Musk has made massive strides in sectors that benefit humanity like clean energy, space travel, public transportation, etc. Musk has flaws; so does everyone else. Oh but he has deep flaws, says Robinson. Well it turns out that those with deep passions also house deep flaws. Even still Robinson should be grateful visionaries like Musk spent their time and money helping develop civilization to such a comfortable level. Only then after real problems like food, sanitation, housing, transportation, etc. have been solved can Robinson afford an occupation that allows him to criticize contributors unabated while contributing nothing substantial himself.
Now we need people to write and criticize and highlight the issues in our societies and ourselves. But 2021 has so many bigger fish worthy to be fried than Musk. Robinson himself doesn't even have an answer to a "problem" like Musk. That's because he isn't paid to solve real problems; he's paid to talk about imaginary ones. In the early twentieth century, Current Affairs would be publishing headlines like "Surely We Can Do Better Than Thomas Edison". But personally I prefer "Surely we can do better than Nathan J. Robinson."
Well put. I have my own laundry list of issues with figures like Jobs and Musk. The people that have work with them personally regularly come out with stories detailing how grueling the work is.
And yet, I can’t help but wonder sometimes if the trade off is worth it. The lives of a couple hundred people are voluntarily made hell for a few years and in return society gains ubiquitous computing with smartphones and electric cars coming to market faster than previously expected. Is it worth it?
This is obviously predicted on the assumption that these advances wouldn’t have come without these people.
The author's thesis isnt that Elon Musk is flawed, though. Its that his vision of the future is.
The idea that there isnt any comparison of the magnitude of the two mens' impact on humanity is untrue, but so is the idea that we should take an impactful person's worldview and vision for the future as gospel.
In fact, the instinct to take it with a grain of salt is probably the right one, as great wealth and power have rarely been correlated with magnanimity in history.
The article is taking issue with the hero worship of Musk, and the unproductive world view which he espouses - not criticizing him just for the sake of it. Unlike your comment, which is intended to cut down the author.
I'd love if people did better than Elon Musk, unfortunately no one is right now. Elon Musk is a bright star in the world right now for progress while most people are proclaiming doom and gloom and doing little to solve it.
10 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 27.9 ms ] threadNow we need people to write and criticize and highlight the issues in our societies and ourselves. But 2021 has so many bigger fish worthy to be fried than Musk. Robinson himself doesn't even have an answer to a "problem" like Musk. That's because he isn't paid to solve real problems; he's paid to talk about imaginary ones. In the early twentieth century, Current Affairs would be publishing headlines like "Surely We Can Do Better Than Thomas Edison". But personally I prefer "Surely we can do better than Nathan J. Robinson."
And yet, I can’t help but wonder sometimes if the trade off is worth it. The lives of a couple hundred people are voluntarily made hell for a few years and in return society gains ubiquitous computing with smartphones and electric cars coming to market faster than previously expected. Is it worth it?
This is obviously predicted on the assumption that these advances wouldn’t have come without these people.
https://www.utilitarianism.com/nu/omelas.pdf
The idea that there isnt any comparison of the magnitude of the two mens' impact on humanity is untrue, but so is the idea that we should take an impactful person's worldview and vision for the future as gospel.
In fact, the instinct to take it with a grain of salt is probably the right one, as great wealth and power have rarely been correlated with magnanimity in history.
>But 2021 has so many bigger fish worthy to be fried than Musk.
It's good that there are enough people to fry both at once.