42 in a world
0:18:43 where everyone
0:18:44 is so focused
0:18:45 on moral ambition
0:18:46 and scale
0:18:46 that we,
0:18:47 like,
0:18:47 that no one
0:18:48 ever writes a novel
0:18:49 because they worry
0:18:49 it won’t impact
0:18:50 enough people.
0:18:51 You know,
0:18:52 when I was reading
0:18:52 your book,
0:18:53 I kept thinking
0:18:54 of the philosopher
0:18:55 Susan Wolfe,
0:18:57 who has this great
0:18:57 essay called
0:18:58 Moral Saints,
0:18:58 and I know you
0:18:59 mention it
0:19:00 in a footnote,
0:19:00 but I think her ideas
0:19:01 are very,
0:19:01 very important
0:19:02 in this context,
0:19:02 so I want
0:19:03 to talk about them.
0:19:05 Wolfe,
0:19:05 in that essay
0:19:06 Moral Saints,
0:19:07 she says,
0:19:08 if the moral saint
0:19:10 is devoting all his time
0:19:10 to feeding the hungry
0:19:11 or healing the sick
0:19:12 or raising money
0:19:13 for Oxfam,
0:19:14 then necessarily
0:19:15 he is not reading
0:19:15 Victorian novels,
0:19:17 playing the oboe,
0:19:18 or improving his backhand.
0:19:19 A life in which
0:19:20 none of these possible
0:19:22 aspects of character
0:19:22 are developed
0:19:23 may seem to be
0:19:24 a life strangely barren.
0:19:27 Quite an elitist idea
0:19:28 of how to spend
0:19:29 your life,
0:19:29 by the way,
0:19:30 reading a novel
0:19:31 and improving
0:19:32 your backhand,
0:19:33 or maybe just
0:19:34 watching Netflix all day.
0:19:35 Fair, fair,
0:19:36 but you could
0:19:36 swap that out
0:19:38 with reading
0:19:39 your favorite book
0:19:42 and any hobby,
0:19:43 playing soccer,
0:19:44 whatever it might be.
0:19:45 But basically
0:19:46 what she’s saying
0:19:47 is if you try
0:19:47 to make all
0:19:48 of your actions
0:19:49 as morally good
0:19:49 as possible,
0:19:50 you kind of end up
0:19:51 living a life
0:19:52 that’s bereft
0:19:52 of hobbies
0:19:54 or relationships
0:19:55 or all the other
0:19:55 experiences
0:19:56 that make life meaningful.
0:19:58 Talk a little more
0:19:59 about how you square
0:19:59 that with your urge
0:20:00 to be morally ambitious.
0:20:02 There is some tension,
0:20:03 but I think
0:20:04 that tension
0:20:04 is mainly felt
0:20:05 by philosophers
0:20:06 for some reason
0:20:08 and not really
0:20:09 by me
0:20:10 or, I don’t know,
0:20:12 a lot of normies.
0:20:14 It’s just,
0:20:17 as I said,
0:20:17 for me,
0:20:18 it’s super obvious
0:20:19 that life is about
0:20:19 many things,
0:20:20 including improving
0:20:22 your backhand.
0:20:23 I’m not saying
0:20:24 that people aren’t
0:20:25 allowed to play
0:20:26 tennis anymore,
0:20:27 but we spend,
0:20:28 what is it,
0:20:30 2,000 work weeks
0:20:30 in our career,
0:20:32 10,000 working days,
0:20:33 80,000 hours.
0:20:34 That’s a lot of time
0:20:36 still left at the job.
0:20:37 And as I said,
0:20:38 25% of people
0:20:39 currently consider
0:20:40 their own job
0:20:41 socially meaningless.
0:20:42 And a lot of
0:20:43 our so-called
0:20:44 best and brightest
0:20:45 are stuck in those jobs.
0:20:46 So,
0:20:47 I don’t know.
0:20:49 We are living
0:20:49 in a world
0:20:50 where a huge amount
0:20:50 of people
0:20:51 have a career
0:20:52 that they consider
0:20:52 socially meaningless
0:20:53 and then they spend
0:20:54 the rest of their time
0:20:56 swiping TikTok.
0:20:58 That’s the reality,
0:20:59 right?
0:21:01 I really don’t think
0:21:03 that there’s a big danger
0:21:03 of, you know,
0:21:05 people reading my book
0:21:05 and, you know,
0:21:07 moving all the way
0:21:08 in the other direction.
0:21:09 And that’s a problem
0:21:09 I would honestly
0:21:10 like to have.
0:21:11 So,
0:21:11 you’re saying,
0:21:11 like,
0:21:12 we’re currently
0:21:14 very far away
0:21:14 from this problem
0:21:15 of, like,
0:21:15 everyone going
0:21:16 full tilt
0:21:17 on moral ambition
0:21:18 and ignoring
0:21:19 everything else in life.
0:21:20 There’s only one
0:21:21 community I know of
0:21:22 where this has
0:21:23 become a problem
0:21:24 and, as you know,
0:21:25 it’s the effective
0:21:26 altruism community.
0:21:28 In a way,
0:21:29 moral ambition
0:21:30 could be seen
0:21:31 as effective
0:21:32 altruism for normies.
0:21:34 Okay,
0:21:34 I definitely,
0:21:35 I definitely want
0:21:36 to get to that,
0:21:36 but I’m going
0:21:36 to put a pin
0:21:37 in that for a moment
0:21:39 because I just want
0:21:41 to take the flip side
0:21:41 of what you were
0:21:42 just saying.
0:21:42 You’re saying,
0:21:43 like,
0:21:43 okay,
0:21:45 I’m not really
0:21:46 concerned,
0:21:46 Seagal,
0:21:47 that we’re,
0:21:47 like,
0:21:48 edging into this world
0:21:48 where everyone
0:21:49 is so focused
0:21:50 on moral ambition.
0:21:53 But how
0:21:54 do you then
0:21:55 actually know
0:21:56 when it’s enough?
0:21:57 I think you used
0:21:57 the phrase earlier,
0:21:58 like,
0:21:58 at some point
0:21:59 it’s enough,
0:21:59 you know?
0:22:01 And I think,
0:22:01 you know,
0:22:03 you write in the epilogue
0:22:04 of the book,
0:22:05 morality plays a big role
0:22:06 in a rich and full life,
0:22:07 but it’s not everything.
0:22:08 And if your inner fire
0:22:09 burns bright,
0:22:10 no need to stoke it hotter.
0:22:12 But to me,
0:22:12 that is pretty,
0:22:12 like,
0:22:13 fuzzy sounding.
0:22:14 How can I know
0:22:15 what’s enough
0:22:17 and avoid pushing
0:22:17 so far
0:22:18 that moral ambition
0:22:20 does take over my life?
0:22:21 That does happen
0:22:21 to some people.
0:22:24 So how can I concretely know,
0:22:24 like,
0:22:24 Seagal,
0:22:25 you’ve done enough.
0:22:26 Chill.
0:22:27 Well,
0:22:28 it depends
0:22:30 on how far
0:22:30 you want to
0:22:31 push yourself.
0:22:33 Look,
0:22:34 there are no
0:22:35 easy answers here.
0:22:37 I think that at some point
0:22:38 when you really start
0:22:41 to suffer
0:22:42 from your moral ambition,
0:22:43 that’s not where
0:22:45 I would want you
0:22:46 to end up.
0:22:48 I think you should be fueled
0:22:49 for 80%
0:22:50 by enthusiasm
0:22:52 and for maybe 20%
0:22:53 by feelings of guilt
0:22:53 and shame.
0:22:55 So a little bit
0:22:56 of guilt and shame
0:22:56 in the mix,
0:22:57 that’s fine.
0:22:59 It’s actually how,
0:23:00 you know,
0:23:01 this journey started
0:23:01 for me.
0:23:02 You know,
0:23:03 I published
0:23:04 this previous book,
0:23:05 Humankind,
0:23:06 made quite a lot
0:23:07 of money on it,
0:23:07 honestly,
0:23:08 which I never
0:23:09 would have expected.
0:23:10 I always thought
0:23:11 that it would be
0:23:12 a broke history teacher
0:23:13 or something like that.
0:23:15 And yeah,
0:23:16 that gave me
0:23:17 a feeling of responsibility
0:23:18 like,
0:23:18 huh,
0:23:19 what does this mean?
0:23:20 I actually need
0:23:21 to do something.
0:23:23 And I also felt
0:23:23 a little bit ashamed
0:23:25 for spending a decade
0:23:26 in what I like to describe
0:23:28 as the awareness industry.
