Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

the-tls.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#21

Post by freeflight »

exergy wrote: post #20
keiferski wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is shattering this illusion a good thing? Especially if a 'false', heroic impression of someone inspires you to achieve great things, or act more virtuously, that you otherwise wouldn't have done. There's a difference between 'hero worship' and 'hero inspiration', IMO. The difficult part is getting rid of the former while not destroying the latter in the process.

I think the parent may have been sarcastic. I certainly hope so. Life was much better before my idols had entirely mundane Instagram feeds.

Imho it can be very misleading to think of Instagram feeds, or any social media for that matter, as "private life".

Many social media users are very self-conscious and calculating with the "image" they are building with particular accounts.

It's all feeding into this idea of perfect infallible human beings, as supposedly showcased on social media, but in reality, such humans simply don't exist.

Particularly in the context that often it's our flaws that define us as humans, not being able to admit to having any does not strike me as a healthy and rational attitude.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#22

Post by cafard »

I'm not sure why we should care. The private lives of Freud, Jung, and perhaps Russell may be of interest because their work was bound up in telling others how to live. Einstein did a certain amount of that--though I think more in the large than in the small--but he did not achieve fame for his thoughts on peace, socialism, etc. Rather his thoughts on matters of conduct became interesting because of the fame earned through physics.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#23

Post by BlargMcLarg »

watwut wrote: post #10
dougmwne wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is taken out of context somewhat, so I'll offer it just to try to keep things balanced. This appears to come from Walter Isaacson biography on Einstein. At the time, Einstein's first marriage had deteriorated and they were already living apart. This was an offer to move back in together for the sake of their children. His wife didn't accept these terms and they divorced in 1919. Also we're talking about 100 year…

Nah, it was not normal by standards of 100 years ago either. Edit: the "it was different time" is popular retort, but it rarely takes into account actual customs and realities of the time back. People just tend to assume that whatever someone else criticizes was unopposed standard back at the time, because it would feel good and was convenient. Societies back at time were as complicated as ours, often had strong stan…

Its in bad taste, but I don't get the downvotes in this thread. Are people eager to hold an ego measuring contest against our ancestors?

The only things I know from my own experience: people resort to violence more quickly when stressed, and when its easier to hide. This doesn't really seem to have changed over the years. Its just easier to suppress yourself and others with the abundance of toys, media and tools available today, and its easier for people to find out you're mistreating others. Heck, if the current crisis is showing anything, its how tons of families can't stand being together for a long time, from complaining about kids to complaining having to share your room with your spouse. Culture has changed, but we're still the same animals we were 100 years ago.

Similarly, when it comes to emotions and social skills, what made a good spouse back then still makes a good spouse today. Treating each other like people, being supportive, allowing the other to excel instead of setting them up for failure, stimulating joy instead of frustration and sadness. The same goes for being a good parent, in supporting your children and stimulating positive reinforcement instead of negative reinforcement. Sure, our understanding on an academic level has increased, but that doesn't explain the similarities between then and now.

And frankly, I don't need a comparison between "the worst then" and "the worst now" to realize you should do your best for someone you share your life with a majority of the time. That 'best' has barely changed.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#24

Post by dougmwne »

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #19
dougmwne wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is taken out of context somewhat, so I'll offer it just to try to keep things balanced. This appears to come from Walter Isaacson biography on Einstein. At the time, Einstein's first marriage had deteriorated and they were already living apart. This was an offer to move back in together for the sake of their children. His wife didn't accept these terms and they divorced in 1919. Also we're talking about 100 year…

Not sure I agree. There were a couple of books I picked up as presents, they were reprints of a book ~100 years old, called something like 'advice for husbands' and 'advice for wives', something like that. They were ~2/3rds the same advice, and of course, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and frankly most if it was surprisingly sensible and relevant today (some still has the assumption that the man is…

This "advice" makes me want to barf, but probably because I hold convictions about gender and sexuality that would have been extreme or unheard of 100 years ago. For me gender, is a flexible construct and sexuality is fluid and this "advice" reinforces abusive gender stereotypes.

So I am not claiming that Einstein's demands were normal 100 years ago (We can surmise that they likely were not given that Maric asked for a divorce instead). I'm not saying that we should look to their personal life as any kind of positive example. I'm only saying that I know they were working on an incredibly different set of cultural assumptions than I am. In their time, I don't know if they would have been judged by their peers as progressive or regressive. I judge them regressive, but what the heck is that worth?

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#25

Post by throwaway_pdp09 »

dougmwne wrote: post #24
throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I agree. There were a couple of books I picked up as presents, they were reprints of a book ~100 years old, called something like 'advice for husbands' and 'advice for wives', something like that. They were ~2/3rds the same advice, and of course, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and frankly most if it was surprisingly sensible and relevant today (some still has the assumption that the man is…

This "advice" makes me want to barf, but probably because I hold convictions about gender and sexuality that would have been extreme or unheard of 100 years ago. For me gender, is a flexible construct and sexuality is fluid and this "advice" reinforces abusive gender stereotypes. So I am not claiming that Einstein's demands were normal 100 years ago (We can surmise that they likely were not given that Maric asked for…

I'm not discussing Einstein but saying that decent behaviour towards spouses evidences itself, up to a point I agree, back then. That's all I was getting at.

