[fuligo]

I wonder if he would get this much positive attention if he wasn't a Christian extremist. Would the article have conveniently left out his racism if he was, say, a militant antisemite instead of being focused on black people as he is? Would people admire his worship of a random number generator if he used it to spit out slogans of a religious text that isn't as revered as the Bible?

While his schizophrenia probably comes with very bad episodes, there is absolutely nothing that can be found in his own words allowing for the conclusion that this view is just a tourette-like symptom. On the contrary. His violence-laden hate speech is one of the constant factors defining him. Contrary to what has been suggested here he doesn't use slurs randomly and generically, either. There's a story behind his views that is just as coherent as the cute "god's own programmer" schtick.

Where his illness clearly manifests is the interpretation of random events all having a specific meaning. The radio talking to him, all the events in his life being just so that an invisible power is communicating with him, all the way down to literally a random number generator whose nature he cannot grasp. That's schizophrenia. If there was an adequate cure or means of suppressing it, this world view would completely go away.

It's more complicated to separate the man from the illness when it comes to pretty much anything else. At the very least I would be extremely hesitant to call him, as people do in this thread, an "inspiration". I'm not even sure it's safe to be in the same room with him.

Closing with a quote straight from his most recent account:

  "I spend my days clubbing retard-n$ggers. CLUB! CLUB! 
   DIE N$GGER! CLUB! RETARD! N$GGER! DIE!! CLUB! N$GGER!*"

HN's majority opinion of this guy makes me more uncomfortable than his comments by themselves. I don't get how we can label this guy as being "high functioning" and at the same time sweep 99% of everything he ever says under the rug. It's either or.

[anigbrowl]

He's 'high functioning' in the sense that he can produce elaborate computer software that runs fast, in other words he has impressive engineering skills. Socially he's pretty incapable. I think his offensive racist, homophobic and other offensive remarks are part and parcel of his condition because I've spent quite a lot of time reading his rants, and disagree with your claim that his use of slurs is not random and generic. It's not uncommon for him to claim that 'bill gAtes is an atheist nigger' and talk about hod God likes 'African musical rhythms and does not like white people so much' on the same day.

Yes, he does seem to use the epithet 'nigger' more than all other epithets combined, which is understandably alienating for many people. But I don't think this is ideologically rooted because it is so randomly and inconsistently applied in his writing (where it makes up a small fraction of the overall output, rather than the 99% you suggest).

Being an atheist, his output of random passages from the Bible is neither admirable nor otherwise to me - it's just statistically the most likely religious text for an American with a religious fixation to be fixated on. I've met mentally ill Asian Buddhists whose cognitive patterns are quite similar to Terry's even though the cultural referents are completely different. Extreme religiosity is very strongly correlated with some kinds of mental illness and I don't find it strange that Terry is fixated on Old Testament Bible stories where God puts in a lot of personal appearances. I could just as easily imagine him being obsessed with the Koran or some other religious text that's ubiquitous in some other part of the world.

I can't agree that he's an extremist - his (inoffensive) 'Guidelines for talking to God' [1]are pretty bland and heretodox as he eschews questions of salvation, morality etc., in favor of keeping God company (which makes sense since God is apparently a fixture in Terry's life). According to Terry, God dislikes classical music, Shakespeare, French people, and Terry's drumming while exhibiting an inordinate fondness for elephants, bears, and 1960s pop singers. You could work these elements into some sort of coherent ideological position just as you could characterize his relentless automated Biblical quotation as Christian extremism, but I don't think either position makes sense.

What's remarkable about him is not the endless stream of nonsense, much of which is offensive when it's even coherent; it's the fact that he manages to construct working things as part of his intellectual pursuits and carry on some kind of social life despite his mental circumstances.

1. http://www.templeos.org/Wb/Adam/God/HSNotes.html#l1

[fuligo]

It's hard to disagree with that. However, being offensive (in the way that word is most commonly used) is not even my point. I also never expressed doubts about his engineering prowess. People can have significant mental impairments and still perform math or engineering tasks, though the output of these tasks is often colored by their limitations as well. He is the same way. Imagine the things he could accomplish if he wasn't in schizophrenic mode!