0:23:28 You know,
0:23:29 I’d been
0:23:32 saying a lot
0:23:32 about all the things
0:23:33 that need to happen
0:23:33 in the world.
0:23:34 A lot of people
0:23:34 would know me
0:23:35 for shouting
0:23:35 taxes,
0:23:36 taxes,
0:23:37 taxes at Davos,
0:23:37 right?
0:23:37 Yep.
0:23:39 And I was a bit
0:23:41 fed up with myself,
0:23:41 honestly,
0:23:43 for standing
0:23:44 on the sidelines.
0:23:45 To me,
0:23:46 what this is indicating
0:23:46 is like,
0:23:47 there’s some element
0:23:48 of subjectivity here,
0:23:48 right?
0:23:49 Like the question
0:23:50 of what percentage
0:23:51 of my life
0:23:52 should be focused
0:23:53 on moral ambition
0:23:53 and what should be
0:23:55 like playing the oboe
0:23:56 or like whatever,
0:23:57 making watercolor paintings.
0:23:58 To some degree,
0:23:59 you’re deciding
0:23:59 how much
0:24:00 you want to push yourself,
0:24:01 how much
0:24:02 you’re okay
0:24:03 with having
0:24:03 some suffering
0:24:04 in your life
0:24:04 to achieve
0:24:05 a greater goal,
0:24:06 how much you’re like…
0:24:08 Can I push back
0:24:08 a little bit?
0:24:09 Yeah, please.
0:24:10 I think the question
0:24:12 itself sort of presumes
0:24:13 that doing a lot
0:24:13 of good
0:24:14 or making a lot
0:24:15 of impact
0:24:16 is not going
0:24:17 to be a nice
0:24:18 experience or something
0:24:18 like that,
0:24:20 that pushing harder
0:24:22 will always involve
0:24:23 more sacrifices.
0:24:24 But if you talk
0:24:24 to a lot
0:24:25 of entrepreneurs,
0:24:26 they find a lot
0:24:27 of joy
0:24:28 in thinking big.
0:24:29 They find a lot
0:24:30 of joy
0:24:31 in climbing the ladder.
0:24:33 It’s what I always
0:24:34 experienced in my career.
0:24:35 I love becoming
0:24:36 a member
0:24:37 of a student society
0:24:38 in Utrecht
0:24:38 in the Netherlands
0:24:39 where I grew up
0:24:41 because I felt
0:24:42 so dumb
0:24:43 compared to all
0:24:43 these older students.
0:24:44 And I was like,
0:24:45 this is awesome.
0:24:45 I want to learn
0:24:46 about philosophy
0:24:47 and anthropology
0:24:48 and history.
0:24:49 And again,
0:24:49 when I started
0:24:49 my career
0:24:50 as a journalist
0:24:52 at the Volkskrantz,
0:24:52 which is sort of
0:24:53 the Guardian
0:24:55 or, well,
0:24:55 I guess the New York Times
0:24:56 at the Netherlands,
0:24:57 I just love being
0:24:59 the youngest journalist
0:25:01 there and learning
0:25:02 from my older colleagues.
0:25:04 And when I started
0:25:06 as a writer,
0:25:07 I had these big dreams
0:25:08 about, you know,
0:25:09 I want to write a book
0:25:10 that will speak
0:25:11 to millions of people
0:25:12 about the big questions
0:25:12 of history,
0:25:13 like why have we
0:25:14 conquered the globe?
0:25:16 What makes humans special?
0:25:19 And then as I did that,
0:25:19 you know,
0:25:21 I was in my early 30s,
0:25:22 I was, yeah,
0:25:23 a bit bored
0:25:24 and looking for the next
0:25:24 ladder to climb.
0:25:27 So for me,
0:25:29 climbing a new ladder
0:25:30 has mostly been
0:25:31 about excitement
0:25:33 and enthusiasm.
0:25:49 Support for this show
0:25:50 comes from Shopify.
0:25:52 When you’re creating
0:25:53 your own business,
0:25:54 you have to wear
0:25:54 too many hats.
0:25:56 You have to be on top
0:25:56 of marketing
0:25:57 and sales
0:25:58 and outreach
0:25:59 and sales
0:26:00 and designs
0:26:01 and sales
0:26:02 and finances
0:26:03 and definitely
0:26:04 sales.
0:26:05 Finding the right tool
0:26:07 that simplifies everything
0:26:08 can be a game changer.
0:26:09 For millions of businesses,
0:26:10 that tool
0:26:11 is Shopify.
0:26:13 Shopify is a commerce
0:26:15 platform behind millions
0:26:15 of businesses
0:26:16 around the world
0:26:17 and,
0:26:18 according to the company,
0:26:20 10% of all e-commerce
0:26:21 in the U.S.
0:26:22 From household names
0:26:23 like Mattel
0:26:24 and Gemshark
0:26:25 to brands
0:26:26 just getting started,
0:26:27 they say they have
0:26:28 hundreds of ready-to-use
0:26:29 templates to help
0:26:30 design your brand style.
0:26:32 If you’re ready
0:26:32 to sell,
0:26:33 you’re ready
0:26:34 for Shopify.
0:26:35 You can turn
0:26:36 your big business
0:26:37 idea into
0:26:39 with Shopify
0:26:40 on your side.
0:26:41 You can sign up
0:26:41 for your $1
0:26:42 per month trial period
0:26:43 and start selling
0:26:44 today at
0:26:45 shopify.com
0:26:46 slash vox.
0:26:47 You can go to
0:26:48 shopify.com
0:26:49 slash vox.
0:26:50 That’s
0:26:51 shopify.com
0:26:52 slash vox.
0:26:59 Support for the gray area
0:27:00 comes from Bombas.
0:27:02 It’s time for spring cleaning
0:27:02 and you can start
0:27:04 with your sock drawer.
0:27:05 Bombas can help you
0:27:06 replace all your old
0:27:07 worn-down pairs.
0:27:08 Say you’re thinking
0:27:09 of getting into running
0:27:09 this summer.
0:27:11 Bombas engineers
0:27:11 blister-fighting,
0:27:13 sweat-wicking athletic socks
0:27:13 that can help you
0:27:14 go that extra mile.
0:27:16 Or if you have a spring
0:27:17 wedding coming up,
0:27:17 they make comfortable
0:27:18 dress socks too
0:27:20 for loafers, heels,
0:27:20 and all your other
0:27:21 fancy shoes.
0:27:23 I’m a big runner.
0:27:24 I talk about it all the time.
0:27:25 But the problem is that
0:27:27 I live on the Gulf Coast
0:27:28 and it’s basically
0:27:29 a sauna outside
0:27:30 for four months of the year,
0:27:31 maybe five.
0:27:32 I started wearing
0:27:34 Bombas athletic socks
0:27:34 for my runs
0:27:36 and they’ve held up
0:27:37 better than any other
0:27:38 socks I’ve ever tried.
0:27:39 They’re super durable,
0:27:40 comfortable,
0:27:42 and they really do
0:27:43 a great job
0:27:43 of absorbing
0:27:44 all that sweat.
0:27:45 And right now,
0:27:46 Bombas is going
0:27:46 international.
0:27:48 You can get
0:27:48 worldwide shipping
0:27:50 to over 200 countries.
0:27:51 You can go to
0:27:52 bombas.com
0:27:53 slash gray area
0:27:54 and use code
0:27:54 gray area
0:27:55 for 20% off
0:27:56 your first purchase.
0:27:57 That’s
0:27:59 B-O-M-B-A-S
0:27:59 dot com
0:28:00 slash gray area.
0:28:02 Code gray area
0:28:02 for 20% off
0:28:03 your first purchase.
0:28:05 Bombas dot com
0:28:05 slash gray area.
0:28:07 Code gray area.
0:28:12 Harvey Weinstein
0:28:13 is back in court
0:28:14 this week.
0:28:15 An appeals court
0:28:16 overturned his
0:28:16 2020 conviction
0:28:17 in New York
0:28:18 saying he hadn’t
0:28:19 gotten a fair trial
0:28:21 and so his accusers
0:28:22 must now testify again.
0:28:25 Weinstein has always
0:28:26 had very good lawyers,
0:28:27 but the court
0:28:28 of public opinion
0:28:29 was against him.
0:28:30 Until now,
0:28:31 it seems.
0:28:32 After looking over
0:28:32 this case,
0:28:32 I’ve concluded
0:28:33 that Harvey Weinstein
0:28:34 was wrongfully convicted
0:28:35 and was basically
0:28:35 just hung on
0:28:36 the Me Too thing.
