tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post2393167461257171295..comments2024-03-28T16:22:14.888-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Fame: It's who you knowUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-12862402702318123362014-03-23T19:41:08.255-07:002014-03-23T19:41:08.255-07:00"The chick appeal of the Tudors seems to be t..."The chick appeal of the Tudors seems to be the chief reason why we have to suffer an endless series of films and television series about their endless squabbles..."<br /><br /> All history is endless squabbles. Shakespeare has recorded a few.<br /><br />The "Tudors" are interesting psychological tapestry punctuated with beheadings. They've got it all. <br /><br /> btw, Ann's lips were still moving in prayer when her head was picked up to display to the crowd. <br /><br />You learn a lot reading about them. There's a reason the English vocabulary contained the largest number of original words during that era, and has been declining ever since. I don't think the squabble between, say, Lenin and Trotsky, is going to be nearly as alive and well in 500 years.dcitenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-57200507610795787692014-03-21T23:40:48.986-07:002014-03-21T23:40:48.986-07:00>Aristotle is not really Philosophy. Reading hi...>Aristotle is not really Philosophy. Reading him is like reading Confucious or Tao. He just comes up with ad hoc explanations to justify the status quo, and advises that the median way is always right.<<br /><br />You haven't read him.<br /><br />Or, charitibly, you have no interest in logic or scientific outlook.<br /><br />Platonists have never explained why opposing one's own values is admirable per se. The real v. the Forms is just sort of a priori with them.Davidhttp://david-passingparade3.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-37071641354124804732014-03-19T18:42:25.358-07:002014-03-19T18:42:25.358-07:00Re Falkenstein: relative wealth matters a he'l...Re Falkenstein: relative wealth matters a he'll of a lot when it comes to buying real estate, politicians, or your way into Harvard, Andover, etc. Choosing to be poorer in absolute terms but richer relative to the average is not a ridiculous notion.<br /><br />Movie producers are more interested in status than money because money is about old success (George Lucas, etc.) and status is more about who's presently making hits.<br /><br /><br />Cogswell's Cognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-28088437677867473532014-03-18T23:44:34.131-07:002014-03-18T23:44:34.131-07:00The results are obviously wrong, but the list is b...<br /><br />The results are obviously wrong, but the list is based on fame, not greatness or influence. It would be great if Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates were 3 of the 4 most famous people, but obviously they're not. <br /><br />And I don't know about fame, but Plato is certainly much greater than Aristotle. What is the big deal with Plato? Are you kidding? <br /><br />Let's start with influence. Christianity is Platonism. The soul over the body, the permanent imperceptible world over the impermanent perceptible world. That's all Plato; without him, it's just folk morality. And as Russell says, Western Philosophy is but a series of footnotes of Plato.<br /><br />And speaking of philosophy, Plato is a philosopher in the strictest sense (perhaps because he basically invented the discipline); it is thought-on-thought and counter-intuitive and with a heaping of mysticism. Aristotle is not really Philosophy. Reading him is like reading Confucious or Tao. He just comes up with ad hoc explanations to justify the status quo, and advises that the median way is always right. <br /><br />And reading Aristotle is a grid. <br /><br />Plato, on the other hand, even in translation, is the most eloquent writer I've ever read. Beyond eloquence, the structure and the ingenious plots beyond the actual philosophy make his dialogues supreme works of art. <br /><br />And it doesn't have anything to do with the quality of his thought per se, but the fact that his ideas of the Good obviously run completely counter to his personal inclinations (of course, this is impossible, as he teaches us) is to me extremely admirable. He, clearly, has a deep literary sensibility, and like his Socrates, I'm sure he was a lover of Homer. But his line of reasoning led him to believe that harsh Cromwellian censorship of literature was best for citizen morality, and he did not flinch from this conclusion. <br /><br />Also like Socrates, he was a bull of a man in build, and according to Aristotle, no one loved life more, and yet he concluded that the body was an evil distraction, that pure mind is the ideal state. <br /><br />If Aristotle were around today (I know, it's unfair and irrelevant), he would be like Krauthammer, if Plato were around today, he would still be Plato. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />McGillicuddynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-31455121383747018492014-03-18T05:08:51.443-07:002014-03-18T05:08:51.443-07:00It's just absurd to dispute the position of So...It's just absurd to dispute the position of Socrates & Plato on this list.<br /><br />Socrates was, even more than Galileo, the ultimate hero & martyr of freedom of thought & inquiry.<br /><br />Plato was not only the greatest writer of the Athenian golden age, but the founder of what remains the position to beat in philosophy of mathematics: Platonic realism.