YanShen wrote:Yeah Einstein stood on the shoulders of other intellectual giants. That's the key point. In particular, the development of relativity tangentially involved other men like Poincare, Lorentz, and even the mathematician Hilbert. He didn't stand on the shoulders of garbage men and ditch diggers to accomplish what he did in his life.

No, he just used them to sustain him in his everyday life, not his work. But without the smooth running of his day to day life how could he of achieved so much.

I'd love to see Einstein thrashing out Special Relativity while laying rabbit snares and picking berries in his animal hide diaper.

NineBerry wrote:"The other two-thirds stayed firmly at home and lived full, rich and happy lives until they were all suddenly wiped out by a virulent disease contracted from a dirty telephone."

Thank you NineBerry and thank you Douglas.

HughMcB wrote:

Mazille wrote:Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that.

Or the little people, whichever the case may be.

And women.

I don't think YanShen has ever gone more than two posts without typing 'the left'.

Doubtdispelled wrote:

HughMcB wrote:

Mazille wrote:Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that.

Or the little people, whichever the case may be.

And women.

Women are people too? No?

Or was that just a clarification?

HughMcB wrote:

Doubtdispelled wrote:

HughMcB wrote:

Mazille wrote:Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that.

Or the little people, whichever the case may be.

And women.

Women are people too? No?

Or was that just a clarification?

I just wanted to separate the classification 'little people', which could be seen as patronising, from the classification 'women', Hugh.

There's a lot of controversy concerning the contributions that Einstein's first wife may or may not have made to his research.

Totally apart from that, where the fuck would all these so-called 'Intellectual Elites' be, and how would they have survived, without the people, mostly women, who did all the work that kept their body and soul together, fed and clothed, while they did their wondrous work?

Sorry, but this kind of stupid elitist talk just pisses me right off.

Doubtdispelled wrote:I just wanted to separate the classification 'little people', which could be seen as patronising, from the classification 'women', Hugh.

The first reference was "standing on the shoulders of giants" to which I corrected standing on shoulders "of little people" i.e. people of non-academic stature (this was all in reference to Einsteins work).

At no point were women singled out (or conversely just men), merely asexual entities.

I think you're seeing a battle of the sexes where there was none. Anyhoo, just crossed wires is all.

HughMcB wrote:I think you're seeing a battle of the sexes where there was none.

Not really, Hugh. Just reminding myself of the saying that 'behind every great man, there is often a woman, rolling her eyes'.

HughMcB wrote:

Doubtdispelled wrote:I just wanted to separate the classification 'little people', which could be seen as patronising, from the classification 'women', Hugh.

The first reference was "standing on the shoulders of giants" to which I corrected standing on shoulders "of little people" i.e. people of non-academic stature (this was all in reference to Einsteins work).

At no point were women singled out (or conversely just men), merely asexual entities.

I think you're seeing a battle of the sexes where there was none. Anyhoo, just crossed wires is all.

When in a hole....

Crocodile Gandhi wrote:I don't think YanShen has ever gone more than two posts without typing 'the left'.

This. I remember Sarah Palin and her intellectual peers shrieking about the elitism supposedly embraced by the Obama campaign; I don't remember "the left" specifically decrying elitism, at least not in this country.

Doubtdispelled wrote:

HughMcB wrote:I think you're seeing a battle of the sexes where there was none.

Not really, Hugh. Just reminding myself of the saying that 'behind every great man, there is often a woman, rolling her eyes'.

Well you can remind yourself all you like as you're perfectly entitled to, however I'd prefer if I wasn't attributed to any kind of sexism when my whole point was that scientists only afford the ability to live out their wonderful contribution to society through their work as other, less prestigious people in society allow for the smooth running of their day to day lives.

Especially given that in no way did I ever a) mention any gender, b) imply any gender or c) even have any thought of gender enter my mind up until the point you posted your comments.

I understand this subject pisses you off, perhaps you should read through my posts and see where I stand on it too, I think you'd be amazed how closely my view reflect your own.

alienpresence wrote:When in a hole....

Keep stirring that pot buddy, eventually something will happen.

Without the rest of the world there would be no cases to research to actually learn anything.
Plus any elite can only provide through academic means and new technologies. Whereas, oil rig workers don't have to be super smart but they provide the world with the majority of the fuel it needs and teachers can nurture the brains of our little'uns for the future without an IQ over 130.