0:28:37 The commentator
0:28:38 Candace Owens,
0:28:38 who has previously
0:28:39 defended Kanye
0:28:40 and Andrew Tate.
0:28:41 Andrew Tate
0:28:42 and his brother
0:28:43 were actually a response
0:28:45 to a misandrist culture.
0:28:46 Women that hated men.
0:28:47 Before Andrew Tate,
0:28:48 there was Lena Dunham.
0:28:49 Has taken up
0:28:50 Weinstein’s cause
0:28:51 and it seems to be
0:28:53 gaining her followers.
0:28:54 Coming up on Today Explained,
0:28:56 when Candace met Harvey.
0:28:56 When Candace met Harvey.
0:29:26 Let’s talk about
0:29:27 the effective altruism
0:29:28 piece of this.
0:29:28 Some of our listeners
0:29:29 may have heard of it,
0:29:31 but for those who haven’t,
0:29:31 it’s a movement
0:29:32 that’s all about
0:29:33 using reason
0:29:34 and evidence
0:29:34 and data
0:29:35 to do as much
0:29:36 good as possible.
0:29:37 I will say
0:29:39 I’m not an effective altruist,
0:29:40 but I am a journalist
0:29:41 who has reported
0:29:42 a lot on EA
0:29:43 because I work
0:29:44 for Vox’s
0:29:45 Future Perfect section,
0:29:46 which was sort of
0:29:47 loosely inspired
0:29:48 by EA
0:29:50 in its early days.
0:29:52 So I am curious
0:29:53 where you stand on this.
0:29:54 You talk about
0:29:55 effective altruism
0:29:55 in the book
0:29:56 and you do echo
0:29:58 a lot of its core ideas,
0:29:59 like this idea
0:29:59 that you shouldn’t
0:30:00 just be trying
0:30:00 to do good,
0:30:01 you should try to do
0:30:03 the most good possible.
0:30:05 So is being morally ambitious
0:30:06 different from being
0:30:07 an effective altruist?
0:30:09 Yeah, so I wouldn’t say
0:30:10 the most good.
0:30:11 I was like,
0:30:12 you should do
0:30:12 a lot of good.
0:30:14 Okay, okay.
0:30:14 Which is different, right?
0:30:15 That’s not about
0:30:16 being perfect,
0:30:17 but just about
0:30:18 being ambitious.
0:30:20 So in the book,
0:30:21 I study a lot of movements
0:30:22 that I admire.
0:30:23 As you know,
0:30:24 I write extensively
0:30:25 about the abolitionists,
0:30:26 about the suffragettes,
0:30:28 about the civil right
0:30:28 campaigners,
0:30:30 about extraordinary people
0:30:31 like Rosa Parks,
0:30:32 who was such a
0:30:33 strategic visionary.
0:30:33 A lot of people
0:30:34 remember her
0:30:35 as this,
0:30:36 you know,
0:30:37 quiet seamstress,
0:30:38 but she was actually
0:30:39 a highly experienced
0:30:39 activist,
0:30:43 and they really planned
0:30:45 this whole Montgomery bus boycott.
0:30:46 It didn’t just happen.
0:30:47 I talk about
0:30:48 the animal rights movement.
0:30:49 I talk about
0:30:50 Ralph Nader
0:30:52 and the extraordinary
0:30:53 Nader’s Raider movement
0:30:54 in the 60s and the 70s,
0:30:55 when Ralph Nader
0:30:56 was able to recruit
0:30:58 a lot of really talented
0:31:00 young Ivy League graduates
0:31:00 and convince them
0:31:01 to not work
0:31:03 for boring law firms,
0:31:03 but instead
0:31:04 go to Washington
0:31:06 and influence legislation.
0:31:07 There’s one historian
0:31:08 who estimates
0:31:08 that they’ve influenced,
0:31:09 what is it,
0:31:11 25 pieces of federal legislation.
0:31:12 So anyway,
0:31:13 the book is a whole collection
0:31:14 of studies of movements
0:31:15 that I admire,
0:31:16 and indeed,
0:31:17 effective altruism
0:31:18 is also one of those
0:31:19 movements that I admire
0:31:19 quite a bit.
0:31:20 I think there’s a lot
0:31:21 we can learn from them,
0:31:22 and there are also
0:31:23 quite a few things
0:31:24 that I don’t really like
0:31:25 about them.
0:31:28 So the main thing
0:31:29 I think indeed
0:31:30 what I really like
0:31:31 about them
0:31:31 is their
0:31:33 moral seriousness.
0:31:35 As I said,
0:31:36 I come from the political left,
0:31:37 and if there’s one thing
0:31:39 that’s often quite annoying
0:31:40 about lefties
0:31:40 is that they
0:31:41 preach a lot,
0:31:42 but they
0:31:43 do little.
0:31:44 For example,
0:31:45 this simple thing
0:31:46 about donating
0:31:47 to charity,
0:31:49 I think it’s
0:31:49 pretty easy
0:31:50 to make the case
0:31:50 that
0:31:52 that is one of the most
0:31:53 effective things
0:31:54 you can do,
0:31:55 but then
0:31:56 very few
0:31:56 of my
0:31:57 progressive
0:31:58 leftist friends
0:31:58 donate
0:32:00 anything.
0:32:01 So I really
0:32:02 like that
0:32:03 moral seriousness
0:32:04 of EAs.
0:32:05 You know,
0:32:05 you go to conferences
0:32:07 and you will meet
0:32:07 quite a few people
0:32:08 who have donated
0:32:09 kidneys to
0:32:11 random strangers,
0:32:12 which is
0:32:13 pretty impressive.
0:32:14 I’m sorry to say
0:32:15 that I still have
0:32:16 both of my kidneys.
0:32:18 My condolences.
0:32:18 And I’m quite attached to them.
0:32:21 But yeah,
0:32:22 I admire the people
0:32:24 who really
0:32:24 practice what
0:32:25 they preach.
0:32:28 I guess the main
0:32:30 thing I dislike
0:32:31 is probably
0:32:32 what we already
0:32:33 talked about.
0:32:33 Like,
0:32:34 where does the
0:32:35 motivation come from?
0:32:38 One of the
0:32:39 founding fathers
0:32:40 of effective
0:32:40 altruism was
0:32:41 the philosopher
0:32:42 Peter Singer,
0:32:42 obviously,
0:32:43 also one of the
0:32:44 founding fathers
0:32:44 of the mother
0:32:45 animal rights
0:32:45 movement.
0:32:46 And everyone
0:32:47 knows him for
0:32:47 this,
0:32:49 you know,
0:32:50 that thought
0:32:51 experiment of
0:32:51 the child
0:32:52 drowning in the
0:32:53 shallow pond.
0:32:55 I’m pretty sure
0:32:55 that he must be
0:32:56 really fed up
0:32:58 with talking about
0:32:59 that thought
0:33:00 experiment because
0:33:01 like,
0:33:01 I am already
0:33:02 fed up talking
0:33:03 about it and
0:33:03 it’s not even
0:33:04 my thought
0:33:04 experiment.
0:33:05 Right.
0:33:05 So that’s the
0:33:06 thought experiment
0:33:07 where Peter Singer
0:33:08 says,
0:33:09 look,
0:33:09 if you are
0:33:10 walking to work
0:33:10 and you see
0:33:11 a little kid
0:33:12 drowning in a
0:33:12 shallow pond,
0:33:13 you know you
0:33:14 could save this
0:33:14 kid.
0:33:15 Your life will
0:33:15 be in no danger.
0:33:16 It’s shallow,
0:33:18 but you will
0:33:19 ruin your expensive
0:33:19 suit or you will
0:33:20 muddy your shoes
0:33:21 should you do it.
0:33:21 And it’s
0:33:22 supposed to
0:33:22 be like,
0:33:22 yes,
0:33:23 obviously you
0:33:24 should do it.
0:33:25 And well,
0:33:26 by comparison,
0:33:26 you know,
0:33:27 by analogy,
0:33:28 we have money.
0:33:29 It could easily
0:33:30 save the lives
0:33:30 of people in
0:33:31 developing countries.
0:33:33 So you should
0:33:34 donate it.
0:33:34 Yeah.
0:33:35 Thank you so much
0:33:36 for helping me
0:33:36 out with that one.
0:33:37 Anyway,
0:33:39 I never really
0:33:39 liked the thought
0:33:41 experiment because
0:33:41 it always felt
0:33:43 like a form of
0:33:44 moral blackmail to
0:33:44 me.
