To highlight certain aspects was Worthington's choice. However, does the fact that he made that choice invalidate it? If the decision to highlight it is based on a 21st century value judgement, does it make the argument that the Greeks and Macedonians would have found it distasteful in the extreme any less true? One not only could not call oneself a god, it was generally a posthumous honor.

As for the governance of the empire Alexander had built, I agree that any judgment of how he administered it is premature, an argument I have had with the author in discussion. Nevertheless, it seems apparent that Alexander had no intention of ending his campaigns, for after Arabia, northern Africa to Carthage would have been next. The Carthaginians had offended him, and Alexander had made it clear he had a score to settle with them. This never-ending conquest and warfare is what Worthington finds unacceptable, for it does not seem that Alexander ever intended to actually govern his new empire. Again, we may disagree with the analysis, but that does not mean that it is based solely on modern values.

As to they dynasty, you are correct. It appears evident that Alexander did not think it a pressing concern. Why would a god worry about his successor? If he didn't actually think he was a god (which is my own viewpoint) then he should have been concerned with producing an heir. Again, this is not a modern concern. Parmenion and perhaps other contemporaries of Alexander felt this to be Alexander's first concern, before going off to Asia.

We come back to empire building. Worthington seems to have no problem with the actual building of an empire by Alexander. He is not making a value judgement on empire building at all. Worthington has only praises for Philip, and Philip built an empire before Alexander did. No, it is Alexander's never-ending conquests which draw Worthington's criticism, and on this I cannot fault him. Maybe this is a 21st century value judgment, for I agree that the more one conquered, the better one was thought of in the 4th century. But Alexander seemed intent on following warfare until the day he died. His own Macedonians grew tired of that constant warfare. That Alexander himself did not is an indication of his separation from the mentality of the rest of the Macedonians.