Do you think we should appreciate an author´s works without considering his/her political views? How can we act if we dont like his/her ideas? There are many great authors who were/are criticised because of their political opinions by people. Some of them were/are accused of being a traitor, some of them of being a religious fanatic, some of them of being a communist and many many other things. Do you think their approaches decrease the value of their works?

In my opinion we should appreciate authors´ works without considering their political views. Because everything change. It can also change what is right or wrong in the future. Yesterday´s traitor can become tomorrow´s hero. Or yesterday´s fanatic can become tomorrow´´s humanist, etc... Look at the past and now you can see the examples.

It depends on what the author is writing about, and how these views influence the writing. There is a difference between a romantic novel, a thriller, or a column in a newspaper.

Let me give an example. For example Pascal was a very religious man, does that have to decrease his works´ value for an atheist?  Or for example some Norwegians think Knut Hamsun was a traitor; does that have to  make his works less valuable for Norwegians?

We know that art has almost a sacred quality. Regardless of how artists may irritate people with their works sometimes, they are given a privilaged status and anger is usually directed at those who try to restrict artist´s right to express himself. We know that Adolf Hitler was an artist too. Assuming that his works live up to artistic standards and that they are still available; should we have them on display? 

Ha ha...so true vineyards. I know when I was much younger I used to look to "artists" with reverence, that is, until I got to know more than a few. I found they are just as likely to be jerks as anyone else. In fact, many are very egoist, thinking theirselves to be very special in all areas. Being profound and informed thinkers is not always included in the list of gifts. 

All too often, the "art" produced  has little more value that a trained animal is capable of.

It depends on what is field of work is. Pascal´s math is still math. There is not intervening of God in his mathematical work, so as an atheist you should not care about Pascal´s views in other parts of his life. However, if somebody is a pedofile, and writes books about children´s psychology and their development, you SHOULD take his sexual views into mind. There is too big a chance that his sexual preferences will influence his professional views.

Hitler´s work was not up to standard. If it was, he probably would have just kept on paiting little trees and houses. Instead, he was pissed of since he did not get the credit for his work that he thought he deserved.

You can also turn this thought around. Hitler was a vegetarian. Should we think better of Hitler now that we know he was all for animal rights?

 Who decided Hitler´s works were not up to standart? And what if someone thinks they are valuable. Should we blame him/her?

 What if a pedophile writes a book about history, does this make the book less valuable?

Actually, pederasty was an accepted part of Greek culture, but much of their works are considered very valuable. Read about Pederasty in Greek culture.

Is not Socrates considered an important scholar/author? The list is quite long....who ever is interested can do their own research.