0:33:45 And now I’m
0:33:46 suddenly supposed
0:33:47 to see drowning
0:33:47 children everywhere
0:33:48 and like,
0:33:48 oh,
0:33:49 this microphone,
0:33:50 it was too
0:33:50 expensive.
0:33:51 Could have
0:33:51 donated that
0:33:52 to, I don’t
0:33:52 know,
0:33:53 a charity in
0:33:54 Malawi or,
0:33:55 you know,
0:33:55 I just had a
0:33:56 sandwich and,
0:33:57 you know,
0:33:59 the peanut butter
0:33:59 on it was also
0:34:00 too expensive.
0:34:01 It’s like a
0:34:02 totally inhuman
0:34:03 way of, I
0:34:03 don’t know,
0:34:04 looking at life.
0:34:05 It just doesn’t
0:34:05 resonate with me
0:34:06 at all.
0:34:07 But there are
0:34:07 quite a few
0:34:08 people who
0:34:10 instantly thought,
0:34:11 yes,
0:34:11 that is true.
0:34:12 they discovered,
0:34:12 hey,
0:34:13 wait a minute,
0:34:13 I’m not
0:34:13 alone.
0:34:15 Let’s build a
0:34:15 movement together.
0:34:17 And I really
0:34:17 like that.
0:34:18 For me,
0:34:19 the historical
0:34:21 comparison is
0:34:22 the Quakers,
0:34:23 the early
0:34:24 abolitionists,
0:34:25 who were very
0:34:26 weird as well.
0:34:27 It was like
0:34:28 this small
0:34:29 Protestant sect
0:34:30 of people who
0:34:31 deeply believed
0:34:31 in equality.
0:34:32 They were some
0:34:33 of the first
0:34:34 who allowed
0:34:35 women to
0:34:36 also preach
0:34:36 in their
0:34:37 meeting houses.
0:34:38 They would
0:34:39 never take an
0:34:40 oath because
0:34:40 they were like,
0:34:41 yeah,
0:34:41 we always
0:34:42 speak the
0:34:42 truth,
0:34:42 so why
0:34:42 would we
0:34:43 take an
0:34:43 oath?
0:34:44 Anyway,
0:34:44 they were
0:34:45 seen as
0:34:45 very weird
0:34:48 and quite
0:34:48 amazing as
0:34:49 well.
0:34:49 The
0:34:50 abolitionism
0:34:50 sort of
0:34:51 started as
0:34:52 a Quaker
0:34:52 startup.
0:34:53 So that’s
0:34:54 also how
0:34:54 I see
0:34:55 EA,
0:34:56 as very
0:34:56 weird,
0:34:57 but pretty
0:34:58 impressive.
0:35:01 And I
0:35:01 think a lot
0:35:02 of people in
0:35:02 there have
0:35:02 done a lot
0:35:03 of good
0:35:03 work,
0:35:04 even though
0:35:05 I’d never
0:35:06 joined the
0:35:06 church.
0:35:08 It’s not
0:35:08 for me.
0:35:09 And there are
0:35:10 some obvious
0:35:12 downsides to
0:35:13 the ideology
0:35:14 as well.
0:35:15 Let’s pick
0:35:15 up on that
0:35:16 weirdness bit,
0:35:16 right?
0:35:17 So in
0:35:17 your book,
0:35:18 you straight
0:35:19 up tell
0:35:20 readers,
0:35:21 join a
0:35:22 cult or
0:35:22 start your
0:35:22 own.
0:35:23 Regardless,
0:35:24 you can’t
0:35:24 be afraid to
0:35:25 come across
0:35:26 as weird if
0:35:26 you want to
0:35:26 make a
0:35:26 difference.
0:35:27 Every milestone
0:35:28 of civilization
0:35:29 was first seen
0:35:29 as the crazy
0:35:30 idea of some
0:35:31 subculture.
0:35:33 I’m curious
0:35:34 how you think
0:35:35 about the
0:35:36 downsides of
0:35:37 being in a
0:35:37 cult.
0:35:38 cults don’t
0:35:39 have a
0:35:39 great
0:35:39 reputation,
0:35:40 do they?
0:35:42 So I
0:35:42 got to give
0:35:43 some credit
0:35:43 to Peter
0:35:44 Thiel here.
0:35:46 Maybe not
0:35:48 someone that
0:35:49 people naturally
0:35:50 associate with
0:35:50 me.
0:35:52 For those who
0:35:52 don’t know
0:35:53 him, he is
0:35:54 a venture
0:35:54 capitalist,
0:35:55 very much on
0:35:55 the right
0:35:57 wing side of
0:35:57 the political
0:35:58 spectrum.
0:35:59 He’s written
0:35:59 this fantastic
0:36:00 book called
0:36:01 Zero to One
0:36:02 about how to
0:36:03 build a
0:36:03 successful
0:36:03 startup.
0:36:05 And indeed,
0:36:06 one of his
0:36:07 advices is to
0:36:07 start a cult.
0:36:09 a cult is
0:36:10 a small
0:36:10 group of
0:36:11 thoughtful,
0:36:12 committed
0:36:13 citizens who
0:36:13 want to
0:36:14 change the
0:36:14 world.
0:36:15 And they
0:36:16 have some
0:36:18 shared beliefs
0:36:18 that make
0:36:18 them very
0:36:20 weird for
0:36:21 the rest of
0:36:21 society.
0:36:23 Now, as I
0:36:23 said, I
0:36:24 spent the
0:36:25 first decade
0:36:25 of my
0:36:25 career as
0:36:26 a journalist
0:36:28 and most
0:36:29 journalists
0:36:30 think that
0:36:30 they should
0:36:31 break out
0:36:31 of their
0:36:31 bubble,
0:36:33 that they
0:36:34 should meet
0:36:34 people on
0:36:34 the other
0:36:35 side of the
0:36:35 political
0:36:35 spectrum.
0:36:36 This is a
0:36:37 debate that
0:36:37 I used
0:36:38 to have
0:36:38 with my
0:36:38 colleagues.
0:36:39 They would
0:36:39 say, yeah,
0:36:40 we’ve got to
0:36:40 make sure
0:36:41 that the
0:36:41 plumbers read
0:36:42 our essays
0:36:43 as well.
0:36:44 And my
0:36:44 response was
0:36:45 always like,
0:36:45 you know,
0:36:46 I would love
0:36:47 for plumbers
0:36:47 to read my
0:36:48 essays, but
0:36:49 currently my
0:36:50 friends aren’t
0:36:50 reading them.
0:36:52 So maybe we
0:36:52 can start
0:36:53 there.
0:36:54 Right?
0:36:56 And this is
0:36:56 why I think
0:36:57 it sometimes
0:36:57 makes sense to
0:36:58 actually double
0:36:59 down on a
0:37:00 cult, because
0:37:01 in a cult,
0:37:02 it can be
0:37:02 radicalized,
0:37:03 and sometimes
0:37:04 that’s exactly
0:37:05 what’s
0:37:05 necessary.
0:37:06 To give you
0:37:06 one simple
0:37:07 example, in a
0:37:08 world that
0:37:08 doesn’t really
0:37:09 seem to care
0:37:09 about animals
0:37:10 all that much,
0:37:11 it’s easy to
0:37:12 become disillusioned.
0:37:14 But then once you
0:37:15 join a safe space
0:37:16 of ambitious
0:37:16 do-gooders, you
0:37:18 can suddenly get
0:37:18 this feeling like,
0:37:19 hey, I’m not the
0:37:20 only one, right?
0:37:21 There are other
0:37:21 people who deeply
0:37:22 care about animals
0:37:23 as well, and you
0:37:23 know what?
0:37:24 I can do much
0:37:25 more than I’m
0:37:26 currently doing.
0:37:26 So it can have a
0:37:27 radicalizing effect.
0:37:29 Now, I totally
0:37:29 acknowledge that
0:37:30 there are all
0:37:31 signs of dangers
0:37:32 here.
0:37:34 Like, you can
0:37:34 become too
0:37:35 dogmatic, you
0:37:36 can be, you
0:37:37 know, quite
0:37:38 hostile to people
0:37:39 who don’t share
0:37:39 all your beliefs.
0:37:41 So I do see
0:37:42 all of that.
0:37:43 I just want to
0:37:44 recognize that if
0:37:45 you look at some
0:37:45 of these great
0:37:46 movements of
0:37:46 history, the
0:37:48 abolitionists, the
0:37:49 suffragettes, yeah,
0:37:50 they had cultish
0:37:51 aspects.
