Nobel prize winners then vs. Nobel prize winners now
Niels Bohr famously dissolved the medal he got for his Nobel Price for chemistry in acid when the Nazis invaded his home country of Denmark, to prevent it from falling into the Nazis' hands.
Unlike him, the most recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize of all things, who shall not be named here, because she doesn't deserve being named, handed her medal to a deranged megalomaniac and fascist wannabe dictator.
29 replies
Unfortunately this isn’t a new thing. Knut Hamsun, winner of the 1920 Nobel Prize in Literature, infamously gave his medal to Joseph Goebbels in 1943.
I wonder if he ever told his partners that "I'm going to Knut!" during sex?
He only Knut in ham, sun
I guess there is a reason why he isn't so well known these days.
He must have been a real piece of work.
Great writer! Not so great person. He’s very well known in Norway and considered seminal in Norwegian literature despite his less than fortunate political views.
This seems like a recurrent unfortunate thing in Norway.
"Burzum is very well known among fans of black metal and is considered seminal in black metal despite being a far-right white supremacist murderer."
Conservatives have artistic impulses as well, it's just that most of them are quite bad at it
The nobel prize has been a joke since Kissinger won it anyway.
Nothing in the motivation for the peace prize says you can't start a war before making peace! This might be Trumps grand strategy. Imagine being the one who brokers peace in a war between NATO states. That's a guaranteed winner
Kissinger investigating war crimes in Vietnam and Cambodia.
Yet the war between Trump and his own diaper will continue unresolved.
While he is the ultimate bastard, there were others before him, like Willy Brandt.
Honestly, when I made that comment, I did think that he probably wasn't the earliest example.
What's wrong with Willy Brandt?
I read this comment like "before Kissinger, there were people who won the prize who weren't utter bastards". But yes, it is a bit vague and can be understood both ways.
i mean it makes sense, she wants to run her country and appeasing the fat american clown seems like a good way to do it
You forgot to mention about the rapes and the kiddie fiddling.
Of course a megalomaniac fascist dictator doesn't bother to ask before sticking his dick somewhere. But that's just a danger to a few individuals, while him being a deranged dictator in a country that is a nuclear superpower is a danger to all life on the entire planet.
Scientists always had more adequate and rational moral grounds than humanitarians. That's why I always against when some "bleeding hearts and artists" start talking about "morality" of some scientific researches.
That's an interesting take considering the post is about Nazis and evil scientist is a popular Nazi trope. Feel free to look into Josef Mengele and co for some chilling examples of what "adequate and rational moral grounds" can look like to people. The whole Nazi thing was built on the "science" of a superior race. The moralizing "bleeding hearts and artists" are often keeping unscrupulous people in the sciences at bay and ensuring science is grounded in humanity, which it should be. Bad people exist in every field and no field should be considered above reproach from another.
Neil Degrasse Tyson becoming a ragecomic meme and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. We should never have given the I Fucking Love Science crowd a voice.
There has always been an air of anti-intellectualism in the US. If it wasn't Neil, it would've just been someone else.
Life is not math. Exceptions are always exist.
And yet you advocate for the scientists over the artists
You’re not even a good troll, make it make sense.
It make perfect sense. You just fail to understand it.
Scientist: Have an overall understanding of the current moral of the current society. Specialist in his scientific area.
Humanitarian: Have an overall understanding of the current moral of the current society. Only in extremely rare cases can do anything besides talking.
Question: who can better understand the moral nuances of the specific scientific area?
Fun fact: You're just wrong.
Math is not art, checkmate.
When I was at University, Math majors were Bachelor of Art, not Bachelor of Science. That has changed?
But math can be beautiful! ... It's just not art.