ridicule is not good science

[iNow]

I challenge the assumption being made above that Dirac was somehow unaware of what he was saying due to a mental condition wherein he exists somewhere on the autistic spectrum.

 

Exactly as Dr.Rocket suggested, my read of the situation is that he was fully aware of what he was saying and did it on purpose. Not only was he correct, he was clever. A person can still be funny when they have asperger's. Unfortunately, it appears that many people seem to completely lack a sense of humor.

[Iggy]

But the beauty of it lies in the subtlety of Dirac's ridicule, which may not be evident if you lack significant experience with mathematical proofs and derivations, and a dry sense of humor. Dirac inserted the knife very deftly -- the work of a master.

I challenge the assumption being made above that Dirac was somehow unaware of what he was saying due to a mental condition wherein he exists somewhere on the autistic spectrum.

 

Exactly as Dr.Rocket suggested, my read of the situation is that he was fully aware of what he was saying and did it on purpose. Not only was he correct, he was clever.

After googling it, I suspect Mystery111 may not be wrong.

 

His 2009 biography suggests he had undiagnosed autism. He was apparently famously socially inept. At Cambridge (according to wiki) they joked that a unit of Dirac was the smallest imaginable number of words that someone with the power of speech could utter in company, an average of one word an hour.

 

The biography's cover has "pathologically reticent, strangely literal-minded and legendarily unable to communicate or empathize... hopelessly socially inept..."

 

Kudos, Mystery, if you guessed aspergers without seeing it on wiki or somewhere.

[Klaynos]

!

Moderator Note

sorry to close this. I feel everyone needs a breathing space and I need a chance to reread a few posts. I hope to open it again in an hour or so.

[Klaynos]

!

Moderator Note

I've split some posts off. Name calling won't be tolerated. On the whole this thread has been going quite well, I've been reading it as it progresses and I'm impressed by the ability of the membership to debate these things and mostly even when things look like they've been going bad it's never strayed too far... until now and even then it was just heading in the wrong direction.

I'm reopening it please stay civil.

Please do not reply to this (or the above) modnote.

[Mystery111]

Yeah, I never googled, but thanks that you did.

[michel123456]

To me, ridicule is a situation into which you fall without anyone's help. You loose your pant in the middle of a speach, or you fall pathetically from a single step you didn't notice, you make a lapsus, you are been caught ignorant on something you ought to know, etc.

There is no need to push on it, and when one does it is foul IMHO.

For example I noticed Ophiolite was hurted by my post #48, I am really sorry but he shoudn't. He (or she) didn't crash lamentably anywhere. It was simply an example I used to show how much it can be hurting to be ridiculized. I was foul.

 

As for Dirac's anecdote I found another version here :

 

When Paul Dirac made a rare error in an equation on the blackboard during a lecture one day, a couragous student raised his hand: "Professor Dirac," he declared, "I do not understand equation 2."

When Dirac continued writing, the student, assuming that he had not been heard, raised his hand again and repeated his remark. Again Dirac merely continued writing...

"Professor Dirac," another student finally interjected, "that man is asking a question." "Oh?" Dirac replied. "I thought he was making a statement."

Edited November 20, 2011 by michel123456

[Ophiolite]

There is no need to push on it, and when one does it is foul IMHO.

For example I noticed Ophiolite was hurted by my post #48, I am really sorry but he shoudn't. He (or she) didn't crash lamentably anywhere. It was simply an example I used to show how much it can be hurting to be ridiculized. I was foul.

I was not at all hurt by your remark. I thought it was foolish and uninformed - or in simpler English, wrong. I included it in my signature in order to ridicule you, which perhaps led you to think the remark had hurt me.

[michel123456]

I was not at all hurt by your remark. I thought it was foolish and uninformed - or in simpler English, wrong. I included it in my signature in order to ridicule you,

 

....edited

 

which perhaps led you to think the remark had hurt me.

Yes.

 

I also noticed that Inow is totally insensible to attacks. Here where I am we call that a pachyderm, not an insult, but a statement about an individual unbothered by bites and smashes (pachys = thick, derma = skin). However he is sensible to the reputation system.

Edited November 21, 2011 by michel123456