[irremediable]

The famous quote is "His ex-wife reportedly testified that on several occasions when she unwittingly disturbed either his calculus or his drums he flew into a violent rage, during which time he attacked her, threw pieces of bric-a-brac about and smashed the furniture." That was from an FBI file (https://www.muckrock.com/foi/united-states-of-america-10/fbi...) on Feynman.

I don't know anything about the "paid abortion" thing.

It's tricky stuff... Feynman was (is?) a hero of mine, and I struggle to put this stuff in context.

[jerf]

"It's tricky stuff... Feynman was (is?) a hero of mine, and I struggle to put this stuff in context."

Heros have feet of clay. The correct move is to adjust your concept of "hero" to include this.

The alternative, that you will only declare someone a "hero" if they are perfect in every way yields a definition of "hero" with 0 instances, which is a useless definition.

If Feynmann was abusive to his wife to some degree, well, plenty of people are abusive to their wifes without also creating physics breakthroughs. It's OK to honor his ability to do that without having to think of him as perfect.

[irremediable]

I half-agree with you, but isn't there an ethical line past which it's wrong to call someone a hero?

[fail2ban]

Isn't that something you should decide for yourself? Also, why do you assume there's a duality between hero and non-hero? The person did what they did. Simplifying it to the point of 'hero' or 'not hero' is overgeneralizing, I think. Acknowledge their achievements. Acknowledge their faults. Labels aren't a requirement.

[jnbiche]

I tend not to engage in much hero worship anymore, but if the question is essentially whether there's an ethical line past which we can't look up to someone, then I'd say it's of vital importance to know exactly what this "abuse" entailed. Did he physically beat his wife on multiple occasions, or did he throw an ash tray or plate at a wall on a few occasions?

I know a good number of people in a relationship, both male and female, who have engaged in some variation of second offense(throwing things or breaking things during their worst arguments with their spouse/partner. But it wasn't habitual and didn't extend to physical contact.

If that's "all" Feynman is accused of, then I don't think it's that big of a deal. I mean, he had a son and daughter who looked up to him, so I am a bit skeptical that he was a brutal wife beater (who tend not to draw the respect of their children).

[jerf]

To be honest, I don't really call very many people "heros". I personally keep a pretty high bar for that. But that goes into an entirely different, and very large, discussion.

[bdamm]

Shine a bright enough light and everyone is hiding cockroaches.

[fsck--off]

> It's tricky stuff... Feynman was (is?) a hero of mine, and I struggle to put this stuff in context.

The context is that there was no such thing as no-fault divorce in the United States until 1969, and as a result, it was not uncommon for people to invent phony stories about abuse and submit false testimony to the court.

[Tycho]

I thought this was a rumour started by Feynman himself in order that the authorities would think twice about asking him to preside over something or other.

The 'his calculus or his drum playing' part is kind of a giveaway.