5 ms·

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

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, You will forego: 1. my sitting at home with you; 2. my going out or travelling with you. C. You will obey the following points in your relations with me: 1. you will not expect any intimacy from me, nor will you reproach me in any way; 2. you will stop talking to me if I request it; 3. you will leave my bedroom or study immediately without protest if I request it. D. You will undertake not to belittle me in front of our children, either through words or behavior." http://www.openculture.com/2013/12/albert-einstein-imposes-on-his-first-wife-a-cruel-list-of-marital-demands.html http://www.openculture.com/2013/12/albert-einstein-imposes-o... and I try and be nicer.

darkerside 7y ago
This is pretty standard stay-together-for-the-kids stuff
RcouF1uZ4gsC 7y ago
The truth is you would not want to be married to the vast majority of “great” people in history.
- xscott 7y ago
  The fact he had to make a rule for her not to belittle him in front of the children makes me think I wouldn't want to be married to his wife either. We're only seeing one half of the picture here, but she doesn't sound like a saint.
claudiawerner 7y ago
This is frankly one of the most absurd and saddest things I've read - and I'm surprised to see it attributed to Einstein.
- kick 7y ago
  Not only was he abusive to his first wife, he then got married to his cousin, and almost proposed to her daughter. Beyond that, he had a great deal of affairs. Einstein may have been smart, but he was a really awful person.
  - shadowprofile77 7y ago
    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.
    - lostphilosopher 7y ago
      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 such evaluation can or should ever be made?) I don't see how their conduct in their romantic relationships could be exempted?
      - shadowprofile77 7y ago
        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.
    - kick 7y ago
      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. There are however many other metrics of what makes someone good and bad in a moral and human sense. Sure. A child-beater can donate millions to charity. An anti-consumer monopolist can donate billions. A rapist can volunteer at homeless shelters. None of these are good people: their worst aspects are inexcusable. So please, lay off the "if you ever cheat on your wife you must be a piece of human garbage" nonsense. Do it multiple times to multiple wives, you're definitely human garbage. You can't magically compartmentalize away being a terrible person solely because you're only terrible to a single person who has very little power. If a person who tortures someone—just a single person—has good actions outside of the person they have locked up in their basement, they're still a bad person.
dougmwne 7y ago
This is taken out of context somewhat, so I'll offer it just to try to keep things balanced. This appears to come from Walter Isaacson biography on Einstein. At the time, Einstein's first marriage had deteriorated and they were already living apart. This was an offer to move back in together for the sake of their children. His wife didn't accept these terms and they divorced in 1919. Also we're talking about 100 years ago in Berlin. It's a bit perilous to judge their relationship by our modern standards. I would say things have changed vastly for the better. I shudder to think how people in 100 years would view my lifestyle.
- watwut 7y ago
  Nah, it was not normal by standards of 100 years ago either. Edit: the "it was different time" is popular retort, but it rarely takes into account actual customs and realities of the time back. People just tend to assume that whatever someone else criticizes was unopposed standard back at the time, because it would feel good and was convenient. Societies back at time were as complicated as ours, often had strong standards of behavior - which just like in ours was often not followed in practice or lead to problems. They were not "just like us except worst". Case in point, even if intra-family violence was way more common, both against kids (I don't mean light spanking I mean actual sever abuse) and women, it was criticized and seen as wrong too (and as such meant to be in-family secret).
  - BlargMcLarg 7y ago
    Its in bad taste, but I don't get the downvotes in this thread. Are people eager to hold an ego measuring contest against our ancestors? The only things I know from my own experience: people resort to violence more quickly when stressed, and when its easier to hide. This doesn't really seem to have changed over the years. Its just easier to suppress yourself and others with the abundance of toys, media and tools available today, and its easier for people to find out you're mistreating others. Heck, if the current crisis is showing anything, its how tons of families can't stand being together for a long time, from complaining about kids to complaining having to share your room with your spouse. Culture has changed, but we're still the same animals we were 100 years ago. Similarly, when it comes to emotions and social skills, what made a good spouse back then still makes a good spouse today. Treating each other like people, being supportive, allowing the other to excel instead of setting them up for failure, stimulating joy instead of frustration and sadness. The same goes for being a good parent, in supporting your children and stimulating positive reinforcement instead of negative reinforcement. Sure, our understanding on an academic level has increased, but that doesn't explain the similarities between then and now. And frankly, I don't need a comparison between "the worst then" and "the worst now" to realize you should do your best for someone you share your life with a majority of the time. That 'best' has barely changed.
trianglem 7y ago
What’s wrong with this? That’s want he wants from life and found a willing wife to do it.

