Smart, focused people are also good at losing context and justifying their instinctual beliefs. I like and admire Parfit, but I don't accept him blindly just because he was smarter and thought more deeply about a few topics than I have (I still think Sidgwick makes more sense, something Parfit might well agree with).
You might like this podcast with David Edmonds on the book. https://www.thendobetter.com/arts/2023/7/2/david-edmonds-derek-parfit-future-selves-paradox-effective-altruism-philosophy-podcast
As a counter to the idea that "Those who become truly obsessed with a topic, who eat sleep, and breathe that topic tend to be the most successful and clearest thinkers on the topic" check out the book Range by David Epstein. My notes are here: https://howtolivetherestofyourlife.wordpress.com/2021/09/22/notes-on-range-by-david-epstein/
Smart, focused people are also good at losing context and justifying their instinctual beliefs. I like and admire Parfit, but I don't accept him blindly just because he was smarter and thought more deeply about a few topics than I have (I still think Sidgwick makes more sense, something Parfit might well agree with).
Does Williams explicitly claim to find Parfit's conception of a reason to be unintelligible? And if so, is this anywhere in print?