[zlg_codes]

It's difficult to defend a stance like one you're adopting, because of how quick to judge the general public is. They'd never know that someone like Ted Kaczynski actually held a PhD and wrote an interesting essay before committing to his campaign of terror. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski)

It's rather strange that people will choose to wholly dismiss a person based on one thing, without realizing that even "evil" people have more facets than a simple bevel.

Ted killed himself in prison a few months ago. What benefit could society have gained if someone had heard him out and took some measures to help the environment? Most people won't ask that question, because they have the intellectual and philosophical depth of a puddle.

One of the most illuminating things in my life has been discovering what the "bad" and "evil" side of humanity actually thought, instead of the version that the authorities or victors give us.

There's also this modern tendency to assume that whatever you read, you become. So superstitious.

[weaksauce]

> There's also this modern tendency to assume that whatever you read, you become. So superstitious.

Sure... but there's also a wealth of information out there and filtering out people with known abhorrent views is a decent first pass filter. maybe alex jones or some other neo-nazi dimwit has a few good ideas here and there but why would I subject myself to listening to them(and also enriching them in the process) when I could listen to people that aren't generally awful people?

[setr]

I think shallow views is a much better first-pass filter than abhorrent views; a sufficiently in-depth abhorrent view can and likely will have components worth taking from, even if their final conclusion is absurd (or just overreaching).

An acceptable-but-shallow view and an abhorrent-but-shallow view are equally worthless; effectively as much value an upvote.

[ilyt]

> Ted killed himself in prison a few months ago. What benefit could society have gained if someone had heard him out and took some measures to help the environment? Most people won't ask that question, because they have the intellectual and philosophical depth of a puddle.

Well it's not all that interesting question coz he wasn't exactly first or last preaching same thing about the environment, so there is a plenty of other people to listen to that do not happen to be crazy.

But in general I agree that the trend of disregarding someone's entire contribution to everything they contributed based on this or that opinion that is currently regarded as "bad". After all, if you dig far enough (especially in time, kids/teenagers do/think some utterly dumb stuff) you won't find an innocent soul alive...

[pharmakom]

Reading Ordinary Men changed how I feel about good and evil.