<br /><br />vinteuilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-28913371580107774402014-03-18T05:02:13.872-07:002014-03-18T05:02:13.872-07:00The problem with this post is that it was not simp...The problem with this post is that it was not simply the association with a great(er) man that made Plato, Aristotle and Alexander (the Great) great. Each accomplished great things in his own right. Certainly, having a tremendous teacher helped in all three cases. But Socrates, Plato and Aristotle each had dozens (or more) of students, nearly all of whom we've never heard of. And many of whom were ninnies, as Plato's dialogues and Xenophon's writings show. Socrates had a large mass of followers, only a few of whom were really talented. We also know from Diogenes Laertius that some of Plato's students were not all that bright.mantonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03922852662124126251noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-43798344826687641322014-03-18T00:38:27.831-07:002014-03-18T00:38:27.831-07:00There's also the Apology. Socrates' decisi...There's also the Apology. Socrates' decision to stay in Athens and stand trial was the original example of civil disobedience.Dave Pinsenhttp://twitter.com/dpinsennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-77137482214599775382014-03-17T23:00:15.560-07:002014-03-17T23:00:15.560-07:00Augustus may be more famous than his great uncle. ...Augustus may be more famous than his great uncle. Augustus is also mention in the bible and when Justinian in the 6th century wrote all his titles in the Justinian code he wrote ever Augustus. I feel Augustus is more important than Julius Caesar since he founded a lasting political system with the emperor for 500 years.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-35695744624809421982014-03-17T21:51:24.789-07:002014-03-17T21:51:24.789-07:00"Also I really don't get the Plato thing...."Also I really don't get the Plato thing."<br /><br />"Republic" would be my guess.<br /><br /><br />Very glib as expected but what exactly was the lasting influence of the Republican. Which again has a lot of very, very strange ideas that we reject out of hand. I mean guess you could add Platonic love to the previous posters list, but was that really that important. I mean compared to Montesquieu's idea of balance of powers. It that it is fame not influence, but still.Matt Buckalewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-6498977120913766152014-03-17T21:51:19.314-07:002014-03-17T21:51:19.314-07:00And BTW ... it really should be whom you know, not...And BTW ... it really should be whom you know, not "who you know".<br /><br /><a href="http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/who-versus-whom?page=all" rel="nofollow">Here's a useful tip about that</a>.eahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-20097849391756079162014-03-17T21:25:49.805-07:002014-03-17T21:25:49.805-07:00I think you misunderstand the mechanism by which f...I think you misunderstand the mechanism by which fame-status is zero sum. It's not, "A fights B and A wins so A gets some of B's status". It's more "A fights B and A wins and it was a really impressive fight so A and B both get status at the expense of all the little people who don't get in as many impressive fights and suddenly have to live up to the example of A and B".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71571123230793914902014-03-17T20:53:21.926-07:002014-03-17T20:53:21.926-07:00Aristotle was the more influential philosopher. Aristotle was the more influential philosopher. Dave Pinsenhttp://twitter.com/dpinsennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-46746778110425874262014-03-17T20:21:24.324-07:002014-03-17T20:21:24.324-07:00"Also I really don't get the Plato thing...."Also I really don't get the Plato thing."<br /><br />"Republic" would be my guess.<br /><br />.<br /><br />"What about the First Qin Emporer also known as the Yellow Emperor? The fellow with all those Terra Cotta warriors?"<br /><br />The list is language mediated so I think there'd be a lot more non-western figures who'd pop up otherwise.<br /><br />Even if you just added mega historical romances there'd be a bunch of extra women for example - and as the post suggests each would bring along their particular star-crossed lover.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-2988694154502151952014-03-17T18:58:13.635-07:002014-03-17T18:58:13.635-07:00Corroboration of Falkenstein: Movie producers aren...Corroboration of Falkenstein: Movie producers aren't interested in money, said the elderly Orson Welles; money, he said, is merely "the counters in the game."<br /><br />What they are truly interested in is status -i.e., ego trips, who is up and who is down. Bluntly put: comparison or envy dominates. There are easier ways to make more money than producing a movie (note that the risk involved in producing a movie is large and must be heavily mitigated at a cost). This may apply to other fields and even be a factor in all.<br /><br />Fame: historic achievers are generally the tip of a societal iceberg. They count on many connections (direct or less direct) with people working in the same field. Their success is their peers' success. This is why we see fame clusters and why in any big historical event, good or bad, there is a narrative involving several individuals who are all famous. Failure may be an orphan, but it doesn't lack company. Everyone knows who Goebbels is.<br /><br />Heck, how many people are connected in some funny way even to Kevin Bacon?Davidhttp://david-passingparade3.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-64126650010426011002014-03-17T18:56:00.398-07:002014-03-17T18:56:00.398-07:00"Plato was an incredible writer and that'..."Plato was an incredible writer and that's the source of much of his fame. You try writing philosophical prose and having it still be read after 2400 years."