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

Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

blog.nuclearsecrecy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#41

Post by poulpy123 »

ecshafer wrote: post #34
poulpy123 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot take seriously someone pretending that Feynman was a sham

There is just a big market for "X great person of the past was actually awful" and "what you learned in school is actually a conspiracy". That these things get spread like wildfire whenever they are brought up, because some people thinks it make them seem smarter I assume. They also drop all introspection or skepticism about it. I would put "Feynman is actually awful" in the same bucket as the "Mercator project is a…

Mercator is a racist conspiracy by big Greenland !

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#42

Post by exitb »

poulpy123 wrote: post #32
Analemma_ wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feynman really deserves it though: [0]. I admit to being part of the problem here, because in the 2000s and 2010s, I was in the Feynman cult with everyone else, but once you dig a little deeper under the quirky anecdotes (many of which are probably fictional), it’s clear he was kind of a scumbag and a lot of his reputation is whitewashing by what we’d now call fanboys. If his wife did write that memo, I’d say she had…

In the very first sentence, with the usage of "Feynman bros", we understand that it is not a text honestly discussing the limits and failures of Feynman (which would not be very interesting anyway), but a politically motivatedl attack against a man seen as too famous and influential.

Too famous and influential in physics. Right?

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#43

Post by poulpy123 »

exitb wrote: post #42
poulpy123 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the very first sentence, with the usage of "Feynman bros", we understand that it is not a text honestly discussing the limits and failures of Feynman (which would not be very interesting anyway), but a politically motivatedl attack against a man seen as too famous and influential.

Too famous and influential in physics. Right?

Yeah, even if his fame went a bit beyond physics

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#44

Post by srean »

poulpy123 wrote: post #41
ecshafer wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is just a big market for "X great person of the past was actually awful" and "what you learned in school is actually a conspiracy". That these things get spread like wildfire whenever they are brought up, because some people thinks it make them seem smarter I assume. They also drop all introspection or skepticism about it. I would put "Feynman is actually awful" in the same bucket as the "Mercator project is a…

Mercator is a racist conspiracy by big Greenland !

Very funny. You will probably be misunderstood though.

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#45

Post by [deleted] »

jcranmer wrote: post #39
ricardo81 wrote: post #23

The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. They're typically going to be non-conformist in any event, and may come across as arrogant if they have an intricate belief system that you may not take the time to understand. I'd think one of the greatest scientists of a generation would have the kind of depth of thinking that few would understand. Having listened to many of his interviews…

> The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. I know this is a common trope in many media portrayals, but it's really not my experience. The "insufferable genius" stereotype tracks most not for the extremely smart people but the kinda-smart people who are absolute jerks but try to defend their jerkassery on the basis of their intelligence.

[deleted]

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#46

Post by chrismatic »

ecshafer wrote: post #38
chrismatic wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd recommend that you watch the entire video, because the point is that he did not even write any of those books.

So someone took recordings of his stories and compiled them into a text....? What does that matter I have seen that entire video in the past, its unsubstantiated garbage that fails mild skepticism. Every point can be explained away trivially. They have an axe to grind against Fenyman / Men generally, and since this goes against the established narrative its therefore heralded as being correct and people blindly follo…

I think you can come to a balanced view here where you acknowledge that Feynman was overhyped posthumously while maintaining that he was an exceptional physicist with some personal flaws. That's precisely the point of the video.

It's less axe grinding and more counter-acting an inaccurate narrative.

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#47

Post by esseph »

jcranmer wrote: post #39
ricardo81 wrote: post #23

The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. They're typically going to be non-conformist in any event, and may come across as arrogant if they have an intricate belief system that you may not take the time to understand. I'd think one of the greatest scientists of a generation would have the kind of depth of thinking that few would understand. Having listened to many of his interviews…

> The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. I know this is a common trope in many media portrayals, but it's really not my experience. The "insufferable genius" stereotype tracks most not for the extremely smart people but the kinda-smart people who are absolute jerks but try to defend their jerkassery on the basis of their intelligence.

> The "insufferable genius" stereotype tracks most not for the extremely smart people but the kinda-smart people who are absolute jerks but try to defend their jerkassery on the basis of their intelligence.

Autism plays a lot into this. You'll get people who can seem condescending or unaware of different social norms, and it's genuinely not from a bad place, just a complete inability to understand their own communication style (especially in the moment).

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#48

Post by esseph »

abtinf wrote: post #26
ricardo81 wrote: post #23

The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. They're typically going to be non-conformist in any event, and may come across as arrogant if they have an intricate belief system that you may not take the time to understand. I'd think one of the greatest scientists of a generation would have the kind of depth of thinking that few would understand. Having listened to many of his interviews…

> The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. They're typically going to be non-conformist in any event, and may come across as arrogant if they have an intricate belief system that you may not take the time to understand. This is the bucket Ayn Rand falls into. Her philosophy is radically different, revolutionizing the entire field, to the point that most people can’t even grasp that…

LMAO Ayn Rand could get rolled up by an 8th grader.

No idea about how social systems actually work, or how real humans act.

If there's one thing that was real about Rand it was that ego.

There's few people that can make an ass of themselves to multiple fields so quickly, but if you stuck an artist, an economist, and an anthropologist in the room with Rand, after 15 minutes they could have all left with a laugh on Rands behalf.

It's also so funny to me the modern US libertarians that claim to love her so much. Rand hated libertarians! She thought they were crybabies and had no moral or logical foundation.

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#49

Post by ricardo81 »

jcranmer wrote: post #39
ricardo81 wrote: post #23

The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. They're typically going to be non-conformist in any event, and may come across as arrogant if they have an intricate belief system that you may not take the time to understand. I'd think one of the greatest scientists of a generation would have the kind of depth of thinking that few would understand. Having listened to many of his interviews…

> The problem with extremely smart people is not many people understand them. I know this is a common trope in many media portrayals, but it's really not my experience. The "insufferable genius" stereotype tracks most not for the extremely smart people but the kinda-smart people who are absolute jerks but try to defend their jerkassery on the basis of their intelligence.

I understand where you're coming from. I wasn't meaning from the context of the pseudo-smart person portraying that (which is obviously a thing, probably more obvious nowadays), but a person that is the real article. You meet all walks of life in your lifetime and that unattainable-ness of very smart people can come across as inaccessible, unexplainable or arrogant.

The kind of person that has spent much time chiselling their belief system or is simply fascinated by a field of study that not many people can relate to on that depth. Feynman was a great communicator, but I can think of a few people that may have Asperger's syndrome that have that exceptional insight into things that sometimes results in collateral damage in relationships.

What I mean is there are exceptional people, and sometimes people fail to understand what is exceptional and take exception themselves.

The political narrative of the time obviously was extra cynical about declarations of which team you're playing for, or non-declaration. That's what I meant about non-conformist, they're not interested in the politics.

Re: Who smeared Richard Feynman? (2014)

#50

Post by ecshafer »

jalapenoi wrote: post #40
ecshafer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That video is such an extremely weak argument. Sure Feynman probably has more fame than he is merited. But he is still one of the most influential physicists. He just also happened to be entertaining and wrote some books. Personality and self-marketing makes a difference, welcome to society.

[flagged]

I don't think we are hurting for prominent Jewish Physicists that there needed to be a conspiracy to promote him. Feynman, Einstein, Von Neuman, Niels Bohr, etc. Plus there is the whole [Martians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martians_(scientists)) group.
Post reply on HN