Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    30 Apr '19 13:07
    Julian Assange wrote something critical of most physicists:

    In a 2006 blog post, he wrote about the attendees at a physics conference and called the scientists “sniveling fearful conformists.”

    https://www.simplemost.com/things-you-may-not-know-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange/?lvl=single2&stack=ssp&utm_source=facebook-adrizer&utm_campaign=142288&utm_term&utm_content=adrizer&fbclid=IwAR1EkvtVulXrzgUDkARaJm0rVxV7gMG-_cp3gIa5WAHYic8abD_90MNl2uU

    Why do you think Assange has that perception of most physicists?
  2. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    30 Apr '19 15:187 edits
    Why do you think Assange has that perception of most physicists?
    Simple; Like you, he can form his own irrational opinions about scientists and science while not being a qualified scientist himself.
    Is the purpose of this thread to try to attack the reputation of us science experts here in revenge to us generally disagreeing with your various non-expert opinions about various science-related topics? If not then what purpose?
  3. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    30 Apr '19 16:22
    @humy said
    Simple; Like you, he can form his own irrational opinions about scientists and science while not being a qualified scientist himself.
    Is the purpose of this thread to try to attack the reputation of us science experts here in revenge to us generally disagreeing with your various non-expert opinions about various science-related topics? If not then what purpose?
    This isn't about me or you, it is about Assange and physicists. He is not the only one who has opinions on conformity.

    https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/conformity

    Why do you think this is about you? Why are you so narcissistic?
  4. SubscriberPonderable
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    532303
    30 Apr '19 16:30
    Well "sniveling" and "fearful" are evidently adjectives which express that Assange has no respect for those phycisist.
    So the whole things is a polemic thesis and should be traeted as such. The place for that would be "debates" it has nothing whatsoever to do with "science".

    If you want to discuss the value and limitations of "conformism" then from your own (preferably non-polemic) Thesis and we can discuss.
  5. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    30 Apr '19 20:23
    @ponderable said
    Well "sniveling" and "fearful" are evidently adjectives which express that Assange has no respect for those phycisist.
    So the whole things is a polemic thesis and should be traeted as such. The place for that would be "debates" it has nothing whatsoever to do with "science".

    If you want to discuss the value and limitations of "conformism" then from your own (preferably non-polemic) Thesis and we can discuss.
    How do you know? Maybe he had good reason because of a debate he had or something like that.

    Maybe some of them made assumptions based on popular opinion rather than challenge unproven notions. When people are reluctant to challenge popular opinion out of fear of being labeled a heretic they are fearful and some might say sniveling.

    How do you know the physicists had no respect for Assange simply because he had expressed unconventional theories? Didn't physicists label Einstein crazy for some of his theories that later became very popular?

    What are you referring to that you describe as polemic? Do you know some details about Assange I don't?
  6. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    30 Apr '19 21:234 edits
    @metal-brain said
    How do you know the physicists had no respect for Assange simply because he had expressed unconventional theories? Didn't physicists label Einstein crazy for some of his theories that later became very popular?
    I have news for you; Neither you or Assange is another Einstein; not even close. At least in your case, quite the opposite actually.
    And what you got against physicists? In what way do you claim they are bad? -They don't agree with one of your non-expert opinions?
  7. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    80539
    01 May '19 01:03
    @humy said
    Simple; Like you, he can form his own irrational opinions about scientists and science while not being a qualified scientist himself.
    Is the purpose of this thread to try to attack the reputation of us science experts here in revenge to us generally disagreeing with your various non-expert opinions about various science-related topics? If not then what purpose?
    According to his Wikipedia page Assange attended 3 universities. The page does not specify which subject he studied, but computer science seems likely. This means that he is a scientist.
  8. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    80539
    01 May '19 02:32
    @metal-brain said
    Julian Assange wrote something critical of most physicists:

    In a 2006 blog post, he wrote about the attendees at a physics conference and called the scientists “sniveling fearful conformists.”

    https://www.simplemost.com/things-you-may-not-know-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange/?lvl=single2&stack=ssp&utm_source=facebook-adrizer&utm_campaign=142288&utm_term&utm ...[text shortened]... 7gMG-_cp3gIa5WAHYic8abD_90MNl2uU

    Why do you think Assange has that perception of most physicists?
    I haven't followed your link from the OP, and I'm only going by what is in your opening post, I hadn't heard this before. Assange attended a physics conference and decided that physicists were "sniveling fearful conformists" based on what exactly? I imagine that he was trying to publicize Wikileaks and expected them all to agree with what he was doing. There are three rather obvious problems with this:

    First, some physicists are right wing and some are left wing, there may be some correlation between being a physicist and having left wing political ideas, but I'm not aware of any evidence for this. No one to the right of the right wing of the British Labour Party is going to agree with what he's doing at an intuitive level. There is no reason to believe that he's going to find an audience at a physics conference.

