Nobel Peace Prize

[sukumvit boy]

I was rather hoping that it might go to Edward Snowden , just as a raspberry and middle finger to the US NSA and as a pat on the back to whistle blowers. However , I think that the Nobel Committee made the better choice.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29564935

Certainly a good argument can be made that Snowden should be regarded as a criminal , not a hero.
Any thoughts?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...lala-yousafzai

[Stavros]

If the Nobel Prize did not exist, no intelligent person would want to invent it. I cannot think of a more pointless exercise in instant celebrity, as most of the recipients of the award in all categories have usually attained a high reputation in their field before being granted a prize whose only value is measured in pounds, dollars or krone. Did Albert Einstein need a Nobel Prize to confirm he was a successful and important man? We already knew that Gunter Grass and Samuel Beckett were two of the finest writers of the 20th century, they didn't need a Nobel Prize to confirm it. Yes it was important for medicine to describe the Human Immunodeficiency Virus that was (and continues to) waste thousands of people a year, but we didn't need the odious back-stabbing competition to get the prize that obsessed some of those working on the disease at the time, as their only necessary role was to understand and combat the disease, not glorify their egos in Stockholm. Barack Obama, had he the modesty and good counsel, should have refused to accept the award.
We also knew what the destructive consequences of US foreign policy in Vietnam was, not just for the population of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia but also for the families of the US service personnel who went through it, yet the justification for giving the award to Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho (who refused to accept it), was also the case with Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat and is in the remit of the Prize which is awarded to those who have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses (from the Wikipedia page on the prize).
On this basis it is hard to see how either of the two latest recipients meet the criteria laid down for the award, but Nobel prizes are shaped more by contemporary politics than the merit of the person or the cause. Boris Pasternak was one of the finest Russian writers of the 20th century, but his Nobel prize was awarded to spite the government of the USSR, which was also the case with the award for Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a courageous man at the time, but a significantly inferior writer to Pasternak.

Imagine there is a Nobel Prize for Music -who on earth would win in? Dolly Parton? Daniel Barenboim? It might be Bob Dylan's only chance of a medal.

As the Telegraph showed the other day in an analysis of the Prize -
Just five per cent of almost 900 Nobel Prizes distributed to the most brilliant minds in peace, literature, science and economics over the past century have been awarded to women. Of 867 prestigious awards distributed since 1901, just 46 have been awarded to women, starting with Marie Curie who won the prize for physics alongside her husband Pierre in 1903 and again for chemistry in 1911.

Since then, 15 women have also been awarded the Nobel prize for scientific pursuits - compared to more than 500 men. A dozen have received the award for literature, 14 for peace and one for economics.

Geographical analysis by the Telegraph has also revealed that western countries have received a disproportionately high number of awards throughout the Nobel's history.

full article is here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ed-gender.html

Malala Yousafzai is a celebrity for all the wrong reasons, and lives in exile from her country because the extremists there believe education for girls is part of some conspiracy to corrupt the population. In fact we never needed an attempt to murder her to bring the issue of education for all into the public domain. Most informed people are aware of the fragile nature of education in large parts of the world, even if they don't spend a lot of time reading about it to know the details, and Malala is certainly a brilliant young woman and one cannot be churlish about her celebrity if in fact it does expose the desperate state of (non-)education -for girls and boys- across the world. But what also is important is what it is that is being taught, and the frightening fact that a lot of education is shaped by people with a political-religious agenda who import into the curriculum extreme ideas, not least in the city in which she lives, Birmingham, or in the schools in Africa which are being run by American evangelists who believe modern science is mostly bullshit.
There are better ways of dealing with these issues than handing out prizes.

[Odelay]

Interesting points made, Stavros. But you have to admit the world loves awards. How else can we explain the continued popularity of beauty contests. And in some ways, our political elections have become not much more than beauty contests. Since 1960, the fellow or missy who sound the best and look the best in front of the cameras seem to do the best, with a few exceptions. From this angle, how appropriate was it that Obama won the beauty contest in 2008 and then was promptly awarded the Nobel for his win in 2009 - or something like that. I wasn't aware that he had done anything for peace that year.

No, the Nobel prize is here to stay. It ranks right up their in award status with the Oscars and the winner of the annual spring break Wet Tee Shirt contest in Fort Lauderdale.

[sukumvit boy]

Interesting points , Stavros . But as Odelay noted , "the world loves awards".

[Stavros]

I agree with Odelay and Sukumvit Boy, it is also part of the mania for lists that online newspapers use to fill space. The Daily Telegraph online has recently had a list of the most famous opening lines to novels (but no Proust, no Joyce, no Woolf), and now has embarked on the 100 best Premier League footballers, which won't mean much to most Americans -I guess it would be like the best 100 Baseballers (?)
How does anyone answer the question 'Are the Beatles better than the Rolling Stones'?
Yes these things are here to stay, but that doesn't mean I have to support it.

If there was a Nobel Prize for Sport, what would it be? Who would get it? Why?

