Humanity's Greatest Minds

  • Thread starter Danoff
  • 186 comments
  • 12,615 views
og-james-maxwell-544.jpg


James Clark Maxwell

Maxwell is responsible for the concept of electromagnetic radiation. Maxwell is basically like the Isaac Newton of the EM world (instead of the physical world). Einstein described Maxwell's work as the "most profound and the most fruitful that physics has experienced since the time of Newton". Maxwell's work was the kicking off of the world of electricity. His work predicted the existence of radio waves, and he (I didn't know this before writing this) apparently invented color photography.

Maxwell's equations (or laws) are learned in second semester freshman physics at University (in the US) by engineering and science students. Basic physics includes two pillars: kinematics and electricity/magnetism. Basically for one semester students learn what Newton developed, and then they learn what Maxwell developed.

He also apparently (I didn't know this before writing this) made contributions to thermodynamics, developing a kinetic theory of gasses, which ultimately led to Einstein's evidence for the existence of atoms.


“Maxwell’s equations have had a greater impact on human history than any ten presidents.” – Carl Sagan

When Einstein was asked if he had stood on the shoulders of Newton, he replied: “No, I stand on Maxwell’s shoulders.”

And Richard Feynman, another of the 20th century’s greatest physicists said: “…the great transformations of ideas come very infrequently… we might think of Newton’s discovery of the laws of mechanics and gravitation, Maxwell’s theory of electricity and magnetism, Einstein’s theory of relativity, and… the theory of quantum mechanics.”
 
As most stand-out "blobs" have already been listed, here's a couple more I'd like to throw in:


Tommy_Flowers.jpg


Thomas Flowers

After an apprenticeship in mechanical engineering, he earned a degree in electrical engineering at the University of London. In 1926, he joined the telecommunications branch of the General Post Office (GPO) as an engineer, moving to work at the research station at Dollis Hill on the northwest side of London in 1930. From 1935 onward, he explored the use of electronics for telephone exchanges. By 1939, he was convinced that an all-electronic system was possible. This background in switching electronics would prove crucial for his future computer designs.

In February 1941 Flowers' director, W. Gordon Radley, was asked for help by Alan Turing who was based at the government's codebreaking establishment at Bletchley Park. A new decoder system was required for Turing's Bombe system to break Enigma codes. Flowers was sent to help, and although the project was eventually abandoned, Turing was so impressed with the work Flowers had put in, that he introduced him to a friend named Max Newman. Newman was a mathematician who believed that it was possible to mechanise the decoding process of Lorenz ciphers that William Tutte and his codebreaking team had carried out by hand. He had built a machine in an attempt to do this with some success - nicknamed Heath Robinson - but it kept breaking down. Although he was brought in to fix it, Flowers believed that he was capable of building a different and better machine than Newman’s and he started the task in February 1943, finishing the first machine in December the same year.

Called Colossus, Flowers' machine was the world's first programmable computer. It worked off 1,800 thermion valves, though many believed that this was a weakness as valves were notoriously unreliable and prone to breaking down. Although he was forced by Bletchley Park management to proceed on his own (and fund the project with his own money), from his time as a GPO engineer, Flowers knew that valves mainly broke down when a machine was switched on and off all the time. Colossus was left on permanently in what he described as a ‘stable environment’. It proved to be a powerful machine. Newman’s Heath Robinson could read 1,000 characters a minute when it was working, but with its reliability issues, this figure was frequently a lot less, and the whole process needed speeding up with D-Day fast approaching. Colossus was able to read 5,000 characters a minute with excellent reliability. By the end of World War Two, British intelligence had access to ten Colossus machines, and all but two were dismantled once the war was over: they were used at Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) before being dismantled between 1959-60.

Flowers was rewarded with an MBE and a £1,000 grant, which did not even cover what he had invested in Colossus. It is a mark of the man that he divided the £1,000 among the team that had helped him and at the end of it, he gave himself £350. Like all the work undertaken at Bletchley Park, Flowers' role in the war was classified and sworn to secrecy. In 1982, when Flowers was asked to give a lecture in America, he had to consult with the MOD as to what topics he could cover, and more especially what topics were still classified. Despite never been honoured by the government for his his work during the war, a road in the area where the research centre for the GPO had been at Dollis Hill is named Flowers Close. An education centre was named after him in Tower Hamlets, London in 2010, which is now the Tommy Flowers Centre, part of the Tower Hamlets Pupil Referral Unit. In 2013, British Telecom (successor to GPO) unveiled a life-sized bronze bust to honour his legacy near its R&D centre in Ipswich.

