It should be knee-jerk dismissed because the submission topic is the textbooks, not the man, and it's derailed discussion into a tangent about his personal shortcomings. Not exactly in the spirit of intellectual curiosity HN tries to foster.
> Not exactly in the spirit of intellectual curiosity HN tries to foster.
I could not disagree more. If you don't see how a comprehensive, warts and all look at the man's life and legacy doesn't add context and foster curiosity, I'm not even sure what to tell you.
It didn't derail the conversation, it expanded it. There's still plenty of discussion about the lectures. This isn't even particularly close to the top of the thread.
What's opposed to curious discussion is knee jerk reactions and middlebrow dismissals.
These sort of people are what is pejoratively called "attention whores" with nothing worthwhile to contribute on the topic under discussion. Hence they always come up with provocative phrases/statements simply to make themselves feel relevant.
Downvote and Flag these sorts of comments into oblivion; don't engage with them.
This is offensive and uncalled for. If the admins see your comment, they will tell you that comments like this get you banned. I don't agree with ThrowawayR2 but they were respectful; I doubt they appreciate their views being lumped in with your insulting, inappropriate comment. You've done a disservice to both of us.
Your account was created in the last 24 hours and your moniker itself is proof that you are not interested in discussing Physics/Science but to steer the conversation in a completely opinionated and negative direction. This is not a soapbox for your negative agendas.
This thread was created to know more about a famous work in Physics, understand its pros and cons, elicit comparisons with the works of other authors etc. The focus should be solely on the Science and nothing else.
You and others like you in this thread needed to be called out on your actions viz. mucking and vitiating a discussion on Physics into a discussion on personalities/opinions/behaviours/etc. completely irrelevant to the topic on hand.
You just think my perspective is invalid and so you read manipulative or deceptive intent into my actions.
> The focus should be solely on the Science and nothing else.
You don't get to decide how the discussion goes. You don't get to decide that the focus should be narrow and restricted to the topics you're comfortable with.
The person who is actually attempting to steer the conversation is you. I'm just here to share my thoughts. You don't like that? You don't see the relevance in discussing Feynman in a thread about Feynman? Noted.
Your very comments prove that you are just trolling. The fact that your account was newly created with so pathetic a moniker is a dead giveaway of your intentions.
The thread's topic is "Feynman Lectures" and not "Feynman, his life and behaviour". If you really wanted to discuss the latter you would start a new thread with adequate information and let people decide. Instead, you are actively engaged in steering conversations in this thread with deceptive/manipulative comments.
As the OP, i do get to say what i am expecting out of this thread and call out negative behaviour and irrelevant nonsense.
