I think the analogy is obviously designed to provoke an emotional response, but it’s not wildly unreasonable. The sun is beneficial for humanity a whole. But o

I think the analogy is obviously designed to provoke an emotional response, but it’s not wildly unreasonable. The sun is beneficial for humanity a whole. But one side-effect is that you get skin cancer. Alice argues that overall, we’re better off, so don’t turn the sun off: Learn to live with skin cancer. Bob argues that maybe we can have the benefits of the sun while avoiding, curing, or reducing skin cancer. So don’t turn the sun off: Put your energies into fixing skin cancer, not complaining about the sun’s harmful rays. Those two arguments are certainly parallel to a lot of other arguments about capitalism, poverty, and inequality. Whether they are particularly convincing is another matter. Whether there are other options is another matter. And whether Paul’s essay matches either argument is yet another.