0:37:52 They were in a
0:37:53 way, yeah, a
0:37:54 little bit like a
0:37:54 cult.
0:37:56 I want to push
0:37:58 a little bit on
0:37:59 this question
0:38:00 about, you
0:38:00 know, cults and
0:38:01 dogmatism.
0:38:03 Obviously, a big
0:38:04 downside, as you
0:38:04 mentioned, is that
0:38:05 you can become
0:38:06 dogmatic, you can
0:38:06 become kind of
0:38:07 deaf to criticism
0:38:07 from the outside.
0:38:09 Do you have any
0:38:10 advice for people
0:38:11 on how to avoid
0:38:12 the downside?
0:38:14 Yeah, don’t let
0:38:14 it suck up your
0:38:15 whole life.
0:38:16 There’s this quote
0:38:18 from Flaubert, the
0:38:19 novelist, who once
0:38:20 said something like,
0:38:20 if you want to be
0:38:22 violent and original
0:38:23 in your work, you
0:38:24 need to be boring
0:38:25 in your private
0:38:25 life.
0:38:26 I’m paraphrasing
0:38:26 here.
0:38:27 But I’ve always
0:38:29 like that quote.
0:38:30 I don’t know, it
0:38:31 gives you a certain
0:38:32 groundedness and
0:38:33 stability.
0:38:35 So maybe surround
0:38:36 yourself with
0:38:38 other types of
0:38:39 people and other
0:38:40 types of pursuits,
0:38:40 right?
0:38:41 Basically be a
0:38:42 pluralist.
0:38:44 Look, I don’t
0:38:45 know, honestly.
0:38:46 I don’t have the
0:38:48 perfect recipe here.
0:38:53 In general, it’s
0:38:54 super important to
0:38:55 surround yourself with
0:38:56 people who are
0:38:56 critical of your
0:38:57 work, who don’t
0:38:58 take you too
0:38:59 seriously, who
0:38:59 can also laugh
0:39:02 at you, who
0:39:03 have a good
0:39:03 sense of humor,
0:39:06 or who can just
0:39:06 see your
0:39:07 foolishness and
0:39:07 call it out and
0:39:08 still be a good
0:39:09 friend.
0:39:10 But this is
0:39:11 general life advice
0:39:12 for everyone.
0:39:13 Right, right.
0:39:15 Having a strong
0:39:16 dose of pluralism
0:39:17 can help
0:39:20 counteract a lot
0:39:21 of the potential
0:39:22 pitfalls with
0:39:23 these sorts of
0:39:24 ideological movements.
0:39:25 Yeah, absolutely.
0:39:25 At the same
0:39:26 time, you know, I
0:39:27 come from such a
0:39:27 different place,
0:39:28 you know.
0:39:30 I was mainly
0:39:31 frustrated with all
0:39:33 these people on
0:39:33 the left side of the
0:39:34 political spectrum
0:39:35 saying, oh, we
0:39:36 need systemic
0:39:37 change.
0:39:38 We need to
0:39:39 abolish capitalism,
0:39:40 overthrow the
0:39:42 patriarchy, and
0:39:43 write, you know,
0:39:44 a hundred more
0:39:45 monographs about it
0:39:46 in utterly
0:39:47 inaccessible
0:39:48 academic jargon.
0:39:49 And I was like,
0:39:50 come on, can we
0:39:51 actually do
0:39:51 something, right?
0:39:53 Can we actually
0:39:55 find some effective
0:39:55 way of actually
0:39:56 making a difference?
0:40:24 I think one
0:40:25 important question
0:40:26 is the question
0:40:27 of who
0:40:27 should we be
0:40:28 trying to
0:40:28 make a difference
0:40:29 for?
0:40:31 There is a very
0:40:31 interesting concept
0:40:32 that you mention
0:40:33 in the book,
0:40:34 which is humanity’s
0:40:35 expanding moral
0:40:36 circle.
0:40:37 What is that?
0:40:38 It’s, again, a
0:40:39 term from Peter
0:40:41 Singer, the
0:40:41 philosopher, who
0:40:42 makes the simple
0:40:43 case that throughout
0:40:45 history, our
0:40:46 moral circle has
0:40:46 expanded.
0:40:49 So, back in
0:40:49 the old days, we
0:40:50 mainly cared about
0:40:52 our own tribe and
0:40:53 members of our
0:40:53 tribe.
0:40:54 And then, you
0:40:55 know, we got the
0:40:56 big religions and
0:40:57 we started caring
0:40:58 about people who
0:40:59 believe the same
0:40:59 things.
0:41:00 And then we got
0:41:01 the nation states
0:41:02 and so on and so
0:41:02 on.
0:41:03 And he basically
0:41:04 says that moral
0:41:04 progress is all
0:41:05 about expanding the
0:41:07 moral circle and
0:41:08 to keep pushing
0:41:09 that expansion.
0:41:11 A couple of
0:41:11 years ago, I was
0:41:12 actually working on
0:41:13 a different book.
0:41:14 I wanted to write
0:41:14 the history of
0:41:15 moral circle
0:41:15 expansion.
0:41:17 because it’s
0:41:18 really interesting
0:41:19 that a lot of
0:41:19 the first
0:41:21 abolitionists, they
0:41:22 already cared
0:41:23 deeply about animal
0:41:24 rights, which makes
0:41:24 a lot of sense
0:41:25 because once you
0:41:26 start expanding your
0:41:27 moral circle, once
0:41:27 you start opening
0:41:29 your heart to
0:41:30 people who first
0:41:30 weren’t included in
0:41:31 your moral circle,
0:41:32 then the question
0:41:32 is, like, why
0:41:33 stop at some
0:41:33 point?
0:41:34 And I was writing
0:41:35 about that, learning
0:41:36 about that, and I
0:41:37 was like, huh,
0:41:39 maybe I should
0:41:40 finish this book
0:41:41 when I’m 60 or
0:41:42 70 or something.
0:41:44 Maybe I should be
0:41:44 doing this stuff,
0:41:45 you know, not
0:41:46 just be writing
0:41:46 about it.
0:41:47 So for me, that
0:41:48 was incredibly
0:41:48 inspirational.
0:41:50 That’s funny.
0:41:50 Okay, so if the
0:41:51 moral circle is
0:41:52 like, okay, who’s
0:41:53 worthy of our
0:41:54 moral consideration,
0:41:54 who’s not, who’s
0:41:56 in, who’s out, you
0:41:58 kind of acknowledge
0:41:58 in the book, like,
0:41:59 maybe it’s not
0:42:00 obvious how to
0:42:01 tell, are we
0:42:02 including everyone
0:42:03 in the moral circle
0:42:03 that should be
0:42:04 included?
0:42:05 And you have a few
0:42:06 pointers that you
0:42:08 offer people on
0:42:08 how to check that
0:42:09 they’re including
0:42:09 everyone that should
0:42:10 be included.
0:42:11 Do you want to
0:42:12 give us a little
0:42:13 summary, a few
0:42:14 pointers?
0:42:15 I think that
0:42:16 there are some
0:42:17 classic signs
0:42:20 that can tell
0:42:20 us whether we’re
0:42:21 on the right
0:42:22 side of history.
0:42:23 This is one of
0:42:24 those fascinating
0:42:24 questions that we
0:42:25 can ask, right?
0:42:26 We can look back
0:42:27 on, say, the
0:42:29 Romans who threw
0:42:30 naked women before
0:42:31 the lions, but
0:42:32 still thought they
0:42:32 were super
0:42:33 civilized because
0:42:34 unlike the
0:42:35 barbarians, they
0:42:36 didn’t sacrifice
0:42:38 kids to the
0:42:39 gods, right?
0:42:40 and every
0:42:40 civilization
0:42:41 throughout history
0:42:41 has always
0:42:43 thought we
0:42:43 are the most
0:42:44 civilized.
0:42:45 And obviously
0:42:46 we think that
0:42:46 today as well,
0:42:47 like any
0:42:48 modern-day
0:42:49 liberal in
0:42:50 the US or
0:42:52 the West in
0:42:52 the 21st century
0:42:53 will be like,
0:42:53 yeah, there’s
0:42:54 still bad stuff
0:42:55 happening, but
0:42:57 basically we’ve
0:42:57 figured things
0:42:58 out.
0:43:00 And the
0:43:01 uncomfortable
0:43:01 truth is that
0:43:02 probably we are
0:43:04 still committed,
0:43:06 engaged in some
0:43:07 really terrible
0:43:08 moral atrocities.
