On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Charles Hixson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Galileo, Bruno of Nolan, etc. > OTOH, Paracelsus was quite personable. So was, reputedly, Pythagoras. (No > good evidence on Pythagoras, though. Only stories from supporters.) (Also, > consider that the Pythagoreans, possibly including Pythagoras, had a guy put > to death for discovering that sqrt(2) was irrational. [As with most things > from this date, this is more legend than fact, but is quite probable.]) > > As a generality, with many exceptions, strongly opinionated persons are not > easy to get along with unless you agree with their opinions. It appears to > be irrelevant whether their opinions are right, wrong, or undecidable. >
I just want to comment that my original post was not about agreeableness. It was about the necessity of being capable of criticizing your own theories (and criticisms). I just do not believe that Newton, Galileo, Pythagoras and the rest of them were incapable of examining their own theories from critical vantage points even though they may have not accepted the criticisms others derived from different vantage points. As I said, there is no automatic equality for criticisms. Just because a theory is unproven it does not mean that all criticisms have to be accepted as equally valid. But when you see someone, theorist or critic, who almost never demonstrates any genuine capacity for reexamining his own theories or criticisms from any critical vantage point what so ever, then it's a strong negative indicator. Jim Bromer ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