    Secondly, the attendees at the conference were there to talk about physics, not to talk about Assange's project. There's a degree of inappropriateness to what he was trying to achieve there and it is unsurprising he received a negative response. However, I'd need to know more about what happened at the conference to be completely confident about this point.

    Thirdly, according to his Wikipedia page he was born almost exactly one month before me in 1971. His parents divorced in 1979, his mother became involved with a member of a cult called "The Family". He attended numerous schools. His upbringing leaves him at severe risk of developing any number of psychiatric problems and a grandiose narcissistic personality trait up to the level of the full personality disorder is entirely possible. Everything he has done is consistent with this. As you know I am a physicist and not qualified to diagnose him, and even if I were I couldn't as I have never met the man. However, his reaction to the physics community's refusal to accept his agenda is also consistent with this.

    I think the Home Office ought to provide him with a psychiatrist. They can't force him to interact with the shrink and he is very likely to refuse, but nevertheless they should make a concerted effort.
  9. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    80539
    01 May '19 02:35
    @deepthought said
    According to his Wikipedia page Assange attended 3 universities. The page does not specify which subject he studied, but computer science seems likely. This means that he is a scientist.
    I have to post a correction to this, the body of the Wikipedia page did contain the relevant information: he variously studied computing, mathematics and, erm, physics. He did not complete a degree. Nevertheless, he has a science background.
  10. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    01 May '19 08:36
    @deepthought said
    I haven't followed your link from the OP, and I'm only going by what is in your opening post, I hadn't heard this before. Assange attended a physics conference and decided that physicists were "sniveling fearful conformists" based on what exactly? I imagine that he was trying to publicize Wikileaks and expected them all to agree with what he was doing. There are three ...[text shortened]... th the shrink and he is very likely to refuse, but nevertheless they should make a concerted effort.
    "There's a degree of inappropriateness to what he was trying to achieve there and it is unsurprising he received a negative response."

    What was he trying to do? It seems like you are making assumptions without knowing that. You assume he wanted to talk about things other than physics. Do you even know that is true?

    "His upbringing leaves him at severe risk of developing any number of psychiatric problems and a grandiose narcissistic personality trait up to the level of the full personality disorder is entirely possible. Everything he has done is consistent with this."

    That is pure speculation on your part. Some judge called him narcissistic and you repeated it like a parrot. He exposed war crimes. How does that make him narcissistic?

    Was Smedley Butler narcissistic too? How about Snowden? You are living in a Five Eyes nation too. How do you feel about our nations spying on each others citizens to bypass domestic laws that limit spying on our own citizens?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

    How do you convince yourself that whistle blowers are narcissistic? I think Trump is a narcissist, not Assange.

    You clearly have a bias against Assange based on your political bias in favor of the left. You repeated a rumor a judge started by calling him a narcissist in the same way Paul Ryan called Assange a sycophant for Russia. Paul Ryan had no evidence at all and still doesn't. It is a conspiracy theory with nothing to back up the claim but silly rumors and false claims of evidence where there is none.

    Since you are pretending to be a psychologist, what do you think of Henry Kissinger? Is he a narcissist in your opinion?

    https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/218473-military-men-are-just-dumb-stupid-animals-to-be-used
  11. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    01 May '19 08:44
    @humy said
    I have news for you; Neither you or Assange is another Einstein; not even close. At least in your case, quite the opposite actually.
    And what you got against physicists? In what way do you claim they are bad? -They don't agree with one of your non-expert opinions?
    I have knowledge about physics as you well know. Would I have a problem with myself? Read my OP. Notice I used the word "most" and it was in the form of a question, not a statement.

    I never claimed physicists were bad. That is a straw man argument exactly as deepthought described.
  12. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    80539
    01 May '19 14:54
    @metal-brain said
    "There's a degree of inappropriateness to what he was trying to achieve there and it is unsurprising he received a negative response."