[trish]

It's true that in most fields Nobel winners are already well established before they are awarded the prize. Prior to winning they already had tenure or job security in one form or another, and had reached the point in their careers where they had no trouble obtaining grant money for their research. Nevertheless, the prize money is nothing to be sneezed at.

What the prize does do is enhance the winners reputation outside the field, gives her or him a momentary voice in the larger world and increases by an iota or two their political clout. I think the romanticism surrounding the prize has some value in getting young people to consider the possibility of pursuing a life of the mind. What better plans had Nobel's heirs for his fortune?

[Stavros]

It's true that in most fields Nobel winners are already well established before they are awarded the prize. Prior to winning they already had tenure or job security in one form or another, and had reached the point in their careers where they had no trouble obtaining grant money for their research. Nevertheless, the prize money is nothing to be sneezed at.

What the prize does do is enhance the winners reputation outside the field, gives her or him a momentary voice in the larger world and increases by an iota or two their political clout. I think the romanticism surrounding the prize has some value in getting young people to consider the possibility of pursuing a life of the mind. What better plans had Nobel's heirs for his fortune?

What the prize does do is enhance the winners reputation outside the field, gives her or him a momentary voice in the larger world and increases by an iota or two their political clout
--This is the point of disagreement that I have -in the cases of Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho, Yitzhak Rabin, Yasser Arafat -in what way were their reputations enhanced? (It didn't do Arafat much good as he spent his last years under siege from Sharon and Netanyahu).
Some people were insulted by the fact these men received an award -often for bringing an end to wars they had such a shocking role in perpetuating for years -is that supposed to be an inspiration? Guess what, after 30 years of killing people I have decided to make peace instead! Why then has Gerry Adams not received the prize? So I guess all Ayman al-Zawahri has to do now is say God Bless America, I was wrong. So give the man a prize!
Peace is the prize, and only peace.

--In the cases of the writers whose work is barely worth the paper it is printed on - I won't name them- being awarded the prize for literature was a distortion of their reputations not an enhancement. Moreover, by awarding prizes to people who don't deserve them you make the whole thing a farce. Jean-Paul Sartre, who spent so much of his life writing it was probably an illness, at least had the decency to say no.

I think the romanticism surrounding the prize has some value in getting young people to consider the possibility of pursuing a life of the mind
--You can do better than that, Trish, we all can. What do you say to someone who acts on your inspiration and fails? Sorry chum, you just ain't good enough for the prize?
Education is a value in itself, it doesn't need badges or baubels.

[trish]

in the cases of Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho, Yitzhak Rabin, Yasser Arafat -in what way were their reputations enhanced? (It didn't do Arafat much good as he spent his last years under siege from Sharon and Netanyahu).
Some people were insulted by the fact these men received an award -often for bringing an end to wars they had such a shocking role in perpetuating for years -is that supposed to be an inspiration? Guess what, after 30 years of killing people I have decided to make peace instead! Why then has Gerry Adams not received the prize? So I guess all Ayman al-Zawahri has to do now is say God Bless America, I was wrong. So give the man a prize!
Peace is the prize, and only peace.

Here I think we're largely in agreement. World leaders and politicians are already widely known. All of their actions have the world's attention...they don't need a prize.

In the cases of the writers whose work is barely worth the paper it is printed on - I won't name them- being awarded the prize for literature was a distortion of their reputations not an enhancement. Moreover, by awarding prizes to people who don't deserve them you make the whole thing a farce. Jean-Paul Sartre, who spent so much of his life writing it was probably an illness, at least had the decency to say no.

This seems to me a bit mean spirited. Tastes in literature run far and wide. Praise that is a farce and distortion to one critic is obviously appropriate to another...otherwise those whom you deem unworthy wouldn't be prize winners.

--You can do better than that, Trish, we all can. What do you say to someone who acts on your inspiration and fails? Sorry chum, you just ain't good enough for the prize?
Education is a value in itself, it doesn't need badges or baubels.

I certainly didn't go into the sciences thinking it's a way to get the coveted Nobel prize. Now that I'm established (somewhat) in academia I don't plan my research around capturing the Nobel. I don't ever expect to win it, but I also don't expect that at the end of my career I'll be saying, "Shit! What a chum I was. I should've become a Wall Street banker." When I was fourteen it was fun to think that the world cared about intellectual achievement. There were prizes of international notoriety awarded for scientific research...amazing! There was even a popular film or two set in Stockholm and the Nobel ceremonies! We agree that education is a value in itself, but we also know the effects of positive and negative reinforcement on young children. The prize romanticized intellectual ability when being a geek wasn't as cool as it is today. Again, to what better use would the heirs have put Nobel's fortune?

[buttslinger]

If you overthink anything all you win is a headache. Of course the Prizers consider themselves the Kingmakers, the discerning Gods, the real Heroes, but creating or discovering something REAL, it does means something. The flaws or the resistance in the game, ...whatever..., part of the charm.
I remember the kids in grade school who would salivate when they fought over who the best baseballer was. It was important then.

[irvin66]

I think it was nice that someone who really deserved it got it, that's all I have to say on the matter.....