Posted on 04/27/2017 10:57:38 AM PDT by C19fan
Much-hyped new National Geographic series Genius chronicles the life of Albert Einstein. The first episode premiered last night and right from its opening scene, in which the groundbreaking theoretical physicist has extra-marital sex with his office assistant, we know we’re probably not going to be subjected to long-winded digressions on the theory of relativity.
(Excerpt) Read more at heatst.com ...
I certainly have an axe against philandering hunks of crap, given that my father was one and I know the damage they do.
Sexual escapades do NOT confirm ANYONE as a genius. What they confirm him as is shallow. And you too for excusing that kind of pathetic behavior just because of other things he did.
One of my favorite YT vids. A classic.
No. The sexual escapades have nothing to do with the genius. The genius exists and cannot be gainsaid. The sexual escapades confirm Einstein as human. I think its unfair to run with one side of a complex human drama after the principals are dead and can’t give the nuances of the story. I’m not really interested in Einstein’s sex life even peripherally.
I am sorry for the personal pain you have experienced. Grown men and women often fall into poisonous relationships and have since earliest written history. That doesn’t change the personal pain but puts affairs in perspective.
God gave man/woman the opportunity to choose between good and evil. They often fail the test when it arises but an affair does not a monster make. That said I believe in honoring vows and forgiveness is not one of my personal strengths in that regard. I consider involving children unforgivable on either side. They are noncombatants and unable to defend themselves or understand the complexities of causation.
If you’re not interested then don’t watch it. Meanwhile it’s actually good to see the human side. We elevate heroes too much, it’s bad for us. For one thing it leads us to pretending there are perfect people in the world, and for another it discourages people to try to follow in their footsteps. When we turn everybody who ever achieved anything into a fairy tale prince those kids who aren’t “perfect” can easily decide they can’t achieve. When we see the feet of clay we understand two important things: yes you too can do awesome stuff, and everybody has room for improvement.
TMI, FRiend!!!!!
Genius intellect people commonly have two issues. First, their brain does not necessarily perceive normal social cues. Second, they often DO perceive that the rationale behind certain social mores and other societal rules is entirely irrational.
That is one way of looking at it but there is another.
When I was young we read histories & biographies and had role models. By the time I was in 4th grade I had read 40 of them. Louis Pasteur, Mme Curie, Luther Burbank, a large collection of early Presidents, Edith Cavell etc.
I was on fire with all of the qualities that they epitomized: hard work, humility, service, perseverance, self sacrifice. That early inoculation of virtuous and other centered living got me through college, medical school, graduate work and into practice with a life long determination to do my best. When someone shows you that road at an early age it molds you. All men/women have secret and sometimes not so secret shames but those do not define them, that proves they are fallible human beings.
You say we raise heroes too high. I say the current generation is raised with no heroes. Everyone is so eager to blame/shame/cut down those that have actually accomplished that we are left with youngsters that have no role model to aim for. Our sports players, entertainers and fashionable class are the people that are looked up to and no group of people are less worth emulating or elevating.
We don’t need to destroy someone like Einstein to allow the less able to succeed. The stories of other’s success can inspire them to do the best they can. There is no substitute for a mother, father, grandfather, special teacher etc who believes in you and reaffirms your actual successes.
Your final sentences are non sequiturs.
“When we see the feet of clay we understand two important things: yes you too can do awesome stuff, and everybody has room for improvement.”
Seeing feet of clay does no such thing. For a child who has a more concrete view of life feet of clay suggests its fine to screw up, no need to strive. Seeing someone else brought down is no way to learn you can soar. You advocate destroying heroes (a unidimentional concept developed to inspire and motivate) so that ordinary folks will feel good.
How many children grow into inspiring adults by being inspired? When they are older they will understand that being heroic or inspirational in one area does not guarantee a perfect person because no one is perfect. But the idealism and moral direction inspired by the hero will not be lost.
So true. They also develop an internally logical morality that may not align well with convention.
Their internal morality is far more variable than can be equitably discussed in this forum. The root issue is their perception - which can be discussed here.
: )
It’s not destroying Einstein. It proves he was human, he screwed up. And offers the possibility to those who look to him: you might not be able to be as smart as Einstein, you might not be able to change the world like he did, but you can be a better human being. You can learn from someone’s positive AND negative examples.
No seeing feet of clay let kids see their own potential. When we paint people as perfect the imperfect child can’t hope to compete, and gives up. When we paint people as REAL, the real child can see the negative and positive examples, the parts they can hope to follow and the parts they prove better than.
How many children grow into lackluster adults because they never thought they could measure up so why even try? That’s always been the problem with the Great Man theory of history, it’s discouraging and dis-empowering, we present people without flaws to kids with flaws and wonder why a generation thinks they can’t do that so never mind. Much better to focus on the great achievements of flawed people, that’s what sends the message that actually you can do that, why not give it a shot.
And in the end it boils down to the people. It’s not the network’s fault that Einstein was a skirt chasing sleaze. He did that. It is reality, it is the truth. And nothing is ever gained hiding the truth.
Your observation is probably very relevant to Einstein’s life.
Like idiot savants, autistics, down syndrome children, geniuses are differently abled people in many senses.
All of those special people have much to contribute but we have to adjust to them and help them to interact with a world they perceive differently. Geniuses can pass more easily because of their mental abilities but sometimes like a 12 year old that looks 17 they get in over their heads because of diminished social ability.
