by Vesa Hautala

This post is related to the EACH research agenda item 6.1 “Are there differences between different forms of Christianity in how compatible they are with EA?”

In this post, I will explore whether there are differences in how responsive different forms of Christianity are to EA. By various forms of Christianity, I mean different denominations but also inter- and intra-denominational variations like the conservative-liberal axis. This post focuses on the current representation of different Christian groups in EA and the possible reasons behind it. As there is only little hard data, a lot of what follows is (hopefully educated!) speculation.

Demographic Trends: Christian Representation in EA

Based on EA for Christians community survey data and observations by me and others in the EACH team, the majority of Christians in EA are Protestants. There is a range from conservative evangelical types to liberals. There appears to be a scarcity of people on the very conservative end of the spectrum—this is not based on survey data but on my and other organisers’ observations. There are Christians identifying as evangelical, progressive, liberal, born-again, mere Christian and reformed. There are also Roman Catholics, but they may be underrepresented compared to protestants. However, it is hard to tell due to the small sample size in the EACH survey and the unreliability of intuitive estimates. Orthodox Christians are notably rare within the EA community; in addition to myself, I recall ever meeting maybe two others.

This distribution of different forms of Christianity in EA is at least partially explained by general EA demographics. The largest EA communities exist in Protestant-majority countries such as the UK and the US. The Church of England was the denomination with the most members in the EACH survey. The scarcity of Orthodox Christians is likely also related to geographic factors. 

The Cultural Influence of Protestantism in EA

If there is a lack of non-Protestant Christians in EA, could the reason be that EA is in some ways culturally Protestant despite being a mostly secular community? I’ve seen people make this claim but also others pointing out it is suspect (“Describing the average member of a movement with as many Jews as effective altruism as “culturally Protestant” is quite anti-Semitic”). I’ve heard of some Catholics who have felt that EA is protestant. The evidence is anecdotal but perhaps hints at an existing phenomenon. It seems possible that EA, or EA for Christians, uses a style of speaking about morality that registers as “Protestant” to some non-Protestant Christians. In the case of EACH, this seems quite likely, even, given the group is majority Protestant. If EA is indeed culturally Protestant in some sense, this could be explained in part by the founder effect, since much of EA originates from institutions like Oxford and Ivy League universities that have strong Protestant traditions.

The common EA approach to ethics is consequentialist, perhaps with some obligation-based appeal. This may present challenges for Christians who have a more virtue ethics-oriented perspective. Catholic and Orthodox traditions especially have a strong virtue ethics element. Additionally, some Christians emphasize specific moral obligations tied to their personal relationships or convictions, leading to tensions with the impartiality central to EA's approach.

The Absence of Conservative Protestants in EA

The lack of the most conservative protestant Christians seems not to be explainable only by geography, since fundamentalists1 are a sizable group in the US, especially as a share of protestant Christians in the US. It might seem obvious why EA has few fundamentalist Christians, but it’s worth spelling out nevertheless. Some of these factors also affect many other Christians to some degree, as well as some Muslims and Jews. The culture of EA is likely difficult for these Christians to engage with. EA tends to be liberal and leans left politically. The fundamentalist tendency to separate from non-Christians also makes engaging with a very secular movement difficult. Fundamentalists tend to distrust the scientific establishment, at least with regard to the theory of evolution, whereas EA is very pro-science and never considers creationist options when touching on matters of human origin or the biological history of life.

I’m somewhat hesitant to say this, but what EAs like to call epistemics also likely plays a role. It seems there’s a style present among fundamentalists that relies more on authoritative sources than on open empirical inquiry. To caveat, a similar style can be found among many other people as well, Christians or not, and EA epistemics is quite foreign to most people in general. Still, it seems plausible to me that among fundamentalists there would be relatively fewer people who are receptive to the EA style of thinking than in some other Christian populations.

Lower exposure to EA could also be an explaining factor. There isn’t much EA presence on campuses of universities like Bob Jones. It seems likely that people encounter EA in different social bubbles than those that fundamentalists and other Christians on the conservative end of the spectrum usually inhabit. 

Theological Stances: Doctrinal Barriers to Engagement

Certain doctrinal stances might affect the receptiveness of different Christian groups to EA. Much could be written about these, but I’ll be brief. One such point of doctrine is eschatology. Those who are who think the Second Coming is sure or very likely to happen within decades would reject the concept of a prolonged future for humanity and hence longtermism. This kind of eschatological expectation is common among the more conservative protestants. Another stance that blurs the boundary between ethical and doctrinal is the relationship between humans and animals. Some Christians might perceive working on animal welfare as misdirected and reject EA because they see animal welfare being a prominent cause area in the movement.

Characteristic to both of these stances is that they lead to a rejection of only a particular cause area within EA. This would leave room to engage with the other parts. Picking the parts that fit one’s worldview is necessary for all EAs because EA contains multiple cause areas that can’t all be the most important one and the choice between them is affected by questions of worldview and morality. 

Conclusion: Cultural and Theological Barriers in EA

In conclusion, there appears to be a lack of some types of Christians in EA. Very conservative Protestants are underrepresented relative to their prevalence among US Christians. Non-Protestant Christians may also be underrepresented, but at least for Orthodox Christians geography is likely an explaining factor. There are theological reasons that may lead some Christian groups to reject certain EA causes, but this does not preclude engagement with other areas of EA. The culture of the EA movement and the way it discusses questions of morality and values likely present barriers to many Christians who would potentially be interested in EA, and it’s likely these tend to affect some groups of Christians more or differently than others. Some of this could likely be overcome by developing the Christian EA community and mapping the relationship between EA and Christianity further. This way a cultural translation of EA and a community that is easier to engage while still faithful to the core tenets of EA could be offered to a wider range of Christians. A lot of work remains to be done, perhaps especially towards non-Protestant Christians. But the question remains how far these efforts should reach, because EA, Christian or otherwise, can’t be everything to everyone.

1I want to talk a bit about the F-word I just dropped. “Fundamentalism” is a term I dislike because it is often used pejoratively and its definition is a bit too fuzzy for my liking, but I’ve decided to use it anyway (without meaning to be insulting) because it’s the most succinct and recognisable way to refer to an existing phenomenon. If you recognise yourself from the following description but feel I have misrepresented this kind of Christianity, I’m very open to discussing this in the comments or otherwise.

Fundamentalism, as I am using the term here, is historically defined by opposition to modernism, especially the theory of evolution and higher criticism of the Bible. A tendency towards a literalistic interpretation of the Bible and belief in scriptural inerrancy are still at its core, and Young Earth Creationism is a commonly held belief. Fundamentalism has also been historically characterised by separating from the unbelieving world, but also from Christians who are seen as too compromising.

As for how fundamentalism differs from evangelicalism or conservative Christianity in general, (almost) all fundamentalists are evangelicals, meaning they put a heavy emphasis on personal salvation, conversion, and evangelism, but not all evangelicals are fundamentalists. Evangelicals are more open to engaging with contemporary culture and Christians who have different beliefs. They also have a wider range of views when it comes to the authority of scripture and certain doctrines. To some extent, the difference between fundamentalism and other types of conservative Protestantism may be more about style or approach than the content of beliefs.