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.
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.