RT nic carter: The absolute moral chaos inherent in the debate as to whether Elon “killed” millions of people in the global south is precisely why w...
Naval argues that the debate over whether Elon Musk "killed" millions through his actions reflects the flaws of raw consequentialist reasoning, which assigns infinite moral culpability and paralyzes decision-making. He asserts that no one actually lives by such logic, making the entire debate irrelevant.
Background
- Naval Ravikant (tech investor, AngelList co-founder) retweets Nic Carter (Bitcoin VC) dismissing the debate over whether Elon Musk indirectly "killed millions" in the global south — a claim loosely linked to resource use by his companies (Starlink, Tesla) or his population views.
- The target is "effective altruism" (EA) and its radical offshoot "longtermism": utilitarian philosophies that treat all lives (present, distant future, even animals) as equally valuable, often producing absurd-seeming conclusions.
- "Shrimp welfare maximizing polycule members in SF" mocks real EA subgroups who argue shrimp sentience is a top moral priority due to their vast numbers — used here to paint consequentialism as alien, not how normal people reason.