It feels intellectually lazy to “strongly disagree” with principles like “The best way to do good yourself is to act selflessly to do good” and then not explain why.
I could be wrong, but I was figuring that here Zvi was coming from a pro-market perspective, i.e. the perspective in which Jeff Bezos has made the world a better place by founding Amazon and thus we can now get consumer goods more cheaply and conveniently etc. (But Jeff Bezos did so, presumably, out of a selfish desire to make money.)
I also suggest replacing “feels intellectually lazy” with something like “I know you’re busy but I sure hope you’ll find the time to spell out your thoughts on this topic in the future”. (In which case, I second that!)
After a PM conversation with Steve, and pending reviewing Zvi’s post more carefully, I’ll note:
I agree that Zvi probably meant something pro-market. (I mostly disagree that EA should be much more pro-market than it already is, but that’s not the main point here.)
Insofar as Zvi is attempting to make the reader believe without justification that EA is insufficiently pro-market, that’s intellectually lazy, but he’s probably just mentioning disagreements to set up the rest of his post rather than to convince, in which case it’s not intellectually lazy. So I retract “intellectually lazy.” (But it is frustrating to a reader who wants to know what Zvi really thinks and why, especially since this isn’t the first time Zvi has criticized EA obliquely.)
I could be wrong, but I was figuring that here Zvi was coming from a pro-market perspective, i.e. the perspective in which Jeff Bezos has made the world a better place by founding Amazon and thus we can now get consumer goods more cheaply and conveniently etc. (But Jeff Bezos did so, presumably, out of a selfish desire to make money.)
I also suggest replacing “feels intellectually lazy” with something like “I know you’re busy but I sure hope you’ll find the time to spell out your thoughts on this topic in the future”. (In which case, I second that!)
After a PM conversation with Steve, and pending reviewing Zvi’s post more carefully, I’ll note:
I agree that Zvi probably meant something pro-market. (I mostly disagree that EA should be much more pro-market than it already is, but that’s not the main point here.)
Insofar as Zvi is attempting to make the reader believe without justification that EA is insufficiently pro-market, that’s intellectually lazy, but he’s probably just mentioning disagreements to set up the rest of his post rather than to convince, in which case it’s not intellectually lazy. So I retract “intellectually lazy.” (But it is frustrating to a reader who wants to know what Zvi really thinks and why, especially since this isn’t the first time Zvi has criticized EA obliquely.)