<br /><br />Ok sure but the idea isn't that Plato couldn't write obviously he could as could Cicero. For that matter Paul has some of the most powerful images ever created like "through a mirror dimly." And number four on this list has zero extant writings so obviously this wasn't a who is the better stylist competition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-21135618823210647112014-03-17T18:32:37.152-07:002014-03-17T18:32:37.152-07:00Steve I think you've been tripped up by a prin...Steve I think you've been tripped up by a principle you where perhaps not aware. In zero sum games as the number of participants increases cooperation becomes a more and more viable strategy. This doesn't make the game non-zero sum. A lot of modern strategic thought comes out of game theory which concentrates on two player games not because of the the cold war origins but because in general two player games are solvable and more then that are not. For example imagine guy A and guy B splitting up a big pile of money, if guy A can clearly defeat guy B then it won't be in guy B's interests to contest the ownership of any part of the pile that interests guy A. If we introduce guy C to the game things are likely to really change. It is much less likely that one player could physically dominate the other two so now any two players that can cooperate can split the swag. However this is unstable because a player left in the cold can always offer a better deal to one of the coalition of the victorious to defect for a better deal. Increasing the number of players only makes things more byzantine. <br /><br />This points to insights for many of your other interests as well. Imagine two populations A and B. In pop A when a situation like this comes up the members all immediately and peacefully resolve the game in some completely random way. Pop B however engages in political struggle when these situations occur. If The two populations do not mix and these situations run from once in a lifetime to common in frequency then Pop A will have more time and effort to devote to tech, infrastructure, institutions and culture and in the long term they will blow Pop B away. However if the populations mix then members of Pop B will have a systematic advantage within the resulting society leading to a Pop B type society. Figuring out how to create Pop A style behavior over the very long term is laudable but not easily rewarded.Nicky Haflingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06002052013979244255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-36429944141896612902014-03-17T18:28:04.102-07:002014-03-17T18:28:04.102-07:00Plato was an incredible writer and that's the ...Plato was an incredible writer and that's the source of much of his fame. You try writing philosophical prose and having it still be read after 2400 years. Steve Sailerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920109042402850214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69190860619685860192014-03-17T18:15:24.115-07:002014-03-17T18:15:24.115-07:00That was a great post by Eric Falkenstein. Also wo...That was a great post by Eric Falkenstein. Also worth reading his post about business frauds and bubbles.Dave Pinsenhttp://twitter.com/dpinsennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-83593545196146254452014-03-17T18:07:58.341-07:002014-03-17T18:07:58.341-07:00Um Aaron what you are describing is mechanics of f...Um Aaron what you are describing is mechanics of fame buddy. You are basically arguing Kennedy isn't more famous than Truman because all that Camelot stuff developed after he was dead yea that's what fame is. <br /><br />Also I really don't get the Plato thing. I mean Aristotle absolutely huge deal maybe rivals Christ/ Paul but what influence has Plato really had on us except for the influence Platonism had on Augustine and consequently Christianity and the west. I mean sure Magritte milked Plato's theory of mimeses for a few good jokes.(He had Steve's penchant for nevering letting a joke go I repeated.) And I guess his idea in ion about art being a kind of infection or charismatic epiphany has been influential. But have you read Phadreus or Meno recollection as the process of learning no one believes that crap. I really like Plato and I'm certainly glad I studied him quite a bit in college but the western mind had in large part been developed and canalized by the time he re-emerges from his suppression by the medieval church. Even in the Renaissance Plato's significance wasn't that great nor widespread. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-21514974553630936102014-03-17T18:02:20.821-07:002014-03-17T18:02:20.821-07:00I like to keep track of how many years Andy Warhol...I like to keep track of how many years Andy Warhol has been famous for saying that everybody in the future would be famous for 15 minutes: we're up to 46 years now, and Andy isn't getting any less famous.Steve Sailerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920109042402850214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-8048140724362748402014-03-17T17:45:59.676-07:002014-03-17T17:45:59.676-07:00varieties of fame
I wish the 15m kind was more co...<i>varieties of fame</i><br /><br />I wish the 15m kind was more common.eahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-37040189696281101632014-03-17T17:18:32.372-07:002014-03-17T17:18:32.372-07:00Most fanous American: George W. Bush! Lol!Most fanous American: George W. Bush! Lol!BB753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90100347904655425632014-03-17T17:16:08.450-07:002014-03-17T17:16:08.450-07:00Five Greeks (and one Macedonian) in the top 10. A...Five Greeks (and one Macedonian) in the top 10. And none more recent than ~300 BCE. keypusherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176947522040838625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-68553708405115697622014-03-17T17:11:04.354-07:002014-03-17T17:11:04.354-07:00It actually doesn't surprise me that Aristotle...It actually doesn't surprise me that Aristotle and Plato are above Jesus on the list. Aristotle would be considered the father of science and logic and Plato perhaps the greatest philosopher ever and teacher of some of the greatest minds in history. The man Jesus was different from the religious icon that was built around him by his followers. Not to mention that Plato and Aristotle have a good 700 or so years on Him if you consider Christianity only came to prominence in the Roman empire during the 4th century. You could argue that He was the most influential person ever but again the Roman Catholic Church that came after him was responsible for spreading His message and not Christ Himself.<br /><br />As an aside, lists are silly.Aaronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-29257691565208854132014-03-17T17:10:26.198-07:002014-03-17T17:10:26.198-07:00Do articial languages like Esperanto, Ido and vola...Do articial languages like Esperanto, Ido and volapuk count? There's a lot of those in the Wilipedia.BB753noreply@blogger.com