4 ms·

I dislike holocaust-deniers as much as the next guy, but I find it troubling that one's political opinions should prevent us from considering a person's work in

I dislike holocaust-deniers as much as the next guy, but I find it troubling that one's political opinions should prevent us from considering a person's work in a distinct domain. This is especially true in the present case: I see no evidence that PJB has crossed the Hitler stream with the common lisp stream. People can be smart and respectable in one domain and stupid in another.

oldmanjay 10y ago
This is especially important to keep in mind because there is no way to shun a person and change their mind on the opinion that led to their shunning. Only engagement does that.
- anon4711 10y ago
  There are two sides to this and I think they're important to distinguish: If the person in question was wrongfully accused, this could do undeserved damage to him. This would be a misfortune (albeit not a great one given how little activity my comment generated) but I'm currently sufficiently convinced this won't happen that I went ahead and posted the comment. The other matter is rehabilitation. Whether he should be allowed to apologise at some point, say that he made a mistake, and be welcomed back, is something that you cannot decide for everyone. It's up to your personal beliefs, in particular your religion. Everybody needs to determine that for him- or herself, in my opinion.
anon4711 10y ago
A person can be smart in one domain and stupid in another, so much is clear (think Grothendieck in maths and politics) But a person cannot be both respectable and disrespectable at the same time, I find, although I'm afraid now we might be disagreeing rather about words than ideas. Respectability, to me, is a compliment to somebody's set of values.
- omginternets 10y ago
  I agree, but the point was rather about censorship. I find it troubling that we should censor (explicitly or otherwise) someone on accounts of his respectability. I find this especially true when the source of disrespectability stems from an unrelated topic.
Retra 10y ago
On the other hand, the influence that people have tends to be blind to how they previously acquired that influence. It's a very common problem in politics: you put power on someone due to their credentials in one area, and they suddenly have power they don't deserve in a completely different domain.
ricksplat 10y ago
"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V7me25aNtI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V7me25aNtI
- omginternets 10y ago
  That's totally missing the point. We can both condemn the stupid/wrong behavior and celebrate the intellectual achievements. The point is that we shouldn't hold back our praise of the latter on account of the former. This is a typical false-dichotomy that plagues contemporary discourse around social justice and various *isms.
  - ricksplat 10y ago
    I don't agree. Many wouldn't.
    - omginternets 10y ago
      Hardly an argument, though. If we abided by your reasoning, the US wouldn't have a space program.
      - ricksplat 10y ago
        What's there to argue about? You think you're right and I think you're wrong.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

oldmanjay 10y ago

This is especially important to keep in mind because there is no way to shun a person and change their mind on the opinion that led to their shunning. Only engagement does that.

anon4711 10y ago
There are two sides to this and I think they're important to distinguish: If the person in question was wrongfully accused, this could do undeserved damage to him. This would be a misfortune (albeit not a great one given how little activity my comment generated) but I'm currently sufficiently convinced this won't happen that I went ahead and posted the comment. The other matter is rehabilitation. Whether he should be allowed to apologise at some point, say that he made a mistake, and be welcomed back, is something that you cannot decide for everyone. It's up to your personal beliefs, in particular your religion. Everybody needs to determine that for him- or herself, in my opinion.

anon4711 10y ago

A person can be smart in one domain and stupid in another, so much is clear (think Grothendieck in maths and politics) But a person cannot be both respectable and disrespectable at the same time, I find, although I'm afraid now we might be disagreeing rather about words than ideas. Respectability, to me, is a compliment to somebody's set of values.

omginternets 10y ago
I agree, but the point was rather about censorship. I find it troubling that we should censor (explicitly or otherwise) someone on accounts of his respectability. I find this especially true when the source of disrespectability stems from an unrelated topic.

Retra 10y ago

On the other hand, the influence that people have tends to be blind to how they previously acquired that influence. It's a very common problem in politics: you put power on someone due to their credentials in one area, and they suddenly have power they don't deserve in a completely different domain.

ricksplat 10y ago

"Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V7me25aNtI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V7me25aNtI

omginternets 10y ago
That's totally missing the point. We can both condemn the stupid/wrong behavior and celebrate the intellectual achievements. The point is that we shouldn't hold back our praise of the latter on account of the former. This is a typical false-dichotomy that plagues contemporary discourse around social justice and various *isms.
- ricksplat 10y ago
  I don't agree. Many wouldn't.
  - omginternets 10y ago
    Hardly an argument, though. If we abided by your reasoning, the US wouldn't have a space program.
    - ricksplat 10y ago
      What's there to argue about? You think you're right and I think you're wrong.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]