0:43:09 I mean, that’s
0:43:10 highly likely if
0:43:10 you just look at
0:43:11 the historical
0:43:11 track record.
0:43:12 So the question
0:43:13 is, what will
0:43:14 the historians of
0:43:15 the future say
0:43:16 about us?
0:43:16 And then I’m
0:43:17 not just talking
0:43:17 about, oh,
0:43:18 yeah, the bad
0:43:19 MAGA people or
0:43:19 something like that.
0:43:20 No, no, no,
0:43:21 I’m talking to
0:43:22 you directly who’s
0:43:23 listening to this
0:43:24 podcast right now
0:43:24 and probably thinks
0:43:25 of his or himself
0:43:27 as a pretty
0:43:27 decent person.
0:43:29 Then the question
0:43:29 is, okay, what
0:43:30 is that?
0:43:30 A couple of
0:43:30 signs.
0:43:31 Well, one is
0:43:32 we’ve been
0:43:33 talking about it
0:43:34 for a long
0:43:34 time.
0:43:35 So the alarm
0:43:35 bells have been
0:43:36 ringing for a
0:43:37 long time.
0:43:37 That’s one
0:43:38 clear sign.
0:43:39 In the book,
0:43:39 I give the
0:43:40 example of the
0:43:40 way we treat
0:43:41 animals.
0:43:41 And it’s not
0:43:42 as if these
0:43:43 arguments are
0:43:44 new or anything.
0:43:44 You know, a lot
0:43:45 of smart people
0:43:46 have said this
0:43:46 for a long
0:43:47 time.
0:43:47 You know,
0:43:48 Jeremy Bentham
0:43:49 already in the
0:43:50 late 18th
0:43:51 century wrote
0:43:51 that, you
0:43:52 know, it’s not
0:43:52 about whether
0:43:53 these animals
0:43:54 can speak or
0:43:54 reason or do
0:43:55 mathematics.
0:43:56 No, it’s about
0:43:56 the simple
0:43:57 question, can
0:43:58 they suffer?
0:43:59 And we’ve got
0:43:59 an enormous
0:44:00 mountain of
0:44:01 evidence that
0:44:02 tells us, yeah,
0:44:03 they can probably
0:44:04 suffer really
0:44:04 badly.
0:44:06 So yeah, if
0:44:07 you eat meat
0:44:07 and dairy
0:44:08 today, then
0:44:10 you are, yeah,
0:44:10 that it’s quite
0:44:11 likely that you’re
0:44:11 involved in one
0:44:12 of those moral
0:44:12 atrocities.
0:44:14 I’ve got a few
0:44:15 other signs that
0:44:15 I talk about.
0:44:17 For example, we
0:44:18 rationalize these
0:44:19 kind of things by
0:44:20 saying that they’re
0:44:22 natural or normal
0:44:23 or necessary.
0:44:24 This is what
0:44:25 Melanie Joy, the
0:44:26 psychologist, calls
0:44:27 the three ends.
0:44:28 And you look at
0:44:29 something like
0:44:31 slavery, and that’s
0:44:31 also what we did
0:44:32 back then, right?
0:44:32 We said it was
0:44:33 natural.
0:44:34 Like, throughout
0:44:35 history, every
0:44:35 civilization has
0:44:36 always practiced the
0:44:37 institution of
0:44:37 slavery.
0:44:39 Like, it’s just
0:44:40 what people do,
0:44:40 right?
0:44:41 What are you going
0:44:42 to do about it?
0:44:43 Or necessary, people
0:44:44 would say.
0:44:45 Yeah, it was just
0:44:47 essential for the
0:44:47 economy.
0:44:48 If we would
0:44:49 abolish slavery
0:44:49 today, you know,
0:44:50 the economy will
0:44:51 collapse and there
0:44:51 will be all kinds
0:44:52 of perverse
0:44:53 consequences.
0:44:54 So anyway, it’s
0:44:55 interesting to look
0:44:55 at those signs and
0:44:56 then think, okay,
0:44:57 what are some of the
0:44:58 worst things that may
0:44:58 be happening today?
0:45:00 There’s sort of a
0:45:01 pet peeve I have
0:45:02 about the way people
0:45:03 sometimes talk about
0:45:03 the expanding
0:45:04 moral circle.
0:45:06 People, I find,
0:45:07 typically talk about
0:45:09 it as if moral
0:45:09 progress or the
0:45:10 expansion of the
0:45:11 moral circle is
0:45:11 some sort of
0:45:12 linear process.
0:45:16 But to me, that
0:45:16 seems like a very
0:45:17 Eurocentric reading
0:45:19 of history because
0:45:20 there are other
0:45:21 cultures, right?
0:45:21 I’m thinking of the
0:45:23 Jains in India or
0:45:24 the Quechua people
0:45:25 in Latin America.
0:45:27 For them, you know,
0:45:28 the inclusion of all
0:45:29 animals and all
0:45:30 nature in the
0:45:31 moral circle has
0:45:32 been morally
0:45:33 obvious for a
0:45:34 long time and
0:45:35 that’s still not
0:45:36 obvious to
0:45:36 Americans.
0:45:38 I think that’s a
0:45:38 really good point
0:45:39 you’re making.
0:45:40 So historians call
0:45:41 this the Whig
0:45:43 view of history,
0:45:44 you know, named
0:45:45 after the Whigs,
0:45:47 the political
0:45:49 party in the
0:45:50 UK a few
0:45:51 centuries ago,
0:45:52 which indeed had
0:45:53 this Western
0:45:55 triumphalism baked
0:45:55 into it.
0:45:56 Like, we know
0:45:57 what’s right for
0:45:59 the world and we
0:45:59 will show the rest
0:46:00 of the world,
0:46:00 you know, how
0:46:01 to be good,
0:46:02 how to be moral.
0:46:04 And obviously,
0:46:06 the fight against
0:46:07 the slave trade and
0:46:08 slavery was essential
0:46:08 to that.
0:46:13 So, I have
0:46:13 complicated views on
0:46:14 this.
0:46:15 There are some
0:46:15 people who are
0:46:16 like, look, it’s
0:46:18 just total BS that,
0:46:19 you know, Britain was
0:46:20 so important in
0:46:21 abolishing the slave
0:46:22 trade because, you
0:46:23 know, it was mainly
0:46:24 the revolutions in
0:46:25 Haiti, you know, it
0:46:26 was enslaved people
0:46:27 themselves who did
0:46:27 it.
0:46:30 So, yeah, stop
0:46:30 with the colonists
0:46:31 crap.
0:46:33 And I think that’s
0:46:34 just not true, to
0:46:34 be honest.
0:46:37 People who have
0:46:38 been suffering from
0:46:39 slavery and the
0:46:40 slave trade, you
0:46:40 know, they’ve always
0:46:42 revolted, obviously,
0:46:42 you know, from
0:46:43 Spartacus onwards.
0:46:46 One in ten slave
0:46:47 voyages saw a
0:46:48 revolt.
0:46:49 But the reality is
0:46:50 that this system was
0:46:51 so horrible, and
0:46:52 not just in the
0:46:53 West, in the
0:46:54 colonies in the
0:46:55 Caribbean, but in
0:46:55 many places around
0:46:57 the globe, that
0:46:58 yeah, abolitionism
0:47:00 was for a long
0:47:00 time unthinkable.
0:47:02 And it was really
0:47:03 a new idea that
0:47:05 originated among
0:47:07 Anglo-Saxon
0:47:09 Protestants, first
0:47:10 the Quakers, and
0:47:10 then also the
0:47:11 Evangelicals, this
0:47:13 new idea that you
0:47:13 could actually
0:47:15 abolish slavery as
0:47:16 an institution.
0:47:17 It was really a
0:47:17 small group of
0:47:18 people who had
0:47:19 this crazy idea.
0:47:21 And then because
0:47:21 they did it in
0:47:22 Britain, and they
0:47:23 were successful in
0:47:24 Britain, then that
0:47:25 country was able to
0:47:27 use its power on
0:47:28 the Seven Seas, the
0:47:30 Royal Navy, to
0:47:31 force a huge
0:47:31 amount of other
0:47:32 countries to also
0:47:33 stop slavery, slave
0:47:34 trading.
0:47:34 So the Netherlands,
0:47:36 where I’m from, we
0:47:37 didn’t abolish the
0:47:38 slave trade on our
0:47:38 own.