darkerside 7y ago

This is pretty standard stay-together-for-the-kids stuff

RcouF1uZ4gsC 7y ago

The truth is you would not want to be married to the vast majority of “great” people in history.

xscott 7y ago
The fact he had to make a rule for her not to belittle him in front of the children makes me think I wouldn't want to be married to his wife either. We're only seeing one half of the picture here, but she doesn't sound like a saint.

claudiawerner 7y ago

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

kick 7y ago
Not only was he abusive to his first wife, he then got married to his cousin, and almost proposed to her daughter. Beyond that, he had a great deal of affairs. Einstein may have been smart, but he was a really awful person.
- shadowprofile77 7y ago
  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.
  - lostphilosopher 7y ago
    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 such evaluation can or should ever be made?) I don't see how their conduct in their romantic relationships could be exempted?
    - shadowprofile77 7y ago
      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.
  - kick 7y ago
    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. There are however many other metrics of what makes someone good and bad in a moral and human sense. Sure. A child-beater can donate millions to charity. An anti-consumer monopolist can donate billions. A rapist can volunteer at homeless shelters. None of these are good people: their worst aspects are inexcusable. So please, lay off the "if you ever cheat on your wife you must be a piece of human garbage" nonsense. Do it multiple times to multiple wives, you're definitely human garbage. You can't magically compartmentalize away being a terrible person solely because you're only terrible to a single person who has very little power. If a person who tortures someone—just a single person—has good actions outside of the person they have locked up in their basement, they're still a bad person.

dougmwne 7y ago

This is taken out of context somewhat, so I'll offer it just to try to keep things balanced. This appears to come from Walter Isaacson biography on Einstein. At the time, Einstein's first marriage had deteriorated and they were already living apart. This was an offer to move back in together for the sake of their children. His wife didn't accept these terms and they divorced in 1919. Also we're talking about 100 years ago in Berlin. It's a bit perilous to judge their relationship by our modern standards. I would say things have changed vastly for the better. I shudder to think how people in 100 years would view my lifestyle.

watwut 7y ago
Nah, it was not normal by standards of 100 years ago either. Edit: the "it was different time" is popular retort, but it rarely takes into account actual customs and realities of the time back. People just tend to assume that whatever someone else criticizes was unopposed standard back at the time, because it would feel good and was convenient. Societies back at time were as complicated as ours, often had strong standards of behavior - which just like in ours was often not followed in practice or lead to problems. They were not "just like us except worst". Case in point, even if intra-family violence was way more common, both against kids (I don't mean light spanking I mean actual sever abuse) and women, it was criticized and seen as wrong too (and as such meant to be in-family secret).
- BlargMcLarg 7y ago
  Its in bad taste, but I don't get the downvotes in this thread. Are people eager to hold an ego measuring contest against our ancestors? The only things I know from my own experience: people resort to violence more quickly when stressed, and when its easier to hide. This doesn't really seem to have changed over the years. Its just easier to suppress yourself and others with the abundance of toys, media and tools available today, and its easier for people to find out you're mistreating others. Heck, if the current crisis is showing anything, its how tons of families can't stand being together for a long time, from complaining about kids to complaining having to share your room with your spouse. Culture has changed, but we're still the same animals we were 100 years ago. Similarly, when it comes to emotions and social skills, what made a good spouse back then still makes a good spouse today. Treating each other like people, being supportive, allowing the other to excel instead of setting them up for failure, stimulating joy instead of frustration and sadness. The same goes for being a good parent, in supporting your children and stimulating positive reinforcement instead of negative reinforcement. Sure, our understanding on an academic level has increased, but that doesn't explain the similarities between then and now. And frankly, I don't need a comparison between "the worst then" and "the worst now" to realize you should do your best for someone you share your life with a majority of the time. That 'best' has barely changed.

trianglem 7y ago

What’s wrong with this? That’s want he wants from life and found a willing wife to do it.