“Buying your way out of personal ethics” by escapealert

I’ve noticed a recurring argument in EA spaces around veganism: “If I donate enough money to effective animal charities, I’ll save more animals than I would by going vegan. So, I don’t need to personally stop consuming animal products.” While this may sound compelling on the surface, I believe it fails for several reasons—both ethically and practically.

First-Order Utilitarianism Can Justify Harm

This argument relies on a pure first-order utilitarian outlook, where harm is permissible as long as it's “offset” by a greater good. Taken to its logical extreme, this reasoning leads to absurd conclusions: “If I donate $10,000 to save two lives, I’m morally justified in taking one life because it's convenient or enjoyable.”

Second-Order Effects: Ethics Become a Privilege for the Wealthy

A system where individuals can buy their way out of ethical harm creates an inequitable moral landscape:

• The Wealthy: Can offset harm without personal [...]

---

Outline:

(00:31) First-Order Utilitarianism Can Justify Harm

(00:57) Second-Order Effects: Ethics Become a Privilege for the Wealthy

(01:41) Personal Sacrifice and Offsetting Aren't Mutually Exclusive

(02:04) Veganisms Signalling Effect: The Power of Visible Ethical Action

---

First published:
July 5th, 2025

Source:
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bMbsfx6oDdcgjbpnP/buying-your-way-out-of-personal-ethics

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.