He died on October 28th 1998, aged 92.



220px-Alan_Turing_Aged_16.jpg


Alan Turing

His early studies were at King’s College, Cambridge where he was elected a Fellow in 1935. In 1936, Turing published his paper On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem, in which he reformulated Kurt Gödel's 1931 results on the limits of proof and computation, replacing Gödel's universal arithmetic-based formal language with the formal and simple hypothetical devices that became known as Turing machines. In June 1938 he obtained his Ph.D at Princeton University, New Jersey. His dissertation, Systems of Logic Based on Ordinals, introduced the concept of ordinal logic and the notion of relative computing, where Turing machines are augmented with so-called oracles, allowing the study of problems that cannot be solved alone by Turing machines.

From September 1938 Turing worked for the Government Code and Cipher School (GCCS) on the problem of the German Enigma machine; on 4th September 1939, the day after the UK declared war on Germany, Turing reported to Bletchley Park, the wartime station of GCCS. Within weeks of arriving, Turing had specified an electromechanical machine that could help crack the Enigma cipher machine more effectively than the Polish bomba kryptologiczna, from which its name was derived. The Bombe, with an important refinement suggested by mathematician Gordon Welchman in 1940 in the form of a diagonal board (which worked similarly to the Enigma's plugboard), became one of the primary tools, and the major automated one, used to attack Enigma-enciphered messages. A standard Enigma machine consisted of three rotors which could be set in any of 26 positions, whereas the Bombe contained 36 equivalent rotors, each with three drums wired to produce the same scrambling effect as the Enigma rotors. In 1941, Turing’s codebreaking section, ‘Hut 8’, mastered the German submarine communication system that was vital to the battle of the Atlantic.

In 1945 he joined the National Physical Laboratory at Teddington, where he designed and was instrumental in the development of the Automatic Computing Engine (ACE), regarded as the world’s first universal computing machine. He joined the Manchester Computer Laboratory in 1948 - working under the mathematician Max Newman, whom he had known from Bletchley Park days - and two years later he settled in nearby Wilmslow. Turing’s final years were marked by tragedy: he was prosecuted in 1952 for his relationship with another man. Despite having always been open about his sexuality, Turing came to be regarded by his employers as a security risk and barred from working at GCHQ. The ensuing phase of depression ended with his suicide by cyanide poisoning on June 7th 1954, at the age of 41.



bill-tutte.gif


William Tutte

He studied at the Cambridge and County High School, and by 1935 gained a scholarship to Trinity College, Cambridge where he studied Chemistry and Mathematics. On the suggestion of one of his tutors, Tutte Joined Bletchley Park during World War Two, but was rejected for work in a code breaking team after being interviewed by Alan Turing. He believed that Tutte would not fit in with the people working in his Enigma team. This decision would lead to Tutte being chosen to join a team led by Colonel John Tiltman, who had been chosen to work on the Tunny project. Tunny was Bletchley Park’s code name for the Lorenz SZ40.

Hitler had ordered the creation of a more sophisticated encoding system that the most senior Nazi military leaders could use with confidence - one far more complicated than Enigma, which was capable of sending out a code in 15 million million different ways. Lorenz was capable of sending out a secret message in 1.6 million billion ways (1,600,000,000,000,000). It was programmed to use binary code, unlike Enigma, and encrypted it. The naval variant of Enigma had four internal rotors to construct an encrypted code. Lorenz had twelve. It also only needed one operator to use it, whereas Enigma needed three at the sending end and another three at the receiving end.

In 1941, the codebreaking teams who were listening to the Nazi codes being sent throughout occupied Europe began to notice the normal Enigma signals had changed. At first, it seemed that they would be indecipherable, but on August 30th 1941, that all changed. A German operator had sent a coded 4,000 character message which had later been requested again by its recipient due to its length. Normally the internal rotor positions would have been changed before any message was sent, but this didn't happen. On its own intercepting the same message twice wouldn't have helped those at Bletchley, but the operator had decided to use abbreviations and different punctuation to help speed up the process of sending the message again. As a result, when the messages were eventually given to Colonel Tiltman, he was able to decipher them in next to no time. However, they still didn't shed any light on what exactly made Lorenz tick, therefore he handed the task over to Tutte, who was asked to "see what you can make of these".

