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

31–36 of 36 posts

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#31

Post by dougmwne »

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #30
dougmwne wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 in…

My entire point is that we need to give people from centuries past some leeway and make an effort to view their lives through the lens of their time. And we should view them through our current lens as well but we're not likely to learn anything but that we think our morality is the best morality.

My chain of responses is meant to highlight this tension. That I can personally find something reprehensible in 2020, but taken in it's cultural or historical context, also find it enlightened or inspiring. In the USA we have an increasingly militant progressivism and we close ourselves off to our own history if we can only judge things by one set of standards.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#32

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

claudiawerner wrote: post #5
andrewfromx wrote: post #3

i read these rules he had for this 1st wife years ago "A. You will make sure: 1. that my clothes and laundry are kept in good order; 2. that I will receive my three meals regularly in my room; 3. that my bedroom and study are kept neat, and especially that my desk is left for my use only. B. You will renounce all personal relations with me insofar as they are not completely necessary for social reasons. Specifically,…

This is frankly one of the most absurd and saddest things I've read - and I'm surprised to see it attributed to Einstein.

High intelligence and educational achievement has nothing to do with morality. Some of the worst human beings I have ever encountered were very successful and competent engineering professionals.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#33

Post by exergy »

freeflight wrote: post #21
exergy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

Ah, no, I have the opposite problem!

For instance, musicians one really likes, one projects them into images of saints. Then they're out their putting selfies on, sharing insipid quotes or just generally seeking validation, and the mirage crumbles a bit.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#34

Post by shadowprofile77 »

kick wrote: post #29
shadowprofile77 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

I think you've gone well off the reservation with lack of perspective. In most modern western societies your spouse that you cheat on can indeed very easily leave you any time she or he wants to, and they're certainly not powerless in either a legal or practical exit sense. If we're talking about a non-legally binding girlfriend/boyfriend relationship, even easier for them to walk away. And no, cheating on someone sexually or romantically is not the same as abusing them in any legal sense, and it's definitely far removed from being a child beater, torturer or rapist. Drop the absurd hyperbole please. These are literal criminal acts of violence against another person, whereas the former is an act of dishonesty to one consenting, adult who understands basic fidelity risks in life and sexual license with another consenting adult. Neither of these is enough to get someone classified as "human garbage" in such denigratory terms in my view, and certainly not enough to put them on par with the genuinely vicious acts of coercive predatory behavior you're comparing cheating to. Your view is absurdly emotional and outside reasoned analysis of moral comparisons dude.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#35

Post by shadowprofile77 »

lostphilosopher wrote: post #16
shadowprofile77 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why is the relationship sphere separate from the moral sphere? How do you decide what belongs in the moral sphere? Does the relationship sphere overlap with the moral sphere in other areas just not in fidelity? Why doesn't it intersect there? Saying someone is boolean "good" or "bad" is of course complex - perhaps beyond utility. But to the extent a moral evaluation is being made of a person (unless your point is no…

I did not say it shouldnt be exempted, only that on the scale of moral judgments insofar as we are equipped to make them, cheating is and should be far down the list compared to many other acts that individually or in summary could and in many cases should make someone worse than a "good person" by the normal standards of moral judgement that most of us accept and live by.

Re: The private and public lives of Albert Einstein

#36

Post by kick »

shadowprofile77 wrote: post #34
kick wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

I think you've gone well off the reservation with lack of perspective. In most modern western societies your spouse that you cheat on can indeed very easily leave you any time she or he wants to, and they're certainly not powerless in either a legal or practical exit sense. If we're talking about a non-legally binding girlfriend/boyfriend relationship, even easier for them to walk away. And no, cheating on someone se…

In most modern western societies your spouse that you cheat on can indeed very easily leave you any time she or he wants to, and they're certainly not powerless in either a legal or practical exit sense.

Not during the early 1900s, which is what's being discussed here. Also, "any time she or he wants to" is a complete misrepresentation of today's situation, as well.

And no, cheating on someone sexually or romantically is not the same as abusing them in any legal sense,

I didn't claim it was abusive, I claimed it was a terrible thing to do. I claimed that his abusive behavior was abusive, which is true.

Your entire argument is based around strawmanning against an argument that wasn't being made.

Post reply on HN