I am currently unaware of anyone who has accomplished anything considered historically important over any significant time period to judge, that didn’t have obv

I am currently unaware of anyone who has accomplished anything considered historically important over any significant time period to judge, that didn’t have obvious ethical gaps. Probably nobody lives without ethical gaps. and the impact of ethical gaps of someone who has been able to achieve a lot, and are more visible to judge, are likely to both be and seem to be, proportionally greater. Could it be enough to simply honor people who, overall, have done inspiring, positive things, while not giving them a pass for their mistakes and deficiencies, assuming they are legitimately smaller in scale? I am not a fan of “purity” viewpoints. so much easier to be severely critical, than open oneself up for judgement. I am a fan of realism in both accomplishments and failures. The good impact and the bad. And taking inspiration and warning, from those whose accomplishments weigh more heavily to the former. Being realistic has another advantage. it doesn’t strongly imply, without actual evidence, that the speaker is somehow less prone to mistakes.