Tutte then set to work in examining the broken codes, and by identifying the repetitions through intuition and mathematical formulas, he and his team learnt that Lorenz's first internal rotor repeated a pattern every 41 strokes, thus concluding the first rotor wheel had 41 spokes. After 2 months further study, Tutte and his team had successfully worked out of the complete logical structure of the cipher machine. This reverse engineering breakthrough allowed British intelligence to effectively be a fly-on-the-wall at the most important meetings held by the most senior Nazis, as well as being able to influence the enemy through military deception during missions such as Operation Fortitude.

After the war, Tutte returned to Trinity College to continue his pre-war work. However he received an invitation to teach in Canada, and in 1948 moved to Canada where he worked at the Universities of Toronto and Waterloo. The UK government never decorated Tutte for his work at Bletchley Park, but he was elected to be a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1987. In recognition of his work, the Canadian government made Tutte an Officer of the Order of Canada in 2001, and the country's Communications Security Establishment named an internal organisation aimed at promoting research into cryptology, the Tutte Institute for Mathematics and Computing (TIMC), in his honour in 2011. He died on May 2nd 2002, aged 84,
 
Ok some on my list.

Marx- I think his writings are still relevant today, even if you disagree with them they are a fundamental set of writings on economics and politics that still influence many academics and the like.

Toyotomi Hideyoshi. To go from peasant to Shogun took some smarts you can't deny.

Oda Nobunaga, To face down someone a lot stronger than you and not only win but establish yourself as the dominant force in the entire region takes brains.

Yamamoto Isoroku
, He was one of the finest commanders ever, predicted exactly how the war was going to turn out. Hindered by the army dictatorship objecting to many of his ideas though.

Keynes. Again like Marx, you may disagree with him but his ideas are still fundamental to the study of economics.

Jan Hus. Father of the protestant movement and I would argue the first sort of left wing theorist.

Jan Zizka. A great military leader, even went blind and still won victory after victory.

Sun Tzu. Set out ideas on strategy which I believe are 100% correct.

Miyamoto Musashi. He was a great swordsman true but he was also smart, for example a popular weapon for bandits at the time was a sickle with a chain to wrap around the enemy's weapon. Most people try to get their weapon free and hence die yet Musashi just chucked it and drew his shorter sword. Also the book of five rings I would say is similar to the level of Sun Tzu, difference being Sun Tzu talks about strategy, Musashi talks about how to train your troops.

Slavoj Zizek. Some conservatives consider his ideas outright dangerous but a Marxist thinker who I think will be remembered as a key to academic study.

Clausewitz. Another fundamental military thinker, personally I prefer Sun Tzu but he is certainly a fundamental person to study.
 
Last edited:
Toyotomi Hideyoshi. To go from peasant to Shogun took some smarts you can't deny.
I wonder if he was actually shogun, if he started as a peasant--I'm given to understand that shogun is a title passed from father to son.* Might daimyo be more accurate?

*Grain of salt and all that.
 
I wonder if he was actually shogun, if he started as a peasant--I'm given to understand that shogun is a title passed from father to son.* Might daimyo be more accurate?

*Grain of salt and all that.
Yes, but if you look at the period, the shogunate before was weak and had no control over the country. There was a 100 odd year war with all the lords fighting each other and he eventually came out on top.

He never officially held the title of Shogun due to his birth but he was the Emperor's Regent which was basically the same thing.
 
Yes, but if you look at the period, the shogunate before was weak and had no control over the country. There was a 100 odd year war with all the lords fighting each other and he eventually came out on top.

He never officially held the title of Shogun due to his birth but he was the Emperor's Regent which was basically the same thing.
TIL.

I was just going by my admittedly pretty insignificant knowledge of the Japanese feudal states and hierarchy, lacking the context of any particular period within the period. Good to know in case I ever get a spot on Jeopardy.

👍
 
If you've had surgery in the past few years, chances are a critical part of the process that was carried out is indelibly linked to another of my choices.

