4 ms·

I half-agree with you, but isn't there an ethical line past which it's wrong to call someone a hero?

• fail2ban 12y ago
  Isn't that something you should decide for yourself? Also, why do you assume there's a duality between hero and non-hero? The person did what they did. Simplifying it to the point of 'hero' or 'not hero' is overgeneralizing, I think. Acknowledge their achievements. Acknowledge their faults. Labels aren't a requirement.
• bdamm 12y ago
  Shine a bright enough light and everyone is hiding cockroaches.
• jerf 12y ago
  To be honest, I don't really call very many people "heros". I personally keep a pretty high bar for that. But that goes into an entirely different, and very large, discussion.
• jnbiche 12y ago
  I tend not to engage in much hero worship anymore, but if the question is essentially whether there's an ethical line past which we can't look up to someone, then I'd say it's of vital importance to know exactly what this "abuse" entailed. Did he physically beat his wife on multiple occasions, or did he throw an ash tray or plate at a wall on a few occasions? I know a good number of people in a relationship, both male and female, who have engaged in some variation of second offense(throwing things or breaking things during their worst arguments with their spouse/partner. But it wasn't habitual and didn't extend to physical contact. If that's "all" Feynman is accused of, then I don't think it's that big of a deal. I mean, he had a son and daughter who looked up to him, so I am a bit skeptical that he was a brutal wife beater (who tend not to draw the respect of their children).