0:47:38 Like, we were
0:47:39 making a lot of
0:47:40 money and enjoying
0:47:41 it quite immensely.
0:47:43 But then, you know,
0:47:44 these moralistic
0:47:46 British people came
0:47:46 along and, okay,
0:47:47 okay, we will
0:47:48 abolish it.
0:47:49 And that happened
0:47:50 again and again.
0:47:51 The irony is,
0:47:52 obviously, that this
0:47:53 was, again, also an
0:47:54 excuse for more
0:47:55 colonialism, so
0:47:57 that, you know, some
0:47:58 new horrors grew out
0:47:59 of that, that under
0:47:59 the banner of
0:48:01 anti-slavery, a new
0:48:03 colonial era dawned
0:48:04 and the whole
0:48:05 scramble for Africa
0:48:05 happened.
0:48:07 So I really don’t
0:48:09 want to, you know,
0:48:09 suggest that there
0:48:10 are some natural
0:48:11 progress in history.
0:48:13 If the arc of
0:48:15 justice bends, or if
0:48:16 the arc of history
0:48:16 bends towards
0:48:18 justice, then it’s
0:48:20 because, like, people
0:48:20 do that.
0:48:21 And if we don’t
0:48:22 keep bending it, it
0:48:23 might easily snap
0:48:24 back.
0:48:25 And there’s really
0:48:27 no natural order
0:48:28 of things here.
0:48:29 And indeed, in some
0:48:31 ways, we’ve made,
0:48:32 what’s the opposite
0:48:32 of progress?
0:48:33 What’s the English
0:48:33 word?
0:48:34 Backsliding.
0:48:35 Yeah, we’ve been
0:48:36 backsliding.
0:48:37 And I think animals
0:48:38 is a great example.
0:48:40 Imagine a world where
0:48:40 the Industrial
0:48:41 Revolution would have
0:48:42 happened in India.
0:48:43 I mean, maybe we
0:48:43 wouldn’t have
0:48:45 ended up with these
0:48:46 horrible systems of
0:48:47 factory farming.
0:48:49 It could have been
0:48:51 so much better.
0:48:53 Yeah, when I think
0:48:55 about progress, I
0:48:56 mean, I think of it
0:48:58 as, first of all, like,
0:48:58 who gets to define
0:48:59 what’s progress?
0:49:01 I think that depends a
0:49:01 lot on who’s in power
0:49:02 and who’s defining it.
0:49:05 But I don’t see it as
0:49:06 a sort of straight line
0:49:07 linearly going up.
0:49:08 I very much see it as
0:49:09 a messy squiggle.
0:49:11 And it’s entirely
0:49:12 plausible to me that
0:49:15 in 100 years, we will
0:49:17 have expanded our
0:49:18 moral circle in some
0:49:19 ways and given more
0:49:19 rights to certain
0:49:20 human beings.
0:49:22 You know, for example,
0:49:24 that we’ve abolished
0:49:25 factory farming and we
0:49:26 are treating animals
0:49:28 great, even as we’re
0:49:30 now really repressing
0:49:31 certain classes of
0:49:31 human beings.
0:49:33 Does that prediction
0:49:35 sound plausible to you?
0:49:35 Oh, no, no.
0:49:36 I’m not making any
0:49:37 predictions here.
0:49:38 I think the future
0:49:39 could be much worse
0:49:39 than today.
0:49:42 For me, that’s one of
0:49:42 the main lessons of
0:49:43 history.
0:49:44 Things can change
0:49:46 quite radically, for
0:49:46 better or for worse.
0:49:47 I’m pretty sure
0:49:49 that when you would
0:49:50 have talked to, you
0:49:51 know, most Germans in
0:49:53 the 1920s, I mean,
0:49:53 they couldn’t have
0:49:54 imagined, like, the
0:49:55 terrible abyss that
0:49:56 was ahead of them.
0:49:58 If I look at the U.S.
0:50:00 today, I am really
0:50:01 pessimistic, to be
0:50:01 honest.
0:50:03 I think there’s a real
0:50:04 threat of democracy
0:50:06 breaking down, and I
0:50:07 think that things can
0:50:08 get much, much worse
0:50:10 quite soon, actually.
0:50:11 Mm-hmm.
0:50:13 Let’s talk about
0:50:14 what’s ahead for you
0:50:15 personally.
0:50:18 Maybe you have a little
0:50:19 more ability to predict
0:50:20 that, potentially.
0:50:21 It, you know, it
0:50:22 strikes me with your
0:50:24 book, like, you could
0:50:25 have been like, look,
0:50:26 I’m happy, I’m
0:50:27 content to just write a
0:50:27 book about moral
0:50:28 ambition, leave it at
0:50:29 that, you know.
0:50:31 But you did not just
0:50:31 leave it at that, you
0:50:33 also decided to co-found
0:50:34 something that you
0:50:34 mentioned earlier.
0:50:35 It’s called the School
0:50:36 for Moral Ambition.
0:50:38 What is that, and how
0:50:39 did that get started?
0:50:40 I was at a point in
0:50:42 my career where I
0:50:43 looked at what I
0:50:44 had, you know, a bit
0:50:44 of a platform.
0:50:46 I think I have the
0:50:48 ability to, you know,
0:50:50 write things that
0:50:51 perhaps some people
0:50:51 want to read.
0:50:54 But I also felt this
0:50:57 itch, right, and felt
0:50:58 a little bit fed up
0:50:58 with myself.
0:51:00 And I was hugely
0:51:02 inspired by, for
0:51:03 example, what Ralph
0:51:03 Nader did in the
0:51:05 60s and the 70s, that
0:51:06 he was able to build
0:51:08 this beacon, this
0:51:08 magnet for very
0:51:09 driven and talented
0:51:10 people to work on
0:51:11 some of the most
0:51:12 pressing issues.
0:51:15 Throughout history, I
0:51:16 think we’ve seen
0:51:17 movements that have
0:51:18 been successful at
0:51:19 redefining what it
0:51:20 means to be
0:51:20 successful.
0:51:21 That was one of the
0:51:23 epiphanies I had when
0:51:24 I studied the British
0:51:25 abolitionist movement,
0:51:26 is they were actually
0:51:27 part of a much bigger
0:51:29 societal shift that
0:51:30 was all about making
0:51:30 doing good more
0:51:31 fashionable.
0:51:33 So I guess that’s
0:51:34 what we are betting
0:51:34 on.
0:51:36 Again, we are trying
0:51:37 to build that
0:51:37 magnet.
0:51:38 We are trying to
0:51:39 redefine what it
0:51:40 means to be
0:51:41 successful.
0:51:42 So we do a couple
0:51:43 of things.
0:51:45 One is we organize
0:51:45 these so-called
0:51:46 moral ambition
0:51:46 circles.
0:51:47 They’re groups of
0:51:48 five to eight
0:51:49 people who want to
0:51:50 explore what a
0:51:50 morally ambitious
0:51:51 life could mean for
0:51:51 them.
0:51:54 This is all freely
0:51:55 accessible on our
0:51:56 website, moralambition.org.
0:51:57 And at the same
0:51:58 time, we organize
0:51:59 so-called moral
0:52:00 ambition fellowships.
0:52:03 And you could see
0:52:04 them as small SWAT
0:52:06 teams of extremely
0:52:08 talented, very driven
0:52:09 people who have
0:52:10 agreed to quit their
0:52:13 job, follow Gandalf,
0:52:15 and work on some of
0:52:16 the most important
0:52:17 global problems.
0:52:18 We got started in
0:52:18 Europe.
0:52:20 No, no, no, no, no,
0:52:20 no, no.
0:52:21 I’m not coming up with
0:52:22 the mission statements.
0:52:24 It’s actually our
0:52:25 researchers who are
0:52:25 our Gandalfs.
0:52:26 I’m more like the
0:52:27 Muppet, you know?
0:52:30 Like the mascot, you
0:52:31 know, in the silly
0:52:33 suit, right?
0:52:35 That’s me who walks
0:52:36 on the field before
0:52:37 the match gets
0:52:37 started.
0:52:38 That’s my job.
0:52:41 But, yeah, so we
0:52:42 asked our researchers
0:52:43 what are some of the
0:52:44 most important things
0:52:45 we can do in
0:52:45 Brussels.
0:52:46 And to my big
0:52:47 surprise, actually,
0:52:47 one of the things
0:52:48 they advised us is to
0:52:49 work on fighting big
0:52:50 tobacco.
0:52:51 It’s the single
0:52:52 largest preventable
0:52:53 cause of disease
0:52:54 still today.