Atul Gawande

220px-Atul-Gawande_%28cropped%29.jpg


A graduate of Harvard medical school (before which he was a Rhodes scholar, studying at Oxford), he is a general surgeon with a specialty in endocrine surgery and practices at Brigham and Women's Hospital. As well as a practicing surgeon, he has written numerous books including Complications: A surgeon's notes on an imperfect science which was a National Book Award finalist. Perhaps the book that had the most impact however was The Checklist Manifesto. It was because of his love of the humble checklist that he decided to, with a team of researchers implement a "bedside aide" for a surgery team to avoid errors when navigating complex procedures. This aide was a 2 minute checklist, and he worked with a team at Boeing in creating it after he visited the factory and witnessed how they worked and how often they fell back on checklists. The result? The average number of complications and deaths dipped by 35%. And it's successor?

The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist:

checklist_custom-7078c7fce8007ead7966a80ba8f734ae2392317c-s800-c85.jpg

This checklist is now used worldwide, and though there are some changes according to which specialty is using it the core checks are basically the same. After implementing it the WHO found morbidity and mortality decreased not only in resource poor countries (where they were expecting a drop), but also in the top performing health systems in the world. In the NHS at least, every procedure, no matter how minor will have a version of this checklist read out before the op and after, with its use documented in the patients notes.

So he created a checklist, big deal. He's also a columnist for the New Yorker, with one essay in particular which compared the price of healthcare between two towns in Texas and the reasons behind it (a profit maximizing model versus a low cost, high quality care model) causing such furor that it was cited by Obama when he was reforming healthcare. By the time of the follow up article many doctors in the high cost town refused to speak to him. He is also (unsurprisingly) a vocal critic of Trump's healthcare repeals

A brilliant orator, he has spoken at numerous institutions (including, luckily, my own) and delivered the Reith lectures in 2014 titled "The Future of Medicine". As of 9th July he has become the CEO of a venture to lower healthcare costs backed by J.P. Morgan, Berkshire Hathaway, and Amazon.

I also think he's one of the few mentioned in this thread still alive and active!

------

Link to the New Yorker article - The cost conundrum https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/06/01/the-cost-conundrum

Link to another article to make you think - Is healthcare a right? https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/02/is-health-care-a-right
 
Last edited:
149188-004-7D1AD672.jpg


Plato
~400 BCE

I add plato to the list for his contributions to the understanding of metaphysics. Plato was more interested in abstractions from the real world than the world itself, and this focus on abstraction contributed to his exploration and uncovering of the concepts of truth, perception, subjectivity, and objectivity. It was, perhaps, the very beginning of science and a turning point for mathematics. I'll quote his wikipedia article:

"He was not the first thinker or writer to whom the word “philosopher” should be applied. But he was so self-conscious about how philosophy should be conceived, and what its scope and ambitions properly are, and he so transformed the intellectual currents with which he grappled, that the subject of philosophy, as it is often conceived—a rigorous and systematic examination of ethical, political, metaphysical, and epistemological issues, armed with a distinctive method—can be called his invention."
 
Last edited:
Elon Musk, identified as a total fraud.

Elon Musk is a total fraud
By Maureen Callahan

July 21, 2018 | 8:32am

tesla-debt_1.jpg

So far, Tesla's Elon Musk has only been successful at tricking people into thinking he's a success.REUTERS

One disastrous tweet has finally revealed Elon Musk for what he is: a fraud.

Enraged that a British cave diver called his idea to rescue the Thai soccer team for what it was — “a p.r. stunt [with] absolutely no chance of working” — Musk took to Twitter and called him a “pedo.”

Just like that, Tesla’s market value plummeted by $2 billion.

Musk has been in business since 2002. His stated goal is nothing short of transforming humanity through his products: his electric cars, space travel, and an underground high-speed Hyperloop system.

He has yet to succeed at anything but somehow spins every failure into proof of imminent success. His only accomplishment has been this decades-long Jedi mind trick.

Tesla is best known for blowing deadlines and consistently falling short on production.

In November 2017, Bloomberg reported that the company burns through $500,000 per hour. For two years now, Tesla has been suffering an epic talent drain and in May, two top execs — one the liaison with the National Transportation Safety Board — walked out the door.

That’s to say nothing of the human toll.

In March, a Tesla driver was killed while test-driving an auto-piloted Model X, the impact fully decimating half the car. Then in May, the NTSB announced an investigation after two teenagers were killed in a Tesla Model S after its battery caught fire following a crash. A similar accident claimed a driver two months prior, with California firefighters reporting that the Tesla battery kept reigniting itself days after the smash.