My point was about whether he is an "inspiration" or not. Mentally ill people can be assholes, too. It's debatable and probably an unsolvable question to which extent his badness comes from his disease, so all we're left with at this point is to simply judge him by his behavior, and maybe charitably take some factors into account in his favor. But even after doing that, I can't get to a state where I can say: "this person is awesome and a continuing inspiration to me".

The nature of mental illness makes it very hard to talk about the core personality of affected people. Their illness is a part of them, just as all of our little hangups and traumata are a part of every one of us. These properties are us in a very real sense.

On a multidimensional scale of personalities, I do judge him way more harshly than a person with Tourette's syndrome, precisely because there is meaning behind the words when he speaks them - even after I make a conscious effort to discard the instances where that meaning was distorted, there is still enough content left that I'm uncomfortable with subscribing to this person.

Ultimately I'd like to reiterate: my frustration is not with him. With this illness, he got a bad deal in life. I hope he stays safe and gets all the care he needs. I hope he can continue to find creative outlets like his operating system. My frustration is with people idolizing him in his entirety, accepting or maybe even sharing his views. I do think it's possible to admire the work a person does without subscribing to their views, but when doing so you have to work extra hard to separate the two. You can't just admire that person without reservations. Frequently, on this thread and elsewhere, no reservations were even visible. We even got people talking about how he was factually right about calling black people dumb.

[anigbrowl]

Thanks for articulating that. Id o admire terry because I'm rather amazed by TempleOS and as I'm almost the same age as him I can relate to his Commodore 64 computer roots but can't hold a candle to him in engineering terms. I don't know where to delinerate the lines between mental illness, cultural context, and personality in a complex case like schizophrenia so I've chosen to leave that question ina grey area.

[kordless]

It would seem confirmation bias plays a part in those 'conversations'.

[bricestacey]

I consider myself a man of principle. However, there comes a point where principle is just another form of prejudice. There is little to disagree with what you're saying, but life is a lot more devious than you're making it out to be.

[fuligo]

> There is little to disagree with what you're saying

On the contrary. There seems to be a lot of disagreement, or I wouldn't be so heavily down voted. Of course I'm not complaining about people who think my comments are trash, but I would prefer to know why they think that. And, to come full circle, I think it's telling that racist comments seem to be well received and regarded as worthy of consideration in this same thread, whereas my suggestion to draw a harsh distinction between the personal values of the guy in question and his technical accomplishments seems to court controversy.

> life is a lot more devious than you're making it out to be

I'm having a hard time seeing what the criticism is here, maybe you could clear that up. Do you mean I portrayed life as being to cheerful? Do you think I was being too simplistic? If so, where, specifically? I'm also unsure about what you mean by being a man of principle and that being connected to prejudice. What, in this context, are your principles and how are they the same as prejudices?

[jpgvm]

The world is more subtle than good and bad.

This is ofcourse subjective. I choose to believe that he is both a good person and someone who says bad things.

I however, place more value one what people do rather than what they say.

[fuligo]

I don't think you can rightfully accuse me of making simplistic judgements after reading my comment, but you are right that my reservations are subjective. My reservations say something about me and my values.

> I choose to believe that he is both a good person and someone who says bad things.

You probably won't be surprised when I say I can't square that.

Let's for a moment evaluate a hypothetical about good and bad people, since you chose those labels. Assume you got two people. One is "a good person who says good things" and the other is "a good person who says bad things". Which of the two is a better person? Your answer seems to be: that depends entirely on the goodness part. My answer is: it also depends on the quality and quantity of the badness part. What they say is a part of who they are.

> I however, place more value one what people do rather than what they say.

Thoughts do matter. When choosing your heroes, their ideology counts.

It's also a point of debate on what counts as "doing" something on the internet. Expressing beliefs and values is as much an action in itself as writing code.