Castle Paradox Forum Index Castle Paradox

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 Gamelist   Review List   Song List   All Journals   Site Stats   Search Gamelist   IRC Chat Room

Most influential people in history
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Castle Paradox Forum Index -> Paradox Lounge
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
msw188




Joined: 02 Jul 2003
Posts: 1041

PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 8:58 pm    Post subject: Most influential people in history Reply with quote

So we've had this Paradox Lounge reopened for some months now, and haven't had much discussion to show for it. But here's something to discuss perhaps.

I just finished reading a book called "The 100", which is some dude's opinion of the 100 most influential people in history. I'm gonna post his top ten with some basic comments here, and we can argue about it for a bit. First off though, the basic principal is this - people are judged on their individual influence, but the whole "it would have happened anyway" idea is largely ignored, although if something most likely wouldn't have happened without a certain individual, that individual gets a significant boost. Also, only known individuals count (he gives the example of the inventor of the wheel being excluded because we can't say who it was, and so it might have been a team).

One more thing, the book was published in the 70s, but I don't think much would have changed in his list if it was published today, with the possible exception of trying to include someone involved with the development of the computer, although there may be far too many people involved to give any one person a large amount of influencial credit, so to speak.

Here we go!

1. Muhammad - Islam is big, but not nearly as big as Christianity. The issue is that Muhammad had a lot more singular influence on his religion and its spreading than any other single religious leader.

2. Isaac Newton - Unified science and mathematics providing a basic scientific framework for the universe, and since then science has basically reinvented the EVERYDAY LIFE of practically every living human being but for a few third world communities.

3. Jesus Christ - Started biggest world religion that was responsible for a lot of the shaping of the world, but not as influential as Muhammad in spreading it during his own lifetime.

4. Buddha - Started another huge religion, and most followers have actually adhered to his basic teachings moreso than Jesus, but the religion is small compared to Christianity.

5. Confuscious - Similar to Buddha, but the influence was a bit more restricted to China, and has diminshed a bit since Mao.

6. St. Paul - Put Christianity on the map, wrote a lot of the New Testament, and was the one to really start spreading the word. Jesus is still higher because, without Jesus, it never would have started. But basically, Muhammad is highest because he is St. Paul and Jesus put together for Islam.

7. Ts'ai Lun - This cat invented PAPER in China in the early 100's, and no one else could figure out how until the Arabs captured some Chinese paper-makers 600 and some years later. The author gives a nice synopsis of history where the West was more advanced until this guy, then China led in cultural and scientific advancement for well over 1000 years, until...

8. Johann Gutenberg - Invented printing press for mass printing of books. Not much else to say here.

9. Christopher Columbus - Hit the New World. He actually pushed for the voyage (unlike some other explorers who were hired guns), but I find this ranking a bit high since he ended up having fairly little significance here. But he was the starting point for Europe to begin carving.

10. Albert Einstein - Relativity, along with writing the letter to begin the Manhattan Project. Nearly all science today adheres to some combination of relativity and quantum mechanics, and Einstein is much more singularly responsible for relativity than any man is for quantum mechanics.

I touched on comparisons between Jesus and Muhammad above, but the author also offers a nice comparison of Einstein and Newton. Relativity essentially supersedes Newton's laws, and changes the way a theoretical scientist has to think about the universe, but it hasn't changed the everyday life of the majority of the world the way science has since adopting Newton's framework. Add to that the fact that Newton was the primary influence behind the calculus, needed for nearly all serious scientific endeavors, and you get Newton higher in the list.

So what do you guys think?

EDIT: I'm dumb. I get "Mohammed" and "Muhammad" mixed up a lot, probably because I don't know much about Islam, but I do like the song "Poor Mohammed" by Procol Harum.
_________________
My first completed OHR game, Tales of the New World:
http://castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=161

This website link is for my funk/rock band, Euphonic Brew:
www.euphonicbrew.com


Last edited by msw188 on Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bagne
ALL YOUR NUDIBRANCH ARE BELONG TO GASTROPODA




Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 518
Location: Halifax

PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's awesome! Scientists and religous leaders.
I can't think of anything more influential on the world of humanity than the forces of science and religion.
_________________
Working on rain and cloud formation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
msw188




Joined: 02 Jul 2003
Posts: 1041

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, great scientists pepper the list. Political and military leaders start occuring a lot more as you go down the list.