California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health opened its third investigation into workplace safety at Tesla Inc. in July after employee complaints. Two investigations have been ongoing since April, yet Musk took to Twitter to boast that Tesla was now building its cars in a tent.

“Not sure we actually need a building,” he tweeted. Meanwhile, he was “back to sleeping at the factory” to hit production deadlines.

This is a genius?

Tesla was founded in 2003, but the world’s largest automakers quickly surpassed Musk’s vision for electric vehicles. Tesla will never catch up. Shareholders are finally catching on.

Musk isn’t sorry and nothing is ever his fault

So should the government, which reportedly gifts Musk’s companies with an estimated $4.9 billion in subsidies.

Star investor Jim Chanos called Tesla a “walking insolvency” back in 2016. He doubled down in December, saying Tesla is “headed for a brick wall.”

SpaceX — which Musk touts as replacing NASA and colonizing Mars — has been a literal failure to launch. So many of its rockets have burned up or crashed that Musk, for reasons unknown, has made a blooper reel.

As for that Hyperloop, most experts say it’s impossible and unnecessary. “It gives me pause to think that otherwise intelligent people are buying into this kind of utopian vision,” Harvard professor Jose Gomez-Ibanez told MIT Technology Review in 2016.

“They’re up against the airlines, and airlines don’t need to install hundreds of miles of track.”

Rocket scientist and aerodynamic engineer Leon Vanstone has called the Hyperloop yet another Elon Musk hustle.

Writing in Fortune, Vanstone asked: “Is it possible to build a Hyperloop train into a 200-mile underground tunnel on a reasonable timeline that moves people in 29 minutes [from DC to New York] and isn’t prohibitively expensive? Probably not.”

Musk infamously does not take criticism well and refuses to be questioned or challenged — three lethal traits in a leader. On a conference call with analysts in May, Musk dismissed questions about Tesla’s diminishing capital and other dubious claims with name-calling.

SEE ALSO
upload_2018-7-22_10-34-40.gif
Elon Musk’s bizarre tweets are raising red flags on Wall Street

“Excuse me,” Musk said. “Next. Boring boneheaded questions are not cool.”

Tesla’s stock plummeted 5.6 percent after that performance. They also dropped 5 percent after an April Fool’s Day tweet in which Musk announced Tesla had gone bankrupt.

“Elon plays by his own rules,” a former Tesla exec told The Washington Post, “but I think he underestimates the weight of his own words.”

Musk’s attempts to insert himself into the Thai cave rescue show he has less intelligence and even less humanity than we realized.

He finally apologized on Wednesday for his disgusting accusations against the hero diver, but only after shareholders demanded it and not without accusing the diver of lying, insisting his own efforts weren’t p.r.-driven but “an act of kindness.”

Oh — and that the sub he built was “to specifications from the dive-team leader.”

In other words: Musk isn’t sorry and nothing is ever his fault.

Business as usual.

https://nypost.com/2018/07/21/elon-musk-is-a-total-fraud/
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-22_10-34-40.gif
    upload_2018-7-22_10-34-40.gif
    43 bytes · Views: 26
I'd like to nominate Augusta Ada Byron, later Augusta Ada King-Noel, or Lady Lovelace.

A collaborator (and strong debater) with Babbage, a proponent of the more abstract side of computational design, she was the daughter of Byron the poet. Her life story suggests that she inherited his incredibly poetic mind and love of shagging... with this fear in mind her mother had insisted that she be tutored in maths and sciences from a young age. Rather than entirely avoid the ethereal intellectual path that her father trod so well she used her maths-brain to work it into some of the most amazing, ground-breaking pieces of thought on the subjects of tabular computation, artificial intelligence, and descriptions of computers and their programs that are still recognisable and relevant today.

Ada_Byron_daguerreotype_by_Antoine_Claudet_1843_or_1850.jpg
 
ludwig-van-beethoven.jpg

Ludwig van Beethoven

Beethoven is the moment of maturity for music. It's like music becoming a teenager, discovering itself, discovering its emotions, discovering its potential, and for the first time really grasping that potential. Prior to the relative chains of classical music, music was pretty basic. Think of the medieval folk tunes, the drums and wails of native american or african music, monk chants and mass. I have to admit an almost complete lack of perspective on Asian historical music here, so maybe a parallel awakening was going on at the time.

