That is interesting. James Joyce chose to go abroad, and never returned to Ireland because he refused to use his talents in the cause of the Irish Republican freedom fighters. He wanted to engage with the world on his own terms, unfettered by any obligations to fight a cause he didn't choose. His canvas was bigger.From the link, http://bostonreview.net/noam-chomsky-responsibility-of-intellectuals-redux "Who then were the intellectuals? The minority inspired by Zola (who was sentenced to jail for libel, and fled the country)? Or the immortals of the academy? The question resonates through the ages, in one or another form, and today offers a framework for determining the “responsibility of intellectuals.” The phrase is ambiguous: does it refer to intellectuals’ moral responsibility as decent human beings in a position to use their privilege and status to advance the causes of freedom, justice, mercy, peace, and other such sentimental concerns? Or does it refer to the role they are expected to play, serving, not derogating, leadership and established institutions?"
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
There are many historical figures who exemplify this kind of personal integrity - rather than support the status quo or system, they either embarked on some individualistic journey or remained, despite the threats to life, reputation and careers. Ironically, you can find this in both the hard sciences as well as those figures who supported unpopular beliefs and assumptions in the social sciences.