5 ms·

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 Being rich does not imply merit in science and knowledge, and certainly n

by tensor 10y ago

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 Being rich does not imply merit in science and knowledge, and certainly not in ethics.

darawk 10y ago
But if you set out to become rich and then do so, it seems a bit inaccurate to label that 'foolish'. The comment I was responding to was casting aspersions on Thiel's judgment in all categories on the basis of his judgment in politics. But that is, of course, nonsensical given his success and the success of those who've thrown in their lots with him.
- cmurf 10y ago
  No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. How does Thiel feel about his choice, who has questioned the legitimacy of the American electoral process and outcome, in advance of the election - ipso facto if Trump does not win, the election must be illegitimate and a Clinton presidency also illegitimate? Perhaps Thiel feels OK with his choice. Perhaps he can dismiss that every paper of record on the planet has just gone ape shit over this issue in the last couple of hours. Maybe the tax cut Thiel thinks he's going to get from Trump is still worth it - that sort of selfishness would at least be rational. But rational alone does not inoculate someone from having their judgment of character questioned. And in fact a questioning of their political ideology - in light of what Trump has said, it's an open question if Thiel prefers autocracy over having a Republic. It's not crazy to have this question for any of Trump's supporters in light of what Trump has said. Tonight's and tomorrow's headlines are historic, shocking, alarming, but they're not really surprising because this sort of delegitimizing is a hallmark of Trump's modus operandi, having spent 7.5 years trying to delegitimize the current president with the blatant lie he was not a natural born citizen; now turning it into a pre-delegitimization of a would-be Clinton presidency by impugning the electoral process itself. This is a person who lays waste to everything he touches, and Peter Thiel is yet another person to get sucked into the Trump con vortex. So at the very least, he's a sucker. It's just as likely that what you call success, was dumb blind luck by another name. He got lucky, despite being wholly deficient in evaluating Trump's character. And I do not agree with the idea that it is antithetical to "diversity" to ask such questions, or challenge people who have more resources, and in effect more speech, on these issues.
  - darawk 10y ago
    > No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. No, he doesn't just do stuff. He has built many objectively successful companies and made a great deal of objective money. That is not an opinion. The rest of your post is a non-sequitur.
    - cmurf 10y ago
      "defining success only in terms of" is an opinion based metric. I did not question facts. If you want to play a game of vaguery, you're on your own, Otherwise you're welcome to specifically point out which of my conclusions is unsupported by the available facts. There is a difference between a non-sequitur and editorialization.
      - darawk 10y ago
        The OP I responded to said that startup founders going to Thiel for advice/investment were 'foolish', because his inability to make good decisions in politics must mean that his startup advice is bad too. Whether or not you agree with his moral/political positions is irrelevant to understanding why that statement is so wrong.

by tensor 10y ago

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 http://www.bbc.com/news/education-36024081 Being rich does not imply merit in science and knowledge, and certainly not in ethics.

darawk 10y ago

But if you set out to become rich and then do so, it seems a bit inaccurate to label that 'foolish'. The comment I was responding to was casting aspersions on Thiel's judgment in all categories on the basis of his judgment in politics. But that is, of course, nonsensical given his success and the success of those who've thrown in their lots with him.

cmurf 10y ago
No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. How does Thiel feel about his choice, who has questioned the legitimacy of the American electoral process and outcome, in advance of the election - ipso facto if Trump does not win, the election must be illegitimate and a Clinton presidency also illegitimate? Perhaps Thiel feels OK with his choice. Perhaps he can dismiss that every paper of record on the planet has just gone ape shit over this issue in the last couple of hours. Maybe the tax cut Thiel thinks he's going to get from Trump is still worth it - that sort of selfishness would at least be rational. But rational alone does not inoculate someone from having their judgment of character questioned. And in fact a questioning of their political ideology - in light of what Trump has said, it's an open question if Thiel prefers autocracy over having a Republic. It's not crazy to have this question for any of Trump's supporters in light of what Trump has said. Tonight's and tomorrow's headlines are historic, shocking, alarming, but they're not really surprising because this sort of delegitimizing is a hallmark of Trump's modus operandi, having spent 7.5 years trying to delegitimize the current president with the blatant lie he was not a natural born citizen; now turning it into a pre-delegitimization of a would-be Clinton presidency by impugning the electoral process itself. This is a person who lays waste to everything he touches, and Peter Thiel is yet another person to get sucked into the Trump con vortex. So at the very least, he's a sucker. It's just as likely that what you call success, was dumb blind luck by another name. He got lucky, despite being wholly deficient in evaluating Trump's character. And I do not agree with the idea that it is antithetical to "diversity" to ask such questions, or challenge people who have more resources, and in effect more speech, on these issues.
- darawk 10y ago
  > No, he just does stuff. And he does stuff that just so happens to have made him money. Calling that success, defining success only in terms of building things or making money, is an opinion. No, he doesn't just do stuff. He has built many objectively successful companies and made a great deal of objective money. That is not an opinion. The rest of your post is a non-sequitur.
  - cmurf 10y ago
    "defining success only in terms of" is an opinion based metric. I did not question facts. If you want to play a game of vaguery, you're on your own, Otherwise you're welcome to specifically point out which of my conclusions is unsupported by the available facts. There is a difference between a non-sequitur and editorialization.
    - darawk 10y ago
      The OP I responded to said that startup founders going to Thiel for advice/investment were 'foolish', because his inability to make good decisions in politics must mean that his startup advice is bad too. Whether or not you agree with his moral/political positions is irrelevant to understanding why that statement is so wrong.