Classical music was a major forward step from Baroque music, and a lot of people claim to like classical music, but they usually really mean they like romantic music. Classical music is really the domain of Mozart more than Beethoven, who thrust classical music toward and into the romantic period, which contains has my favorite composer Chopin. But if I love Chopin, Debussy, Tchaikovsky, Rach, even Gershwin and everything that followed, Beethoven was the one who really started that ball rolling. The classical music of Mozart feels aimless and disconnected by comparison.

Here's Mozart. Listen for a few seconds to put yourself into classical:


Here's Beethoven. Check the difference:




The romantic style of Beethoven really touched people and expanded and exploded the expressive level of music from then on.
 
Last edited:
Nope. Atomic physics was just another part of the progression of human knowledge. Applying that to make a bomb was a natural extension of that knowledge.

The great fool is the one who thinks that knowledge can be contained. The wise man considers that things will always be known because that is human nature, and that true wisdom is how you use that knowledge.

There have been great advances that have come from nuclear research, and only one of them is the nuclear bomb. They are not separable. You cannot throw away nuclear bombs without also disowning everything else that nuclear science has brought.

Its no surprise that humans will weaponise anything.

I dont think einstein or other scientists should be blamed for it.

Humans will always invent new ways to kill other humans.
 
1459020450333


Adam Smith

Author of An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776) otherwise known as The Wealth of Nations. Smith founded modern economics, was the first to actually understand and explain capitalism, and solidified the beginnings of the spread of capitalism across the globe - a movement which has greatly contributed to our current period of peace and prosperity.

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.

Labour was the first price, the original purchase - money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased.

As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it.
 
1503368088_939_10-ancient-lost-books-we-would-love-to-read.jpg


Aristarchus of Samos
~300 BCE

First person to realize that the sun was the center of the solar system, that other stars were like the sun, and placed the planets in the correct order in the solar system. His ideas were rejected in favor of geocentric models (which is blamed on Aristotle). It would not be until Copernicus almost 2000 years later that his work was continued and shown to be true. Copernicus actually cited Aristarchus in an early draft of his work, and then removed the citation for the final version.

This guy was way ahead of his time. We're not the center of the universe or solar system... radical thinking which took a lot of persuading before it became adopted. To realize that we're not at the center that far ahead of everyone else, and get the reasoning right, ordering the planets, and even realize that there are other solar systems at that time absolutely floors me.
 
6f58c02f9f57081d077c097b7d4eea46469cab8c.jpg


Edward Jenner

In 1796 Jenner wrote Inquiry into the Variolae vaccinae known as the Cow Pox, inventing the vaccine and effectively creating the field of immunology. At the time, smallpox was killing between 10 and 20 percent of the population (according to wikipedia). Jenner solved it with a vaccine, and created a wildly successful weapon against many viruses. Vaccinations of course are still the method of choice today (unless you're Jenny McCarthy).

Again, according to wikipedia, Jenner was not the first person to inoculate against small pox, or to invent the concept of inoculation. In Jenner's time, inoculation was very dangerous - because inoculated people would catch the disease from the inoculation and die from it. But Jenner's methodology by creating a safe inoculation and then testing the people who had been vaccinated and showing that they had immunity to the disease was the step that was needed to show that there was a safe and effective method to combat smallpox. Jenner is attributed with saving more lives than any other human being.
 
My nomination is a name that is probably not well known in mainstream society - Robert Koch (1843-1910). This guy is known as the founder of modern bacteriology and was the first to really grow bacteria in pure culture, which led to the ability to prove causative links between bacteria and disease. He was the first to show that Anthrax, TB and Cholera were caused by bacteria.

Koch's postulates are four criteria that must be satisfied in order to show a link between an organism and disease, and are still used and taught today.
Namely:
  1. The organism must always be present, in every case of the disease.
  2. The organism must be isolated from a host containing the disease and grown in pure culture.
  3. Samples of the organism taken from pure culture must cause the same disease when inoculated into a healthy, susceptible animal in the laboratory.
  4. The organism must be isolated from the inoculated animal and must be identified as the same original organism first isolated from the originally diseased host.
 
9ed11b511796f5ea3866c355d84fabd4-ayn-rand-atlas-shrugged.jpg


Ayn Rand
~1950

Rand was born in St. Petersberg Russia in 1905 and as a child watched her life go from comfortable to near starvation as her father's business was confiscated under Bolshevik rule. She came to the United States in 1925 and thereafter fell in love with Manhattan, Hollywood, and the US. I think that portion of her background explains a great deal about her personality and tastes.

