You seem to be moving the goalposts. First you said
You cannot look into someone and you cannot predict what he will do next. Humans are not perfect.
Then when I pointed out that humans being imperfect doesn’t preclude us from predicting what humans will do, you’ve now changed your argument to
You will always find exceptions in everything. Because Obama seems to be an negative example here, I also would have given it to someone else at that time but that does not mean we should abandon it entirely.
I think you’re being far too charitable to the Nobel Committee and I’m trying to figure out why one would defend such people whose work is so largely symbolic. Nobel prizes are like most awards-- utterly meaningless, largely symbolic, and hardly useful in making actual progress. Leftists and working class people in general should not put any weight into pompous awards like Nobel prizes.
How is that contradicting itself, the one state from me says that no one is perfect and the other says the same, there are exceptions, mistakes are simply made by people. The committee reviews their decision or can even removes someones entry. Obama is one negative example, there are positive examples especially in physics scene.
I do not defend anyone since I am not even involved into the process nor do I have background knowledge other than Wikipedia or TV reports, which makes me not an expert on this matter. My opinion is that the committee needs to be more transparent and give us a real voice, I think it could work much better if we find solutions instead of trying to remove the whole thing.
Nobel prizes are like most awards-- utterly meaningless, largely symbolic, and hardly useful in making actual progress. Leftists and working class people in general should not put any weight into pompous awards like Nobel prizes.
Symbols of hope do have meaning, maybe not to you but for others who maybe get inspired by their idols. I know some people who only got teacher because of their past experience with other teachers in their childhood and the same, I am pretty sure applies to physics or science in general. The underlying point is that a Nobel Prize can give people hope, encourage others and if you want to take this away you also need to take away other things which similar because if you remove one part of the pyramid it will collapse and others will judge you because of that.
You are already biased here, enforcing your opinion on others is what is really meaningless, since your are entirely unwillingly to find a middle-ground.
You seem to be moving the goalposts. First you said
Then when I pointed out that humans being imperfect doesn’t preclude us from predicting what humans will do, you’ve now changed your argument to
I think you’re being far too charitable to the Nobel Committee and I’m trying to figure out why one would defend such people whose work is so largely symbolic. Nobel prizes are like most awards-- utterly meaningless, largely symbolic, and hardly useful in making actual progress. Leftists and working class people in general should not put any weight into pompous awards like Nobel prizes.
How is that contradicting itself, the one state from me says that no one is perfect and the other says the same, there are exceptions, mistakes are simply made by people. The committee reviews their decision or can even removes someones entry. Obama is one negative example, there are positive examples especially in physics scene.
I do not defend anyone since I am not even involved into the process nor do I have background knowledge other than Wikipedia or TV reports, which makes me not an expert on this matter. My opinion is that the committee needs to be more transparent and give us a real voice, I think it could work much better if we find solutions instead of trying to remove the whole thing.
Symbols of hope do have meaning, maybe not to you but for others who maybe get inspired by their idols. I know some people who only got teacher because of their past experience with other teachers in their childhood and the same, I am pretty sure applies to physics or science in general. The underlying point is that a Nobel Prize can give people hope, encourage others and if you want to take this away you also need to take away other things which similar because if you remove one part of the pyramid it will collapse and others will judge you because of that.
You are already biased here, enforcing your opinion on others is what is really meaningless, since your are entirely unwillingly to find a middle-ground.