Help on report

[Icanoutsmokeany1]

Most great minds or intellectuals aren't considered so until after their death. Actually, most great minds are unknown or shunned while they are alive and until later on, they aren't considered great minds. Einstein is just one example. Mr. Luther King, another. Great minds that are respected today, but were shunned in their time.

 

[DrPizza]

Here's a mathematics example:
Andrew Wiles. But, of course, about all you'll find out about him relates to Fermat's last theorem. You'd have to be fairly advanced in mathematics to understand what he has contributed to number theory and how far mathematics has advanced because of him (and he's only one of dozens)

This brings up another point: The majority of stuff that the average person learns that could be considered scientific or mathematical was discovered hundreds of years ago. Point: uhh, calculus? A few hundred years ago. Mechanics (much of physics) - a few hundred years old.
Even if you look at modern physics; very few people (I'd bet <1%) get beyond the physics knowledge available in Einstein's era. Thus, 99% of people don't have a clue about and probably wouldn't understand many of today's discoveries and theories in physics. So, for the intellectuals out there, how are they going to be regarded in that manner when the most 99.9% of people know about them is "oh, that's the guy in the wheelchair who uses a computer that talks funny. I heard he's smart."

Walk down the street in an average city and ask 100 people to name 5 of Steven Hawkings contributions to physics... that's the response you're going to get from the vast majority of them. The same applies to virtually every branch of science and mathematics. It can probably be argued that it applies to many of the humanities as well.

 

[Fenixgoon]

the fact that anything revolutionary will be substantially more in depth than anything one's predecessor encoutered. sure people might have created atomic models and proved that protons, neutrons, and electrons exist, but how would they react if you told them you found the particle that gives everything mass? (supposedly its the not-yet-discovered higgs particle)

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: ggnl

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Here is the correct answer:
There are more great intellectuals in our time than ever before.
But, because journalism majors are typically stupid people who understand very little science, they avoid science almost as much as the plague. Actually, more than the plague. Some of them would be the first in line to enter a city of plague victims, in the interest of getting a big story for CNN or FOX or some other media outlet, in an attempt to boost their careers. The journalists would rather spend their time concentrating on stories about how some "famous" baseball player was caught beating his wife or taking drugs. These are easy stories to write. They take a minimum of understanding and there are virtually no mathematics to comprehend (the vast majority of journalists are quite innumerate - the equivalent of illiterate but in mathematics) Thus, 99% of all media reports stories that are incredibly lacking in any depth of intellectual content. Some intellectual will make a giant leap in quantum computing, and the reporter assigned to the story is going to say "quantawhoseajiggawhat?" and turn their attentions to Dwight Gooden's 15th arrest on drug charges. Dwight makes the 1st or 2nd page, and the quantum computing story turns to the blurb, "some scientist made some sort of fast computer made out of stuff smaller than atoms" buried on the 20th page of the paper.

edit: I cannot count the times I've read stories about technical revelations that showed the author of the story was an idiot who couldn't comprehend the information he was given.

So it's the media's fault?

To expound on your analysis, I would say that it is not just the media, but the public at large that is disinterested in scientific progress.

You're also ignoring the fact that not all "great minds" are scientists. You will also find philosophers, politicians, writers, and artists among their ranks.

Sorry, I covered those other guys in my second post... I was still in the middle of typing when you posted that. But, I tried to clarify that it's also the public's level of relative stupidity.

I don't know where I heard this, but it's fairly true:
The knowledge we're gaining as a society is increasing at an exponential rate.
Individually, we still learn at the same old slow linear rate.
Thus, overall, we're getting stupider by the second.

I like that word: "stupider"

 

[DrPizza]

Oh, and speaking of being recognized in your own time, IIRC, the "discoverer" of the atom was scoffed at in his own time. Or perhaps it was whoever conjectured its existence in modern times (the greek's had already suggested the atom centuries ago) I wish I could remember the name; I was recently reading an article that mentioned him and that he almost turned down the Nobel.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Walk down the street in an average city and ask 100 people to name 5 of Steven Hawkings contributions to physics... that's the response you're going to get from the vast majority of them. The same applies to virtually every branch of science and mathematics. It can probably be argued that it applies to many of the humanities as well.

I suppose being a guest on the Simpsons doesn't count?

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: Icanoutsmokeany1
Most great minds or intellectuals aren't considered so until after their death. Actually, most great minds are unknown or shunned while they are alive and until later on, they aren't considered great minds. Einstein is just one example. Mr. Luther King, another. Great minds that are respected today, but were shunned in their time.

How the heck do you get Einstein not being considered a great mind whilst he was alive??? He was FAMOUS during his lifetime - he complained constantly about being hounded by the media. In fact the famous photo of him sticking out his tongue was done precisely to ruin (he thought) a shot by paparrazi - yes, paparrazi chased good old Albert.

He was the popular face of science during his own lifetime, and indeed was so sought after he had numerous marriages and even more numerous affairs. It was rumoured that he dated a few movie starlettes. They certainly weren't after him for his looks, but for his fame. Fame he got by being considered the most brilliant man then alive. (I don't concur, but hey we digress).

The closest we have had to that recently would probably be Stephen Hawking - who certainly has been world-wide famous.

And as for lack of big intellectual inventions that have changed mankind recently - you 're typing into one (PC), and the results are being broadcast on another (internet/WWW)...

Future Shock

 

[DaShen]

Technology. Nothing has to be worked for anymore. Calculators and computers can become a crutch. TV 'sallows' the brain.

Then society steps in and helps the lazy and foolish and you end up with people who don't try hard. Where it is okay, as long as you are happy. (not that I am complaining) I am a lazy @$$.

***EDIT***
'Oh Brave New World' indeed.

Need my soma fix now :beer:

 

[Whisper]

I'm going to agree with some of the other posts on here, and say that I doubt there are fewer intellectuals around nowadays. It's just that they get less "publicity" than they used to, as they've been replaced in the spotlight by actors/actresses, sports figures, musicians, and other artists.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: DrPizza

Walk down the street in an average city and ask 100 people to name 5 of Steven Hawkings contributions to physics... that's the response you're going to get from the vast majority of them. The same applies to virtually every branch of science and mathematics. It can probably be argued that it applies to many of the humanities as well.

yeah, but how much is the next journalist REALLY gonna change the world?

its all about sciences, baby!!!