Philosophy had done a great deal of questioning of perception and reality. That foundation was absolutely crucial for building objective concepts, which is where Rand started. She was a student of philosophy and understood that nature of the problem that philosophy was facing in her time. Her book Philosophy: Who Needs It put that problem into context. Her answer to the question posed in the book's title is "everyone". Objectivism creates a philosophical framework in which man can proceed as though the universe really does exist independently of himself and his perceptions.

Rand also builds on Adam Smith's fundamentals of capitalism, through Objectivism, to understand the nature of human rights and by extension, a moral code based on those human rights.

I was tempted to include Locke ahead of her in this list, or one of the framers of the US constitution, but those contributions to human thinking suffered from exactly the problem that she solved - a lack of understanding of objectivity. Basically, Rand took the concepts of human rights from a means to an end and made them a truth that could be extended to the world.

He is free to make the wrong choice, but not free to succeed with it. He is free to evade reality, he is free to unfocus his mind and stumble blindly down any road he pleases, but not free to avoid the abyss he refuses to see. Knowledge, for any conscious organism, is the means of survival; to a living consciousness, every “is” implies an “ought.” Man is free to choose not to be conscious, but not free to escape the penalty of unconsciousness: destruction. - Ayn Rand

“The recognition of individual rights entails the banishment of physical force from human relationships: basically, rights can be violated only by means of force. In a capitalist society, no man or group may initiate the use of physical force against others. The only function of the government, in such a society, is the task of protecting man’s rights, i.e., the task of protecting him from physical force; the government acts as the agent of man’s right of self-defense, and may use force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use; thus the government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of force under objective control.” –Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal

“The moral justification of capitalism does not lie in the altruist claim that it represents the best way to achieve “the common good.” It is true that capitalism does—if that catch-phrase has any meaning—but this is merely a secondary consequence. The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with man’s rational nature, that it protects man’s survival qua man, and that its ruling principle is: justice.” –Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal

“The concept of individual rights is so new in human history that most men have not grasped it fully to this day. In accordance with the two theories of ethics, the mystical or the social, some men assert that rights are a gift of God– others, that rights are a gift of society. But, in fact, the source of rights is man’s nature.”—Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal
 
Last edited:
Rene-Descartes.jpg

Rene' Descartes
~1640

Descartes (like pretty much everyone in this list) is a mixed bag of contributions to human thought which have endured as legit, and contributions which were in error, and I'm always quite forgiving of the errors, especially when they occurred in the 1600s.

Descartes invented the Cartesian coordinate system (I did not know this) which was named after him, and developed analytic geometry. His work is thought to have been more influential on my first entry into this list, Isaac Newton, than any other work. That's enough to get him to be considered one of the greats all by itself.

What Descartes is best known for is known in philosophy as "the cogito". Ego cogito, ergo sum. Which means "I think therefore I am". Philosophically this concept is the culmination of the greek work on metaphysics (eg: Plato mentioned earlier) into absolute questioning of reality. Also it basically gave us the matrix, so that's a total bonus.

But I have convinced myself that there is nothing in the world, no sky, no earth, no minds, no bodies. Does it now follow that I too do not exist? No: if I convinced myself of something, then I certainly existed. But there is a deceiver of supreme power and cunning who is deliberately and constantly deceiving me. In that case I too undoubtedly exist, if he is deceiving me; and let him deceive me as much as he can, he will never bring it about that I am nothing so long as I think that I am something. So after considering everything very thoroughly, I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind. -Descartes

Descartes is simultaneously destroying metaphysics and laying the foundation for it to be reborn. He's realizing that everything can be questioned, everything except himself. This last bit, the tantalizing door opened to objectivity was subsequently criticized. But in my view that criticism is misplaced, because the criticism can be defined away (by defining the thinker of his thoughts as wherever they are originating).

This is pretty mind-bogglingly brilliant for the 1600s - to realize (without understanding really what a brain is, or eyes, or how they communicate, etc) that perception can be, in total, questioned. I think it's a noteworthy achievement of mankind, even if it had philosophers scratching their heads saying "now what" for hundreds of years and making appeals to God.