Not to throw a monkey wrench, but you should also consider that they often perceive motivations much more clearly than “average” folks do. What society perceives as normal is most often an illusion.
I wasn’t disagreeing on that aspect at all just not addressing that Emperor’s clothes aspect.
We (society agree, sotto voce, not to to examine closely our many inconsistencies and hypocrisies. Then someone comes along and cuts through our social construct with a why? Sometimes honesty is difficult to come by or live with. Hence the accommodations I mentioned. Many people can’t cope with too much “truth”.
I am something of a savant. (That discussion could take hours)
The primary fault of society is relying on the receiver’s sole discretion.
We can at the end agree to disagree. Part of it is motives. I think the networks’ motives are not the ones you are advancing. They are not trying to give imperfect children encouragement.
The networks are trying for ratings, sex sells. They don’t really care who they damage in the pursuit of ratings; we see that by the ghoulish questioning of the newly bereaved. The networks are also politically correct so geniuses must be brought down, devalued, as must white males. That’s especially good for boys who have the ability to pursue STEM careers to be exposed to /sarc. It is despicable to sensationalize someone’s life after their death for personal gain.
If you feel that Einstein’s sex life gives any depth or dimension to his achievements I disagree. The fact that he had affairs does not mean that his discoveries are eclipsed or make it easier for an average person to grasp them let alone engender them.
I think your “great man” discouragement of kids is an excuse to enshrine mediocrity. I totally reject it. Children are not ready to see the nuances of “real” in any case. It is self indulgence to think that you can enlighten them in that way. You enjoy pontificating but they just give lip service. Just like taking a child of 4 to Les Mis. Some of it they get & love and some goes so far over their heads there isn’t a ripple. That’s the way its supposed to be. Nuance comes in its own time.
The shame of it is that your theory is what creates lack luster kids. Moral relativity and no clear and invigorating embodiment of virtues.
I think they’re just telling the story. The gate opener on this kind of warts and all presentation of historical figures is all the way back in the 70s with the book and then movie Right Stuff. Neither shied away from the fact that the astronauts tended to be womanizers before they were astronauts and then developed a taste for “Cape Cookies” when they got “promoted”. It’s simply a part of the facts of history and pretending it didn’t exist wouldn’t change the fact that most of the astronauts were divorced by the time the book came out. The truth was known, no reason not to tell it.
It’s the same thing here. Einstein’s predilections are known, well documented, in his own hand. Now they could ignore it and tell the “sanitized” version of the story, or they can tell the truth. They haven’t damaged anybody, the information is out there, and was well publicized long before this show was even green lit. He hasn’t been “brought” down, he did it to himself.
It gives depth and dimension to who he was. It’s simply a part of him and his story. Ignoring it is ignoring a major part of his life (he spent a lot of time chasing skirts). Nobody is trying to eclipse his discoveries, it’s simply part of the story.
No, my theory is NOT what creates lackluster kids. It’s blind hero worship and elevating people to unachieved and unachievable glory that does that. It’s the pedestal YOU put these people on that teaches kids they can’t be that good. you are, quite simply, wrong on all counts. this isn’t moral relativity it’s ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF THE FACTS. This DID happen, that’s WHO HE WAS, and anybody that can’t handle that needs to grow the hell up.
I guess we will see how the whole Einstein series plays out. We were probably too early dissecting it before all the facts are in.
Possibly the other points we are arguing about are the result of oversimplification of our respective points of view. Probably truth on both sides depending on how its emphasized.
My points about heroes were more generalized and less about Einstein than about the need for heroes. It has a lot to do with your definitions of heroes as I touched upon with the sports figures, entertainment stars etc in my earlier post.
I have never encountered a child that was discouraged by others’ success. Sometimes jealous and often lazy and looking for excuses not to put forth effort. That’s what parents and significant adults are for to help each kid discover where they can shine and help them strive. I don’t like the idea of making things easy for kids. Breaking things down into smaller bits, teaching strategies to succeed but I can’t imagine needing to put someone down to allow someone else to be encouraged to succeed. We may have different world experiences.
Be well.
I’ve encountered MANY kids that were discouraged by others success. Hang out on the poor side of town, that’s where you encounter a lot of kids that have a solid laundry list of what they’ll never be good enough for. Often times the parents are part of the problem, poor side of town parent also tend to have a laundry list of things they couldn’t achieve and their kids won’t achieve. Highly varnished success gives very different messages to people who see opportunities in life than to people who see obstacles. A little flaw goes a long way to breaking the “well they’re just better than me” view.
And anyway, it’s the truth. In the end the truth is always the right answer.
Your last post is all the things I hate about public school. I feel that the schools receive those kids bright eyed and eager to learn as kindergartners and by the time they are in 3rd grade many are closed off and discouraged.
I don’t fault you for looking for solutions that you think would work. Its a heartbreaking situation because so much is lost personally & by society. Returning control locally and allowing vouchers would empower the parents who would be more hopeful if they had more input and could see their children thriving. Voucher schools would also tend to pool children whose parents were engaged and who were ready to learn.
Children who do not have as much home support & perhaps already have issues functioning in a school environment would be able to get more specialized attention as well and intervention to open up their potential futures. Its a lot more complex than self esteem. These kids also need role models that have had beginnings in similar circumstances with compelling stories and successes. They need to be engaged in possible futures.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.