Too many people who have received it ended up being awful people. That being said, much more people who have received it changed out world for the better.
You cannot look into someone and you cannot predict what he will do next. Humans are not perfect.
The Nobel Prize is not given for your entire life or existence, it is given for specific work you did which had an bigger impact in the world. You cannot give everyone a price otherwise it would be useless, it is there as an appreciation and thank you.
Humans aren’t perfect, but that doesn’t preclude us from being able to predict what a person will do. Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 diminished the award considerably in the eyes of many, as it was generally understood that he would do what most US presidents do-- prologue needless war abroad, all under the shallow guise of "protecting Americans", while wealthy shareholders in the various corporations involved in conflict get even wealthier.
For me, the Nobel Peace Prize is the award equivalent of the Davos forum-- just more symbolic nonsense for wealthy people to pat each other’s backs while the rest of us suffer.
You will always find exceptions in everything. Meaning wrong decisions can be made, from those who decide who actually gets such a prize. Because Obama seems to be an negative example here, I also would have given it to someone else at that time but that does not mean we should abandon it entirely.
I would agree that the prize itself is more a symbolic thing which gives you an entry into history for your work or something you did. Personally I think we could address the criticism of the Nobel Prize if we make the vote more transparent and public. People like you and me should get a chance and a voice on who gets something and then democratically vote for or against it.
However, I do understand the criticism of such a price but the problem I see is that if we disallow such things or abandon it, we need to abandon other principles and awards too, some which I consider more useless such as the golden globe and other awards.
You seem to be moving the goalposts. First you said
You cannot look into someone and you cannot predict what he will do next. Humans are not perfect.
Then when I pointed out that humans being imperfect doesn’t preclude us from predicting what humans will do, you’ve now changed your argument to
You will always find exceptions in everything. Because Obama seems to be an negative example here, I also would have given it to someone else at that time but that does not mean we should abandon it entirely.
I think you’re being far too charitable to the Nobel Committee and I’m trying to figure out why one would defend such people whose work is so largely symbolic. Nobel prizes are like most awards-- utterly meaningless, largely symbolic, and hardly useful in making actual progress. Leftists and working class people in general should not put any weight into pompous awards like Nobel prizes.
Too many people who have received it ended up being awful people. That being said, much more people who have received it changed out world for the better.
You cannot look into someone and you cannot predict what he will do next. Humans are not perfect.
The Nobel Prize is not given for your entire life or existence, it is given for specific work you did which had an bigger impact in the world. You cannot give everyone a price otherwise it would be useless, it is there as an appreciation and thank you.
Humans aren’t perfect, but that doesn’t preclude us from being able to predict what a person will do. Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 diminished the award considerably in the eyes of many, as it was generally understood that he would do what most US presidents do-- prologue needless war abroad, all under the shallow guise of "protecting Americans", while wealthy shareholders in the various corporations involved in conflict get even wealthier.
For me, the Nobel Peace Prize is the award equivalent of the Davos forum-- just more symbolic nonsense for wealthy people to pat each other’s backs while the rest of us suffer.
You will always find exceptions in everything. Meaning wrong decisions can be made, from those who decide who actually gets such a prize. Because Obama seems to be an negative example here, I also would have given it to someone else at that time but that does not mean we should abandon it entirely.
I would agree that the prize itself is more a symbolic thing which gives you an entry into history for your work or something you did. Personally I think we could address the criticism of the Nobel Prize if we make the vote more transparent and public. People like you and me should get a chance and a voice on who gets something and then democratically vote for or against it.
However, I do understand the criticism of such a price but the problem I see is that if we disallow such things or abandon it, we need to abandon other principles and awards too, some which I consider more useless such as the golden globe and other awards.
You seem to be moving the goalposts. First you said
Then when I pointed out that humans being imperfect doesn’t preclude us from predicting what humans will do, you’ve now changed your argument to
I think you’re being far too charitable to the Nobel Committee and I’m trying to figure out why one would defend such people whose work is so largely symbolic. Nobel prizes are like most awards-- utterly meaningless, largely symbolic, and hardly useful in making actual progress. Leftists and working class people in general should not put any weight into pompous awards like Nobel prizes.