h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: John Forbes Nash, Mathematician - A1073206
Author: Pimms Lettuce - U219930

This is finished, bar the constructive comments in PR, and the fact it links to another unedited entry (Game Theory)

I don't agree that this is finished.

in particular, saying that the film was covered (some would say unreliably) in the text trivialises the fact that it was almost universally disliked by those with experience of schizophrenia due to its pandering to just about every (often wildly inaccurate) stereotype about the disorder.

Also, I don't think we should be encouraging the linking to pdf's from edited guide articles. if you can find a proper web page covering the same stuff, that would be much more preferable.

Shouldn't "Jr." be added to the title of the article?

The last sentence before the References section is awkward. A long string of clauses and prepositional phrases before you get to the verb.

This entry is incorrect in saying "However, the real John Nash did not experience hallucinations as part of his schizophrenia, rather delusions that he was receiving messages from space."

Nash had no visual hallucinations, but he suffered from audio hallucinations, which is much more common among people with schizophrenia. Here's a link to an interview in which Nash talks about "hearing voices".
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/nash/sfeature/sf_nash_06.html

This point can be cleared up fairly easily in the guide entry by changing it to say "The film showed Nash having many visual hallucinations,..." and later "... the real John Nash only experienced audio hallucinations..."

It would be good to mention that the film was controversial among some mental health professionals and activists, but dozens of pages could be written [and have been written] debating whether the movie had a politically correct or pharmaceutically correct agenda -- that people must take pills to overcome mental illness, that it's harmful to present Nash as a role model for people who might reject treatment as he did. Those comments would be appropriate for an h2g2 entry about the movie A Beautiful Mind, but I think this entry about the man could just mention that the movie caused some controversy.

xyroth, is there a way that the controversy could be summed up in a few sentences? I'm not even sure that we're thinking of the same problems with the movie. The main complaints I heard were that in real life, Nash managed to cope with his problems without any of the "newer drugs" at least up to the time of the Nobel prize, but that the makers of the movie inserted a line about that to make sure people with mental illnesses would not follow his example and reject their medications or treatments.

What wildly inaccurate stereotypes did you think the movie pandered to? Do you have anything to back up your statement that "it was almost universally disliked by those with experience of schizophrenia"? Here's a page from National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, full of glowing recommendations for the movie from people with schizophrenia and other mentall illnesses, as well as their families:
http://web.nami.org/pressroom/ABMreactions.html

The movie earned awards from NAMI and the National Mental Health Awareness Campaign. Apparently they didn't think the movie was wildly inaccurate.

Hi Xyroth

Me and Cyzaki will get the Schizoprhenia/Beautiful Mind bit rejigged (I'll take the blame for misinterpreting Cyzaki's research )

about the pdf link - I hadn't realised this was a problem. I'll see if I can find Milner's information elsewhere.

Pimms

Hi Rob

Thanks for the additional links. Will add in 'visual', as of course hearing voices is also hallucinatory. Also agree a deep discussion of the film and schizophrenia is out of place in this particular entry.

May take a day or two to for us (myself and Cyzaki) to agree how to address the schizoprenia element appropriately

Pimms

I think a bit more biographical information would be nice (if it's available, which I think it is).

You could also put in a link to his homepage. (Yes, he has one at the university AFAIK.)

Niwt

Point noted Niwt. Will post again when changes made to entry

Pimms

Looking forward to reading it again!

Hey, I'm happy to take some blame too! Although I don't think I did too badly seeing as I knew nothing about John Nash or schizophrenia other than what is in the film before we started this entry!

Entry revised, more links, new section on how Nash became a mathematician.

I saw an entry published last week on front page with a pdf link - is mentioning that a link is to a pdf sufficient? To be fair much of what is in the Milner article is mentioned in Nash's Nobel autobiography.

Pimms

just read the update, and I can't think of anything to add to it.

part of the controversy I mentioned was because I accidently remembered some of the stuff surrounding "me, myself and irene" which really did get panned by those who know about schizophrenia.

the remaining problems you have already covered in your imporvements.

The thing about the pdf files is not official site policy (although I think it should be), but is instead a matter of common sense. why link to a dead end if you can find a web page with most of the same info and additional links so you can find out more.

well done.

keep up the good work.

Hi Rob (further reply)

I should add that I don't want to put 'Jr' after Nash's name if I can avoid it. Since it is clear from the entry that it is talking about the mathematician, not his father the electrical engineer, and gives his date of birth, there should be no confusion about who is being discussed, and the 'Jr' is redundant.

I think suffixes like Jr, if they are not neccessary to avoid confusion, are demeaning, in a similar way to prefixing Miss or Mrs to a womans name where it isn't relevant - it is labelling someone by how they are linked (or not) to someone else.

Amended sentence near end too.


Pimms

Looking good

So it is.

It's altered a fair amount since I first read it!

Oh I forgot to say - it would be handy to have a translation of:

'perform a titration'.

Not everyone knows that this is! (including me!)

ZSF Your wish is my command Titration footnoted

Pimms

Hi Pimms,

I didn't realize anyone felt that "Junior" was demeaning. I just thought that "Junior" makes it technically accurate. Like if you hear the name Martin Luther King, technically that would be the father of the famous civil rights activist named Martin Luther King Jr.

Is there a style guide for the Edited Guide that covers this? I couldn't find anything in the Writing-Guidelines or the <./>SubEditors-Style</.> pages, but there's at least one entry in the Edited Guide in which they used Jr: A352450 "Adam Clayton Powell Jr - Activist and Politician."

Hi Rob
I *do* mention in the first paragraph that sometimes he is referred to with 'Jr' after his name (I could have footnoted the potential name confusion as I did with my entry on Piet Hein A1034731), but the point is that the suffix is redundant in this entry, irrespective of its connotations.

To take your example of Martin Luther King, the fame of the son makes mention of the 'Jr' unnecessary in general discussion. Only in the situation that both he and his father were being discussed, and there might be room for confusion, would the suffix be required.

I personally would have no sympathy for someone who complained that they had been misled by the current title into thinking I was writing about JFN Sr.

Pimms

Thanks Pimms! Now I understand (I think!).

I should mention there is a thread on the entry about another aspect to consider in relation to Nash's life: quantum reality

I am having difficulty getting my head around this concept. Does anyone think it is neccessary to add QR to the entry?

Pimms