The problem with this argument is that two professors are using a PMC-type of argument about "self-regulation" theory—a pop-psych fad since the 2010's—to psychologize a peer whose behavior is more simply explained as being a creation of the philosophical-industrial complex. In trying to warn prospective readers about Parfit's books/legacy, this essay inadvertently tells on itself, it is casting judgment instead of reflecting on the madnesses of philosophy itself.

It would save lay people a lot more time if they just said what was wrong with Parfit's works, rather than this thinly-veiled biographical ad hominem exercise.

> the philosophical-industrial complex

what's this?