Nearly everyone contributes to humanity in small ways. Most people keep it alive. Others, the 'elite', move it forward in terms of progress. I am in awe of what the scientific community have achieved and are working on but I wouldn't trust most of them to fix my car.

I think we should clarify something here. The far left and the far right both denounce elitism. In particular, religious conservatives will often belittle the ivory tower academic elites who tell them that their religious beliefs are complete bullshit, i.e. Dawkins. But the far right denounces elitism only insofar as it directly conflicts with some particular idea unrelated to the notion of elitism itself. You'll notice for instance that the far right has no problem favoring the business elite in defense of free market principles. In fact, many of them heartily endorse the notion that the most talented and successful people should be able to disproportionately reap the fruits of their labor. The far left denounces elitism because it fundamentally dislikes inequality in outcome. It also fundamentally disdains the notion that certain individuals are far more capable than others and therefore contribute disproportionately to human civilization. Thus, the reason for the far left's denigrating of elitism is directly rooted in its antagonism towards inequality itself, either in outcome or in aptitude.

Regarding Einstein's wife...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mileva_Mar ... in_physics

The question whether (and if so, to what extent) Marić contributed to Einstein's early work, and to the Annus Mirabilis Papers in particular, has been the subject of some debate. However, the overwhelming consensus among professional historians of physics is that she did not.[28] A few academics, outside the consensus among historians, have argued that she may have played some role.[29]

Perhaps one day robots can replace oil-rig workers in the same way that self service checkouts at some grocery stores have already begun to replace cashiers to a certain extent. In either case, the technology that could eventually make those robots possible, or that made the self-service checkouts possible, will have been/was the result of the fruits of the intellectual elite. You might not trust the elites to fix your car, but its only because of the elites that you have a car to drive in the first place.

In fact, almost everything that we take for granted and enjoy in modern day life was the laborious result of just a few bright and talented individuals. Rather than appreciate this fact, we often attempt to denigrate the elite by either attacking the notion that they were somehow particularly gifted intellectually, or by suggesting that the fruits of their labor depended tremendously upon a large percentage of society at large.

During the so-called communist era there was this "meme" .. I am a miner! Who is more? .. and that is the whole problem with the so-called elitism, because who wants to be less, yes?

Years later I worked in a supermarket, stocking up fruits and vegetables, and during an incident with a customer it came up .. I am a lawyer, and who are you? .. and then he got his ass handed to him.

More and/or less measured by whom and how? Evoluperskeptometer? Gimme a fucking break.

Good to see that the OP, despite being obviously well below that top 10%, thinks so much of the world's intellectuals. Well done.

Chairman Bill, you've been reported for a personal insult. Try to keep the discussion civil and impersonal.

YanShen wrote:Regarding Einstein's wife...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mileva_Mar ... in_physics

The question whether (and if so, to what extent) Marić contributed to Einstein's early work, and to the Annus Mirabilis Papers in particular, has been the subject of some debate. However, the overwhelming consensus among professional historians of physics is that she did not.[28] A few academics, outside the consensus among historians, have argued that she may have played some role.[29]

Why did you feel it important to ad above? She had three children by him and took care of them, maybe she also, like so many others, took care of the household. As others have pointed out, everybody needs everybody, if not for anything else then to have some to blame your problems on or just mindlessly complain about.

Perhaps one day robots can replace oil-rig workers in the same way that self service checkouts at some grocery stores have already begun to replace cashiers to a certain extent. In either case, the technology that could eventually make those robots possible, or that made the self-service checkouts possible, will have been/was the result of the fruits of the intellectual elite. You might not trust the elites to fix your car, but its only because of the elites that you have a car to drive in the first place.

No, it's also because there have been people cooking, washing, farming and provide other services for the "elite" while they design etc.
And it's only because there are people who fix cars that the elite can continue to drive their cars.

In fact, almost everything that we take for granted and enjoy in modern day life was the laborious result of nearly everybody who lived before us ( not counting the poor sods who died of flue at age 3 etc.) just a few bright and talented individuals.

Fixed that for ya.

Rather than appreciate this fact, we often attempt to denigrate the elite by either attacking the notion that they were somehow particularly gifted intellectually, or by suggesting that the fruits of their labor depended tremendously upon a large percentage of society at large.

I haven't noticed, are you sure your not just speaking for yourself?

Boy, I can tell that some people on this forum would rather bite off their own arms than concede that certain individuals contribute disproportionately to human civilization.

Pro-tip: If you'll prove it, they will have to concede.