Here's an easy way to start talking. Who else do you think is on the list, and why? I'll start by naming a couple people that I thought WOULD be on the 100, but weren't:

Gandhi - I guess it's fair to say that his ideas haven't actually influenced that many people since we all end up doing things violently anyway

Socrates - Huge influence on Greek curiosity I would think, which led to some big names that did make the list. Then again, it might be argued that it's hard to know how much of what we might attribute to him is really Plato using him as a vehicle, and Plato is on the list at #40.

Pavlov - Leading familiar name in behavioral psychology with the dog+bell=saliva experiment, but I'm not familiar enough with psychology to know whether he is really as influential as he is famous.

Gauss - Great mathematician, but perhaps more brilliant than influential. Questioned whether space was curved over a century before Einstein, but lacked the tools to answer, and no one else was able to follow up.

Archimedes - Similar to Gauss, more brilliant than influential. Had the basis for the calculus almost 2000 years before Newton, but again lacked the mathematical tools to put it all together, and no one else followed.
_________________
My first completed OHR game, Tales of the New World:
http://castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=161

This website link is for my funk/rock band, Euphonic Brew:
www.euphonicbrew.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bagne
ALL YOUR NUDIBRANCH ARE BELONG TO GASTROPODA




Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 518
Location: Halifax

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You serious?
Plato/Socrates was pegged at 40?
He's at the heart of western history - and has a solid influence in the middle east too.

I would put Socrates on there absolutely, or at least place him in there with Plato. But I'm very biased - Socrates shaped my life throughout high school! I frequently had Socratic dialogues with a friend: one of us would try and make an outrageous claim about reality, and the other would try and tear it down with Socratic questioning.

And I agree - I don't see Columbus being in the top ten. Not up there with Buddha and Newton - no way.
Imperialism would have happened with or without him - he was just among the first to do what would have happened anyway (plus, the vikings made it here before him).
_________________
Working on rain and cloud formation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
8bit
Clutcher of toes.




Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 110
Location: In the thoughts and dreams of all the world's children.

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ronald McDonald - Invented fast food and is responsible for countless fat asses. His impact is felt in a number of fields, from healthcare to food production to economics.
_________________
Peace and love. Peace and love. No more autographs. Peace and love.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Nepenthe




Joined: 27 Sep 2004
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Frederick Douglass. If not for Douglass' petitions Lincoln would have deported all Blacks from America following the Civil War. The United States would not have become the "melting pot" it is today and would have a completely different role in the global society.

(If you read anything about Lincoln beyond highschool textbooks you'll find he was a complete D-bag.
_________________
My art (and random photos)!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Bob the Hamster
OHRRPGCE Developer




Joined: 22 Feb 2003
Posts: 2526
Location: Hamster Republic (Southern California Enclave)

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

+1 Frederick Douglass
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
msw188




Joined: 02 Jul 2003
Posts: 1041

PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To Bagne:

The author does mention in his article on Plato that the ranking was one of the most difficult for him, because Plato's influence has been so vast but so indirect. Very few people still use his actual ideas and/or techniques explicitly to solve issues. As opposed to Aristotle, who was taken as an absolute authority for over 1000 years and is placed at #14.

To Nepenthe and James:

Neither Frederick Douglass nor Abe Lincoln is on his list, although Lincoln is mentioned in a brief epilogue concerning "near-misses". I don't know enough about history to comment much further other than to remark that very VERY few people in his list are political leaders who influenced only one country, and the only such from the US is George Washington, mostly because he was the only general who wouldn't give up during the Revolution.

Actually the article on George Washington is somewhat interesting (#27, seems too high to me) in that the author points out that the majority of the other American colonies (South America) couldn't manage much of a constitution or democracy, but the US managed it in part because GW was so well-respected by all of the colonies, and he did NOT choose to use that respect to put himself in power. In fact he specifically chose not to run for a third term, and set a somewhat unique historical precedent for the US to follow.

Oops, forgot that JFK is also on his list (#80), but only for being the one to push for the moon. I disagree with him placing, because I don't think landing on the moon has greatly affected either how people think or behave much, and until the project is followed up I don't think its fair to call him incredibly influential on human history.

To 8bit:
Ronald McDonald is not on his list, sorry. I laughed in a terrible, "you know that kind of makes sense" kind of way.
_________________
My first completed OHR game, Tales of the New World:
http://castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=161

This website link is for my funk/rock band, Euphonic Brew:
www.euphonicbrew.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bagne
ALL YOUR NUDIBRANCH ARE BELONG TO GASTROPODA




Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 518
Location: Halifax

PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry msw, there's just nothing that fires up a lively thread like "DoesGodExist?OKGO!"