"Your husband has no right to control your individuality // Don’t belittle your wife before visitors // Don’t call your wife a coward because she is afraid of a spider. Probably in a case of real danger she would prove to be quite as brave as you"

This makes you want to barf? I mean, this is as good advice now as it ever was, and there are plenty of men & women who fail to follow it today. Other items are poor by today's terms, but you're dismissing it all as barf-making.

> I judge them regressive, but what the heck is that worth?

It's worth lots. Those who don't judge permit bad stuff to happen. Keep on judging, and change the world for the better.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#26

Post by gdubs »

For what it’s worth, I thought Andy Serkis really captured some of the complexity of Einstein’s character in the movie “Einstein and Eddington” — contrasts with the typical characterization of Einstein as the cuddly goofball of pop culture, and paints him as a human with flaws.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#27

Post by dougmwne »

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #25
dougmwne wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "advice" makes me want to barf, but probably because I hold convictions about gender and sexuality that would have been extreme or unheard of 100 years ago. For me gender, is a flexible construct and sexuality is fluid and this "advice" reinforces abusive gender stereotypes. So I am not claiming that Einstein's demands were normal 100 years ago (We can surmise that they likely were not given that Maric asked for…

I'm not discussing Einstein but saying that decent behaviour towards spouses evidences itself, up to a point I agree, back then. That's all I was getting at. "Your husband has no right to control your individuality // Don’t belittle your wife before visitors // Don’t call your wife a coward because she is afraid of a spider. Probably in a case of real danger she would prove to be quite as brave as you" This makes you…

To me it was almost all patriarchy disguising itself as benevolent wisdom and all the more insidious because it dresses itself up in father knows best clothes. Every bit of it is heavily gender stereotyped. It's not clever manners to refrain from controlling your spouse's individuality! Yikes.

Anyway I'm not offering this in the spirit of debate but in sharing. As a minority myself, I understand that we all stew in the pot of the majority and the powerful. In order for someone to extend an olive branch and offer you back your humanity, it had to have been taken from you first.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#28

Post by roundabout4ce »

But...the real (big) Question was: "Why is there no spaceship with 'front-drive'?", and speaking in terms of "Reisegefühl" (um in other words, something like the feeling you have during traveling) heck - damned Einstein - Why does it need mass for acceleration #=!*%?? (-:

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#29

Post by kick »

shadowprofile77 wrote: post #11
kick wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only was he abusive to his first wife, he then got married to his cousin, and almost proposed to her daughter . Beyond that, he had a great deal of affairs. Einstein may have been smart, but he was a really awful person.

Being shitty about commitment and affection in your romantic life does not by default make you an awful person. It makes you bad at strong romantic relationships perhaps. There are however many other metrics of what makes someone good and bad in a moral and human sense. So please, lay off the "if you ever cheat on your wife you must be a piece of human garbage" nonsense.

Being shitty about commitment and affection in your romantic life does not by default make you an awful person.

Yes, it does. Abusing your spouse is one of the worst forms of abuse, especially during that time, because they can't really get themselves out of that situation. Cheating's a more intense version of any other breaking of commitment. A person who consistently breaks commitment is absolutely an awful person.

There are however many other metrics of what makes someone good and bad in a moral and human sense.

Sure. A child-beater can donate millions to charity. An anti-consumer monopolist can donate billions. A rapist can volunteer at homeless shelters. None of these are good people: their worst aspects are inexcusable.

So please, lay off the "if you ever cheat on your wife you must be a piece of human garbage" nonsense.

Do it multiple times to multiple wives, you're definitely human garbage.

You can't magically compartmentalize away being a terrible person solely because you're only terrible to a single person who has very little power. If a person who tortures someone—just a single person—has good actions outside of the person they have locked up in their basement, they're still a bad person.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#30

Post by throwaway_pdp09 »

dougmwne wrote: post #27
throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not discussing Einstein but saying that decent behaviour towards spouses evidences itself, up to a point I agree, back then. That's all I was getting at. "Your husband has no right to control your individuality // Don’t belittle your wife before visitors // Don’t call your wife a coward because she is afraid of a spider. Probably in a case of real danger she would prove to be quite as brave as you" This makes you…

To me it was almost all patriarchy disguising itself as benevolent wisdom and all the more insidious because it dresses itself up in father knows best clothes. Every bit of it is heavily gender stereotyped. It's not clever manners to refrain from controlling your spouse's individuality! Yikes. Anyway I'm not offering this in the spirit of debate but in sharing. As a minority myself, I understand that we all stew in t…

I don't get you. You want perfection and aren't willing to give any leeway to a book that is over a century old. Things were very, very different back then and I'm not sure you recognise that, or seem willing to recognise that.

> ...in father knows best clothes

Both books were written by a woman https://www.amazon.co.uk/Blanche-Ebbutt/e/B0034NHXDW

> It's not clever manners to refrain from controlling your spouse's individuality

I just don't know what to say. It's not acceptable, but people tried to then, they try to now, what is your complaint about pointing out it's wrong?

Your last sentence doesn't help - what minority are you in and why does it matter? The rest seems so negative and helpless

Not meant personally but I am confused by your response.

Post reply on HN