If the author means what I mean, then he does a very bad job countering the  good arguments in favor of profit =&gt; increased responsibility (i.e. against mutually beneficial exploitation), while at the same time he portrays a very important ethical standpoint -- one held by many of those who devote their lives to the study of ethics -- as ridiculous. Why? I suspect that&#x27;s because he  never bothered to read any of the serious discussions on this issue, so he&#x27;s arguing out of ignorance. I don&#x27;t think that paints his arguments in any better light.