Here's a thought:

Newton had influence, sure - but who influenced him? I'm sure Euclid had a big fat say in his mathematic understanding.

What about one of those Muslims who spread algebra to the rest of the world?
Algebra! Blaaaa!
Can you imagine a world without algebra?

Yeah - how does that book's author deal with the "B was very influential, but A influenced B" problem? I mean -

Oh - by the way - I hear Newton was pretty hard core. Apparently, while studying optics, he came up with this crazy idea that eyes had some kind of lens to resolve an image (Wowzers, he was right! Good jorb!). To test this, he stuck knitting needles _under_his_eyes_ and applied pressure to see if it would throw his vision out of focus.
Aaand ... presumably it worked.
That's hard core science.
I'm going to tell my future children to follow his example.
_________________
Working on rain and cloud formation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
msw188




Joined: 02 Jul 2003
Posts: 1041

PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Haha, it's easy to have opinions on religion and philosophy. It's harder to have opinions on history, because you actually have to know something.

The whole 'A was influenced by B' thing is largely ignored in favor of trying to determine who all was influenced by either of them, and in what ways. Thus, Euclid does not get credit for influencing scientists using Newton's framework, even though he is credited with influencing Newton's approach to a great degree. This is not a great example, because regardless of Newton, Euclid did have a great influence on many people and may be regarded as the main reason the West was so much more inclined towards theoretical math and science than the East. The author brings up the issue that China's knowledge of practical mathematics rivalled and may have surpassed that of the West after the invention of paper, but there was no Euclid in the back of Chinese mathematician's minds, and they rarely cared for rigorous foundations for their mathematics in the abstract. He ranks Euclid at #22, which I think is pretty fair.

In regards to your point about person influencing person, a better debate might be had about placing Aristotle (#14) so far ahead of Plato (#40), despite Plato's substantial influence upon Aristotle. The issue is that Aristotle was the one who actually became such an authority and influenced scientific inquiry for so long, not Plato.

In hopes of stirring some more voices in here, I'm gonna call you guys out on the fact that there are some real obvious names that no one seems interested in bringing up. Here's one I thought would be higher than he was:

Hitler (#35) - The author points out that Hitler may have had the greatest singular influence on people of his own lifetime, but his after-effects are rather slight and mostly due to others' reactions after the war, and usually in the opposite direction that he tried to influence. For example, he wanted to eradicate the Jews, but as a result of his war, the Allies created Israel. He hated both Communism and Democracy, and both were strengthened in the world at the end of WW2.
_________________
My first completed OHR game, Tales of the New World:
http://castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=161

This website link is for my funk/rock band, Euphonic Brew:
www.euphonicbrew.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bagne
ALL YOUR NUDIBRANCH ARE BELONG TO GASTROPODA




Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 518
Location: Halifax

PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bah.
Hitler shouldn't even have an honourable mention.
I might even propose a rule - that most political figures should not be on there. Politics only change the circumstances, while ideas transform the world.

Yeah, no Hitler. Tyrants come a dime a dozen.
WWI and WWII in my eyes were not events triggered by people, politics, or even nations. Rather, I think they were humanity's collective realization that we have reached an age of civilization where war is no longer permissible.
It's like the world has reached a stage of adolescence - we're in the process of waking up from the old ways of the past, but, like any teenager, part of the process is to learn the hard way - to have a terrible war, and realize how awful it really is.
_________________
Working on rain and cloud formation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
msw188




Joined: 02 Jul 2003
Posts: 1041

PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know man. Although the Treaty of Versailles may be regarded as priming Europe for hostilities to continue, I don't think there is much evidence that anything similar to the scale of the Holocaust was likely without the existence of Hitler. The scale of the war itself was influenced by a lot of things certainly, but Hitler's aggression was actually very singular compared to nearly any other leader in history. In this way, his singular influence on the lives of VAST numbers of people in his lifetime was HUGE.

Consequently, other historical leaders who pursued similarly singular aggressive policies are also fairly high on his list. One could place some of Muhammad's influence in this category. Genghis Khan(#21) and Napoleon(#34) are both higher since they also contributed to a unity of peoples in various ways. Oh yes, Alexander the Great(#33) as well.

Honestly, to turn a blind eye to political and military figures simply because the pen is mightier than the sword is a little misguided I think. People live under circumstances - if a singular person greatly affects these over a large enough portion of the world and/or for a long enough period of time, he certainly deserves to be called influential.

