New Times,
New Thinking.

  1. Business
  2. Economics
20 August 2015

A new breed of hardcore altruists are changing the way we think about charity. But can generosity go too far?

The act of giving is always a calculated risk. Julian Baggini explores the limits of altruism.

By Julian Baggini

The Maitreya Social restaurant in Bristol would seem to be the ideal location to talk to Peter Singer, the author of Animal Liberation and one of the world’s most celebrated moral philosophers. Vegetarian and organ­ic, it is impeccably ethical. You can even ­settle your bill with Bristol Pounds, the local currency, designed to keep wealth out of the hands of multinational businesses and big banks. But according to my guest’s austere utilitarian principles, there is no justification for spending £10.95 on a summer vegetable galette when people on the other side of the world are dying of malnutrition.

I’m meeting Singer because, along with Thomas Pogge, he is one of the leading intellectual inspirations of effective altruism, the central principle of which is summed up in the title of his latest book, The Most Good You Can Do (Yale University Press). The idea is simple: that when you donate to charity, you ought only to give to organisations which can demonstrate that they will make good use of it. This has suddenly become a very hot topic, with the concern in recent weeks that donors to Kids Company were moved more by the charisma and dedication of its founder rather than hard evidence that it was spending money well.

Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month
Content from our partners
Towards an NHS fit for the future
How drones can revolutionise UK public services
Chelsea Valentine Q&A: “Embrace the learning process and develop your skills”