[Amorymeltzer]

To pick two items:

>His views on AIDS didn’t just look bad, they may have had deadly consequences. By the late 1990s, South Africa was in the midst of a catastrophic AIDS epidemic. President Thabo Mbeki, under the spell of AIDS denialists including Mullis, declared that AIDS was caused by poverty, not HIV. Many South Africans were denied access to treatment. A 2008 study published in the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes estimated that as a result, 35,000 babies were born with HIV and 330,000 South Africans died of AIDS unnecessarily.

and

>At some point during their interview in his apartment, Mullis grabbed her by the neck and tried to forcibly kiss her. She rebuffed him. But he tried again. And again. He asked her, “How can you say you know me without sleeping with me?”

[timr]

OK. So you're doing exactly the opposite of what I said.

[Amorymeltzer]

“People are complex” is true but complexity is not ignoring a person’s totality. Complexity is holding multiple, sometimes contradictory, things in one’s mind at once. Mullis can be intolerable but still responsible for something meaningful. I can enjoy his book and believe PCR to be a top-5 invention of the past century, but not want the guy over for dinner. That’s what intolerable means, and that’s what the piece is doing. “This guy did an astounding thing but oof.”

[timr]

> Complexity is holding multiple, sometimes contradictory, things in one’s mind at once.

Yes!

> Mullis can be intolerable but still responsible for something meaningful.

Sort of! Agree with the spirit of the sentence, but "intolerable" is a blanket statement. Intolerable to whom?

OK, so you don't want to have him over to dinner. That's fine; I get it. But do we just start calling people "intolerable" if a large number of people don't like them? Should UC Berkeley Alumni magazine publish a puff piece on "The Intolerable Joe Biden"?

I won't be holding my breath.