3 ms·

I don't quite understand how this is failure. Chemistry, physics, physiology and medicine are sciences that have practitioners. Literature is an art that has p

I don't quite understand how this is failure. Chemistry, physics, physiology and medicine are sciences that have practitioners. Literature is an art that has practitioners. But peace is not a science nor an art. Nevertheless, Alfred Nobel saw fit to set up the peace prize. The rumor is that he did this because of hurt feelings after being accused of profiting from munitions manufacturing (he made his fortunes through inventions in explosives). Of course there is a difference in who is doing the awarding. Nobel's decision to give the prize-awarding responsibility to Norwegian parliament might have had something to do with knowing peace activists at the time when Sweden and Norway were approaching the dissolution of their union, and there was fear of war. I can't really point out any significantly better subject matter experts in working for peace than Norwegian Parliament.

bzbarsky 10y ago
You may be right that at the time there were no better subject matter experts. That doesn't make the Norwegian Parliament any good as subject matter experts in perpetuity, unfortunately, and I think the spotty history of the Peace Prize awards and the resulting disdain for it is evidence of that. Not least because the priorities of both the electorate and their elected representatives can change. So we certainly have evidence of failure; it's not clear whether the failure could have been avoided. In hindsight, it _may_ have been a good idea to have a process in place for handing off to a better-suited body at some point (e.g. past prize recipients, the UN). Hard to say, of course.
- ptaipale 10y ago
  The UN would be a rather horrible solution. No, I trust the Norwegian parliament and its assigned panel a lot more. Nobel Peace Prize and its reputation is theirs. So far they've done a decent job, even if some of the appointments - like the premature selection of Obama - are disappointing.
  - bzbarsky 10y ago
    > No, I trust the Norwegian parliament and its assigned panel a lot more. I trust them more than the UN too, fwiw, but that's because it's a really low bar. > Nobel Peace Prize and its reputation is theirs. Yes, but they don't seem to care very much about its reputation. > So far they've done a decent job This opinion is not universally shared.

bzbarsky 10y ago

You may be right that at the time there were no better subject matter experts. That doesn't make the Norwegian Parliament any good as subject matter experts in perpetuity, unfortunately, and I think the spotty history of the Peace Prize awards and the resulting disdain for it is evidence of that. Not least because the priorities of both the electorate and their elected representatives can change. So we certainly have evidence of failure; it's not clear whether the failure could have been avoided. In hindsight, it _may_ have been a good idea to have a process in place for handing off to a better-suited body at some point (e.g. past prize recipients, the UN). Hard to say, of course.

ptaipale 10y ago
The UN would be a rather horrible solution. No, I trust the Norwegian parliament and its assigned panel a lot more. Nobel Peace Prize and its reputation is theirs. So far they've done a decent job, even if some of the appointments - like the premature selection of Obama - are disappointing.
- bzbarsky 10y ago
  > No, I trust the Norwegian parliament and its assigned panel a lot more. I trust them more than the UN too, fwiw, but that's because it's a really low bar. > Nobel Peace Prize and its reputation is theirs. Yes, but they don't seem to care very much about its reputation. > So far they've done a decent job This opinion is not universally shared.