    What was he trying to do? It seems like you are making assumptions without knowing that. You assume he wanted to talk about things other than physics. Do you even know that is true?

    "His upbringing leaves him at severe risk of devel ...[text shortened]... ion?

    https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/218473-military-men-are-just-dumb-stupid-animals-to-be-used
    If his purpose in attending the conference was to discuss physics then it seems unlikely that he would describe them as "sniveling fearful conformists" afterwards. For what? Supporting paradigm theories?

    As I pointed out elsewhere there is no contradiction between being narcissistic and pursuing valid political objectives. I do not know what the basis for the judge's statement was, but since this was part of the sentencing speech it may have been based on a psychiatrist's report, the judge may just be giving his own opinion.

    Exposing a war crime is entirely consistent with narcissism. Clearly it is not a necessary condition. But in someone with high levels of narcissism self-aggrandisement is liable to form at least some of their motivation in exposing the war crime.

    So you understand this, everyone has some level of narcissism, in most people it is at a low level and amounts to healthy self-regard. In some people the level of narcissism is so high it becomes a problem. They can be abusive, manipulative, and have impaired levels of affective empathy. This creates problems for the people around them which then rebound on the narcissist.

    You have incoherent ideas about politics. The normal position would be for the left to support Assange and the right to support the intelligence agencies. This approximately represents the positions of the two major parties in the UK.

    If I were to speculate about Kissinger's personality I would be thinking in terms of machiavellianism rather than narcissism.
  13. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    01 May '19 17:36
    @deepthought said
    If his purpose in attending the conference was to discuss physics then it seems unlikely that he would describe them as "sniveling fearful conformists" afterwards. For what? Supporting paradigm theories?

    As I pointed out elsewhere there is no contradiction between being narcissistic and pursuing valid political objectives. I do not know what the basis for the judge' ...[text shortened]... out Kissinger's personality I would be thinking in terms of machiavellianism rather than narcissism.
    So everyone has some narcissism? Kind of pointless to call anyone that then. Then it amounts to name calling to slander.

    From the link below:

    "Name calling is a cognitive bias and a technique to promote propaganda. Propagandists use the name-calling technique to invoke fear in those exposed to the propaganda, resulting in the formation of a negative opinion about a person, group, or set of beliefs or ideas.[1] The method is intended to provoke conclusions and actions about a matter apart from an impartial examinations of the facts of the matter. When this tactic is used instead of an argument, name-calling is thus a substitute for rational, fact-based arguments against an idea or belief, based upon its own merits, and becomes an argumentum ad hominem."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_calling

    "If I were to speculate about Kissinger's personality I would be thinking in terms of machiavellianism rather than narcissism.

    Psychopath is more like it. Or do you agree with him when he said “Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy"?
  14. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    80539
    01 May '19 19:03
    @metal-brain said
    So everyone has some narcissism? Kind of pointless to call anyone that then. Then it amounts to name calling to slander.

    From the link below:

    "Name calling is a cognitive bias and a technique to promote propaganda. Propagandists use the name-calling technique to invoke fear in those exposed to the propaganda, resulting in the formation of a negative opinion about a ...[text shortened]... him when he said “Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy"?
    Well, a bit is fine and a lot is not. It is not a matter of name calling.

    I doubt Kissinger has factor 1 psychopathy and I am certain he does not have factor 2 psychopathy. Machiavellianism is far more likely. The major difference being that machiavellianism has no related personality disorder.

    No, I don't agree with his statement. However, I'm curious to know where you obtained that quotation and what the context was.
  15. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    14798
    01 May '19 22:241 edit
    @deepthought said
    Well, a bit is fine and a lot is not. It is not a matter of name calling.

    I doubt Kissinger has factor 1 psychopathy and I am certain he does not have factor 2 psychopathy. Machiavellianism is far more likely. The major difference being that machiavellianism has no related personality disorder.

    No, I don't agree with his statement. However, I'm curious to know where you obtained that quotation and what the context was.
    You are using the term Machiavellianism as a euphemism for psychopath. Kissinger was behind the overthrow of a democracy in Chile and probably the recent coup attempts in Venezuela to also overthrow a democracy.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/crimes-against-humanity-why-is-henry-kissinger-walking-around-free/5358322

    https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-trials-of-henry-kissinger/

    One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

    Joseph Stalin
Back to Top