What scientists would you place above Hitler, or Genghis Khan? There are several on his list, all of which I agree with.
_________________
My first completed OHR game, Tales of the New World:
http://castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=161

This website link is for my funk/rock band, Euphonic Brew:
www.euphonicbrew.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Bagne
ALL YOUR NUDIBRANCH ARE BELONG TO GASTROPODA




Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 518
Location: Halifax

PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll have to learn a little more about your other examples (Alexander etc.) before I make any comments... but even if I agreed in those cases, I don't think this would change my mind about Hitler.

I think there are enormous forces of change operating on the world today, and the rise of Hitler was simply a side effect. If you're willing to put up with some of my ranting, I'd like to describe the nature of this change.

Um. Okay. In short:
I think that the world is transitioning from an "old world", where worldly power was wielded by kings and clergy, to a new, global civilization where the individual is empowered.
Now ... exactly how long this transition will take, and what this new civilization will look like, I don't know. But this is why I think it's happening:

If we list a number of the modern world's pressing concerns ... and compare them to those of 200 years ago, we'll find some big differences.
So, let's list a few modern public concerns:
Upholding universal human rights, maintaining equality between races, genders and faiths, eliminating the extremes of wealth and poverty, establishing world peace, facilitating universal education, upholding freedom of expression, holding to our environmental responsibilities ... etc etc etc.
... and notice that these issues are _all_ global in scope. Now, although these concerns existed in various forms 200 years ago, _none_ them were seriously considered in a global context.
Rather, nations were concerned only about themselves - their race, their religion, and their king. Consequently, almost all forms of worldly power were held by kings and clergymen.

So - I'm describing a colossal shift in civilization's workings (maybe there's a name for this shift? I don't know). It is because of the sheer size of this change that I think that growth pains are inevitable.
I think that a central reason why WWI was so horrendous is that nobody had seen a world war before. Everyone thought they'd be "home before Christmas", and that thousands of wars have been fought before ... what's another?
Today, we're slightly more experienced, we better understand our modern capacity for destruction, and so we have systems in place to restrain our aggressions.

Consider - nothing like the UN, as imperfect as it is, has ever before existed in history! Surely, this in itself is a sign of enormous change.

Ok, so what does this have to do with Hitler?
Well, say Hitler died in his childhood. Maybe there wouldn't have been a war in 1939 ... but had this happened, we wouldn't have learned our lesson, and no reliable system would be erected to stop a WWII from happening.

So - no, I don't think Hitler caused WWII, nor do I think Nazi Germany had much to do with it. They were simply the form that the war happened to assume.

I need to think about your scientist > Genghis Khan question.
_________________
Working on rain and cloud formation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
msw188




Joined: 02 Jul 2003
Posts: 1041

PostPosted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not a historian, so I'll just say that while I (and the author of the book) agree about your basic assessment of WW1, it seems that the vast majority of the major powers DID learn the lesson. At least, they learned to try to avoid open warfare, even while Hitler was busy annexing Czechoslovakia and more. What they could not account for is the vast influence that could be wielded by a single person who did NOT believe in the lesson.

While the causes of the war are debatable certainly, the causes of the Holocaust are less so. We are aware of nothing quite like it in history, and there is no reason to believe that anything similar would have occured without the rise to power of Adolph Hitler.

A similar consideration might be given to the Pope who announced the Crusades, who clocks in at #50 I think (I don't have the book on me now). One might say that the world was primed for such a religious war, or that these were 'growing pains' for the world's need to learn that religious wars may not be so holy. Nevertheless, there is no way anyone other than the Pope could have bonded Christian Europe into such a fighting force. In this sense, the Crusades could not have occured without the power of some Pope, and regardless of which one had done it, that man would then deserve to be called influential, would he not?

A hint on the scientists. One is quite famous, perhaps more famous and controversial than his actual single influence deserves, but still quite influential. Another is the chief man involved with what is probably the most influential scientific findings of all in terms of influencing people's lives. Somewhat lower are a few great theoretical physicists who deciphered the one resource we use probably more than any other in developed countries.
_________________
My first completed OHR game, Tales of the New World:
http://castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=161

This website link is for my funk/rock band, Euphonic Brew:
www.euphonicbrew.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nepenthe




Joined: 27 Sep 2004
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm going to guess Pasteur. Or maybe that guy who discovered genetics by breeding pea plants (drawing a total blank right now.) I have a nagging suspicion that Darwin might be in there as well, although his influence was incredibly focused (others ran with his theories later, even though he himself denounced them).
_________________
My art (and random photos)!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Castle Paradox Forum Index -> Paradox Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group