0:52:55 Eight million
0:52:55 deaths every year.
0:52:56 year, and very
0:52:57 few people are
0:52:58 working on
0:52:59 countering it.
0:53:00 So we’ve been
0:53:02 recruiting corporate
0:53:02 lawyers,
0:53:03 marketeers.
0:53:04 Actually, we’ve got
0:53:05 someone in our
0:53:06 last cohort who
0:53:07 used to work for
0:53:09 Big Tobacco, and
0:53:10 now they’re applying
0:53:11 their skills and
0:53:12 their talents to
0:53:13 doing a lot of
0:53:13 good.
0:53:15 And, yeah, we
0:53:16 want to scale up
0:53:17 this machine.
0:53:18 Obviously, the point
0:53:19 is that it is very
0:53:20 hard to get into
0:53:21 one of our
0:53:22 fellowships because
0:53:22 we want to make
0:53:23 it more prestigious.
0:53:24 You went to
0:53:24 Harvard.
0:53:25 Okay, well,
0:53:25 that’s not
0:53:26 nearly enough.
0:53:27 That’s nice, but
0:53:30 we are, yeah,
0:53:32 it’s quite
0:53:32 extraordinary, I
0:53:33 think, the
0:53:34 groups that we
0:53:35 are now bringing
0:53:36 together.
0:53:38 I think because of
0:53:39 two reasons.
0:53:39 One, because we
0:53:40 want to make doing
0:53:41 good more
0:53:41 prestigious and
0:53:43 more fashionable.
0:53:44 The other thing is
0:53:45 that we genuinely
0:53:46 believe that if you’re
0:53:47 very selective and
0:53:48 that some very
0:53:49 entrepreneurial people
0:53:50 can just do so
0:53:51 much.
0:53:51 where is the
0:53:52 school for
0:53:53 moral ambition
0:53:54 getting all the
0:53:55 funding, getting
0:53:56 the money to be
0:53:56 able to pay
0:53:57 people to quit
0:53:57 their jobs?
0:53:59 Mostly from me
0:53:59 now.
0:54:02 Everything I earn
0:54:02 with the book is
0:54:03 going all into the
0:54:04 movement.
0:54:06 So that’s been
0:54:06 helpful.
0:54:07 And we’ve got a
0:54:09 group of entrepreneurs
0:54:09 supporting us as
0:54:10 well.
0:54:11 So these are
0:54:11 people who have
0:54:12 indeed built their
0:54:13 own companies and
0:54:14 who are looking
0:54:16 to climb, as
0:54:17 David Brooks would
0:54:18 say, their second
0:54:18 mountain.
0:54:19 You know, you
0:54:20 mentioned that
0:54:21 the School for
0:54:22 Moral Ambition is
0:54:24 highly sort of
0:54:25 competitive to get
0:54:25 in.
0:54:27 And most of the
0:54:28 listeners won’t end
0:54:29 up going to the
0:54:31 school, but I am
0:54:32 kind of interested to
0:54:32 hear that you’re
0:54:33 also promoting
0:54:34 these moral ambition
0:54:35 circles that people
0:54:35 can start with
0:54:36 their friends.
0:54:38 I personally am not
0:54:40 really sold on the
0:54:41 idea of maximizing,
0:54:42 like do the most
0:54:44 good possible as my
0:54:45 entire guiding
0:54:46 philosophy for life,
0:54:47 but I am attracted
0:54:49 to the idea of
0:54:50 trying to do more
0:54:51 good.
0:54:52 Exactly.
0:54:53 Right?
0:54:54 We’re totally on
0:54:54 the same page.
0:54:55 Yeah.
0:54:58 And I very much
0:54:59 think I could enjoy
0:55:00 kind of just sitting
0:55:01 with five or six
0:55:02 friends on a regular
0:55:03 basis and trying to
0:55:04 challenge each other
0:55:05 to be more
0:55:06 intentional about
0:55:07 whatever the values
0:55:08 are that we do
0:55:09 believe in, right?
0:55:09 Yeah.
0:55:11 So maybe one way
0:55:12 to say this,
0:55:13 Sikal, is that
0:55:15 when I talk to
0:55:15 some of my banker
0:55:17 friends, I’m not
0:55:18 inclined to talk
0:55:18 about all these
0:55:19 drowning children
0:55:20 in shallow
0:55:21 ponds, right?
0:55:23 I’m also not
0:55:24 inclined to talk
0:55:25 in a more leftist
0:55:25 way and say,
0:55:25 oh, you’re so
0:55:26 bad, you’re so
0:55:27 greedy.
0:55:30 What I’ve
0:55:31 discovered is
0:55:32 that it’s much
0:55:32 more effective to
0:55:33 say something
0:55:34 like, oh,
0:55:35 wow, you’re so
0:55:36 talented, you’re so
0:55:38 experienced, and
0:55:39 this is what you’re
0:55:39 doing?
0:55:40 Boring.
0:55:43 And that hurts
0:55:44 them much more
0:55:46 in my experience.
0:55:47 And it’s also
0:55:48 honestly what I
0:55:48 believe.
0:55:50 Yeah, people
0:55:50 really don’t like
0:55:51 to be boring.
0:55:54 I will say this
0:55:55 conversation has
0:55:55 been far from
0:55:56 boring.
0:55:57 I really enjoyed
0:55:58 chatting with you
0:55:59 and reading your
0:55:59 book.
0:56:00 It’s called
0:56:01 Moral Ambition.
0:56:03 Rutger, just
0:56:03 want to say thank
0:56:04 you so much for
0:56:05 being on our
0:56:05 show.
0:56:06 Thanks for
0:56:06 having me.
0:56:15 I hope you
0:56:15 enjoyed this
0:56:15 episode.
0:56:16 I know I
0:56:17 enjoyed wrestling
0:56:17 with all these
0:56:18 ideas.
0:56:19 And while I
0:56:20 don’t think I’ll
0:56:20 be enrolling at
0:56:21 the School for
0:56:21 Moral Ambition,
0:56:23 I will consider
0:56:23 setting up a
0:56:24 moral ambition
0:56:25 circle with my
0:56:25 friends.
0:56:26 But as always,
0:56:27 we want to know
0:56:28 what you think,
0:56:29 so drop us a
0:56:29 line at
0:56:31 thegrayareaatvox.com
0:56:33 or leave us a
0:56:33 message on our
0:56:34 new voicemail
0:56:35 line at
0:56:38 1-800-214-5749.
0:56:39 And once you’re
0:56:40 finished with that,
0:56:41 go ahead and rate
0:56:42 and review and
0:56:43 subscribe to the
0:56:43 podcast.
0:56:45 This episode was
0:56:46 produced by Beth
0:56:47 Morrissey, edited
0:56:48 by Jorge Just,
0:56:49 engineered by
0:56:50 Christian Ayala,
0:56:51 fact-checked by
0:56:52 Melissa Hirsch,
0:56:53 and Alex Overington
0:56:54 wrote our theme
0:56:54 music.
0:56:56 The episode was
0:56:56 hosted by me,
0:56:57 Sigal Samuel.
0:56:58 I’m a senior
0:56:59 reporter at
0:57:00 Vox’s Future
0:57:01 Perfect, where I
0:57:02 cover AI,
0:57:03 neuroscience, and a
0:57:03 whole lot more.
0:57:05 You can read
0:57:05 my writing at
0:57:06 vox.com
0:57:07 slash future
0:57:07 perfect.
0:57:09 Also, if you
0:57:10 want to learn
0:57:10 more about
0:57:11 effective altruism
0:57:11 and the
0:57:12 drowning child
0:57:13 thought experiment,
0:57:14 check out
0:57:15 Vox’s Good
0:57:16 Robot podcast
0:57:16 series.
0:57:17 I highly
0:57:17 recommend it.
0:57:18 We’ll drop a
0:57:19 link to that
0:57:19 in the show
0:57:19 notes.
0:57:22 New episodes of
0:57:22 The Gray Area
0:57:23 drop on Mondays.
0:57:24 Listen and
0:57:25 subscribe.
0:57:26 The show is
0:57:27 part of Vox.
0:57:28 Support Vox’s
0:57:29 journalism by
0:57:29 joining our
0:57:30 membership program
0:57:30 today.
0:57:31 Go to
0:57:32 vox.com
0:57:33 slash members
0:57:34 to sign up.
0:57:35 And if you
0:57:36 decide to sign
0:57:36 up because of
0:57:37 this show,
0:57:38 let us know.