I love critiques of consequentialism, but I found this piece to be fundamentally free of meaning. Then I looked up the author's bio. "I am a Professor of Econom

I love critiques of consequentialism, but I found this piece to be fundamentally free of meaning. Then I looked up the author's bio. "I am a Professor of Economics." Well that explains it. The only thing worse than an economist is an economist trying their hand at philosophy. Snark (somewhat) aside, this is the worst kind of philosophizing, where the author clearly read a couple SEP articles and then described their position with a mix of half-understood and contradictory jargon, and dumb thought experiments where the only possible subject can be Hitler. It's pure sophistry. No actual philosopher worth their salt would use such extreme and intentionally trolling examples.