21–25 of 25 posts
> the greatest value must be the freedom to doubt I used to emphatically applaud this statement, but in this era of fake news and disinformation, now I tend to think differently. Of course the freedom to doubt is still important, but not all doubts are created equally. You have to beware of someone feeding you a suspicious doubt.
I forget where I first read this essay, but I have a tendency to go through periods in which I fixate on some person and exhaustively read everything I can find about them and Feynman was one of those people for me at one point (another was Hunter S Thompson - perhaps I have some attraction to brilliant and also deeply flawed people). There are many interesting points in this piece that are worthy of further discussi…
> ...brilliant and also deeply flawed people We are all deeply flawed. In my experience, being unashamed of our flaws is a side-effect of honestly and humility. Being unable to spot another's flaws is most often the result of duplicity on their part. Sure, there are some pretty decent folks out there (Fred rogers comes to mind) but nearly all "perfect" people are just charlatans. It's good to admire flawed people, be…
Someone who very much falls into this category is Ghandi. A person who was as complex as they were impactful. Ghandi has had an undeniably huge impact on the well being of a huge portion of the world. He was also disgusting and abusive to individuals around him. We, as individuals, need to make it clear that one of these is great and the other is unacceptable. We are capable of such nuance.
I forget where I first read this essay, but I have a tendency to go through periods in which I fixate on some person and exhaustively read everything I can find about them and Feynman was one of those people for me at one point (another was Hunter S Thompson - perhaps I have some attraction to brilliant and also deeply flawed people). There are many interesting points in this piece that are worthy of further discussi…
> ...brilliant and also deeply flawed people We are all deeply flawed. In my experience, being unashamed of our flaws is a side-effect of honestly and humility. Being unable to spot another's flaws is most often the result of duplicity on their part. Sure, there are some pretty decent folks out there (Fred rogers comes to mind) but nearly all "perfect" people are just charlatans. It's good to admire flawed people, be…
The idea that nearly all "perfect" people are just charlatans is also quite toxic. Is it true that many people try extremely hard to hide their problems? Sure, sounds plausible. But is it also true that the only way someone might appear perfect is by being a "charlatan"? Of course not. For example, maybe not every person's faults are exposed to the interface between that person and your slice of the universe.
I feel a little bit icky slamming on a comment so hard, but I think this flattening out of the human condition is a major negative thread in our culture/society right now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But not without flaws (it's hard to know how much truth there is with the women - definitely a womaniser, possibly abusive but that could be just be for the divorce - but Gell-Manns criticism of him is pretty funny)
> definitely a womaniser, Curious - should someone who as consensual casual affairs with women be labeled as a "flaw"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...brilliant and also deeply flawed people We are all deeply flawed. In my experience, being unashamed of our flaws is a side-effect of honestly and humility. Being unable to spot another's flaws is most often the result of duplicity on their part. Sure, there are some pretty decent folks out there (Fred rogers comes to mind) but nearly all "perfect" people are just charlatans. It's good to admire flawed people, be…
I'd take this a step further and say it's important to talk about their flaws in nuanced and honest ways. It's something that is both extremely difficult and extremely important. To say "here are the great things they brought into the world" and to say "here are the things that were not so great" and to use both pieces of information when we construct ourselves and our society. Someone who very much falls into this c…
Meanwhile, Gandhi's views on the value of science were not as well known and he is often mis-reported as "anti-science,". because he often harshly criticized animal testing and weapons development. He in fact admired the scientific method and its search for the truth.
What he was against was imposing imported western technology on a poor and illiterate populace without actually "teaching them to fish". His contemporaries like Jawaharlal Nehru wanted rapid industrialization to catch up with the West. Gandhi wanted the vast masses in the countryside to develop a scientific outlook and become self-sufficient, not just a supplier of raw materials for the educated urban elite.
His views on science are analyzed in a long article by Prof. Shambu Prasad:
https://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/views_on_sci.htm
A 2019 NPR interview with famous historian Ramachandra Guha about Gandhi's flaws and his evolving views on racism is worth reading.
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/02/766083651/gandhi-is-deeply-re...