why is that? what makes something relevant? I think just the opposite - it's increasingly relevant, even though I don't follow his ethical system.

how is your single conversation with him relevant? It doesn't seem relevant at all, sample size of 1... maybe it would be if you bothered to tell us what he dismissed.

This last part seems disingenuous, but how so?

I'll grant you this: he hasn't said much that's new and also of interest in the past 10 or 20 years probably. But his past thinking is still extremely relevant.