The downside of Descartes was his grasping at straws to explain away the problems created by the cogito. Making appeals to the human soul, and inventing dualism (spirit and body separation) which plagues people to this day. I normally don't mention the missteps of the great thinkers in this list, but dualism is a misstep that has proven to be long lasting.
 
Frederic_Chopin1014px.jpg


Frédéric Chopin

1810-1849

Chopin lived only 39 years, dying of tuberculosis. In that time, he revolutionized music by devoting himself almost entirely to the piano and perfecting compositions for that instrument in a way that perhaps no composer had ever done for a single instrument. Beethoven opened the door to romantic music, but Chopin explored it to its depths and demonstrated to the world at the time and everyone that followed what was possible in terms of musical expression. Many musicians feel that his piano compositions are without equal, not in terms of technical difficulty, but in terms of clarity of expression. Chopin worked to simplify his music, and he is described as being unique for being an extreme technical virtuoso who never composed for the purpose of demonstrating it. Some of Chopin's greatest works (the preludes) were composed while he was isolated and diagnosed with tuberculosis. Depressed and in declining health, he poured his experience into some of the most evocative music ever created.

Beethoven opened the door, and Chopin walked through and turned on the light.





and last (here) but not least




I could fill this thread with great Chopin music.
 
Rene-Descartes.jpg

Rene' Descartes
~1640

Descartes (like pretty much everyone in this list) is a mixed bag of contributions to human thought which have endured as legit, and contributions which were in error, and I'm always quite forgiving of the errors, especially when they occurred in the 1600s.

Descartes invented the Cartesian coordinate system (I did not know this) which was named after him, and developed analytic geometry. His work is thought to have been more influential on my first entry into this list, Isaac Newton, than any other work. That's enough to get him to be considered one of the greats all by itself.

What Descartes is best known for is known in philosophy as "the cogito". Ego cogito, ergo sum. Which means "I think therefore I am". Philosophically this concept is the culmination of the greek work on metaphysics (eg: Plato mentioned earlier) into absolute questioning of reality. Also it basically gave us the matrix, so that's a total bonus.

But I have convinced myself that there is nothing in the world, no sky, no earth, no minds, no bodies. Does it now follow that I too do not exist? No: if I convinced myself of something, then I certainly existed. But there is a deceiver of supreme power and cunning who is deliberately and constantly deceiving me. In that case I too undoubtedly exist, if he is deceiving me; and let him deceive me as much as he can, he will never bring it about that I am nothing so long as I think that I am something. So after considering everything very thoroughly, I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind. -Descartes

Descartes is simultaneously destroying metaphysics and laying the foundation for it to be reborn. He's realizing that everything can be questioned, everything except himself. This last bit, the tantalizing door opened to objectivity was subsequently criticized. But in my view that criticism is misplaced, because the criticism can be defined away (by defining the thinker of his thoughts as wherever they are originating).

This is pretty mind-bogglingly brilliant for the 1600s - to realize (without understanding really what a brain is, or eyes, or how they communicate, etc) that perception can be, in total, questioned. I think it's a noteworthy achievement of mankind, even if it had philosophers scratching their heads saying "now what" for hundreds of years and making appeals to God.

The downside of Descartes was his grasping at straws to explain away the problems created by the cogito. Making appeals to the human soul, and inventing dualism (spirit and body separation) which plagues people to this day. I normally don't mention the missteps of the great thinkers in this list, but dualism is a misstep that has proven to be long lasting.
I had to study him, please don't take me back there haha.

He did have some weird 'evidence' for the existence of god though, and he believed all your muscles were just air sacs that expanded and contracted with air.
 
and he believed all your muscles were just air sacs that expanded and contracted with air.

In some ways that just makes him more awesome - because of the absolute lack of human knowledge at the time. To contribute to mathematics and philosophy so profoundly with so little factual information is very impressive to me.
 
In some ways that just makes him more awesome - because of the absolute lack of human knowledge at the time. To contribute to mathematics and philosophy so profoundly with so little factual information is very impressive to me.
True.

I had to study his reasons for god though which was painful. Also the idea that the mind is separate from the body I find a little weird. He argues it well and it can still be supported today but I find the idea strange.
 
Last edited:
True.

I had to study his reasons for god though which was painful. Also the idea that the mind is separate from the body I find a little weird. He argues it well and it can still be supported today but I find the idea strange.

Yea, I had to study that stuff too, and I agree it was painful. Like you say, dualism is still painful.
 
Back