Are there Unique Talents in History?

[Stravo]

Spurred on by one of the stupid right wing emails that my brother's girlfriend (live in, good to see those right wing ideals are pick and choose) sends me just because she knows it annoys me.

It asked the question, if you knew a woman who was pregnant and already had 8 kids, two were deaf, one was paralyzed and she had syphillis would you recommend she have an abortion?

Oh oh, I can smell the bullshit already.

If you said yes, congratulations you just killed Beethoven.

UGH.

Anyway, do you think there are certain talents that are unique in the world, that if Beethoven's mom aborted would we have someone else like him? Are great talents simply those that happened to be recognized at the time and someone similar would have stepped in to take their place? Hell, have we lost great talents over the ages that we will never know?

[Petrosjko]

I'd say the fact that Beethoven lies among many noted classical musicians indicates that he's not completely unique.

(Though the various music historians around here can undoubtedly wax eloquent on precisely what was special about him, better than I can.)

Some people are special, gifted in certain things. Are they irreplaceable? No more than any other human. History is a collective effort, after all.

I have no doubt that a great many special, precious talents have died without anybody being aware of their existance. Infant and childhood mortality rates were abysmally high throughout history.

[Trytostaydead]

I agree that history is collective effort. But it also requires the right person at the right time at time. A science book is filled with such instances. While maybe sooner or later someone else would have (we don't know for sure), history moves by the hard work of men, but leaps by serendipity.

[Lagmonster]

I think that there are people who succeed at single-handedly dragging humanity forwards or backwards, but I don't imagine that all too many of them are irreplaceable. Scientists chiefly among these, of course, since their discoveries would be made by any of their peers.

Artists are harder to place, but one has to argue how important any ONE piece of art is to humanity. Sure, we appreciate Beethoven's work now that it exists, but what would be different had he never lived? Surely *something* would have filled the gap he left at his particular level or niche.

Famous political and military figures are the most difficult in this sort of argument, since by the nature of their actions a lot can and does change, and not all such individuals were just 'a product of their time', meaning that similar actions would have been pursued by someone else in their absence.

[Petrosjko]

I agree that history is collective effort. But it also requires the right person at the right time at time. A science book is filled with such instances. While maybe sooner or later someone else would have (we don't know for sure), history moves by the hard work of men, but leaps by serendipity.

Thing is, history has to be viewed like evolution- is evolution inherently wrong or write in its results? Nah. It just is, devoid of right or wrong. We have no idea how much we missed out on because world-changing geniuses cacked it at age two from tuberculosis.

In both subjects, we can lament how things could have developed better than they did, but there's nothing inherently right or wrong about the series of events that got us from there to here.

[Dahak]

I think special artists and scientists are easier to "do with out" than persons of historic importance.
Surely, the Mona Lisa is a masterpiece, but without it there's other art around.
As for scientists, I think even without Einstein we'd still stumbled across "his" theories. Or others. It just needs someone with interest to make a breakthrough.
But persons who made decisions of historic importance or proportion? Europe without Napoleon? Would the same have happened without Hitler? No Alexander the Great? Bismarck?....
I think this is one part where the person making the decision is of vital importance to the future and the development of humanity.

[CaptainChewbacca]

For unique talents, I can think of...

Einstein
Newton
Tesla
Da Vinci
Archimedes

That's just off the top of my head. Both Newton and Einstein in the space of a year each revolutionized all branches of science. Tesla changed the world, though few know it. Da Vinci and Archimedes, well, you know what they did.

Singular talents, all

[SirNitram]

Is there genius? Yes, there is. The men who come forth and see connections and order where those before didn't, and distill their insights into understandable words, are clearly geniuses.

Defining it is harder. It is, perhaps, a difficult combination of mere intelligence, perspective, and just having a few things loose.

[Guy N. Cognito]

I think there has to be a natural gift but how many did we loose to witch hunts, illness or lack of the right circumstances. Sooner or later some one would have written something quite nice too. I think the bigger question that question forgets is how many malformed and critically ill babies do you bring into the world for the off chance of getting another Ludwig van Beethoven or Stephen Hawking?

[SirNitram]

I think there has to be a natural gift but how many did we loose to witch hunts, illness or lack of the right circumstances. Sooner or later some one would have written something quite nice too. I think the bigger question that question forgets is how many malformed and critically ill babies do you bring into the world for the off chance of getting another Ludwig van Beethoven or Stephen Hawking?

How many potential geniuses are flushed in hastily-grabbed tissues? These questions are pretty silly.

[Petrosjko]

I think there has to be a natural gift but how many did we loose to witch hunts, illness or lack of the right circumstances. Sooner or later some one would have written something quite nice too. I think the bigger question that question forgets is how many malformed and critically ill babies do you bring into the world for the off chance of getting another Ludwig van Beethoven or Stephen Hawking?

How many potential geniuses are flushed in hastily-grabbed tissues? These questions are pretty silly.

*sigh*

Every time young Einstein jerked off...

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

It seems that a lot of events in world history, pivotal and mundane alike, were one-in-a-million chances. The person that had me thinking about that was Shakespeare. IIRC, most of his siblings died in childhood. It made me wonder how much easier English classes would be had a sibling survived, and he died.

[Durandal]

I think special artists and scientists are easier to "do with out" than persons of historic importance.
Surely, the Mona Lisa is a masterpiece, but without it there's other art around.
As for scientists, I think even without Einstein we'd still stumbled across "his" theories. Or others. It just needs someone with interest to make a breakthrough.

Another physicist (his name escapes me) was on the verge of relativity as well, but Einstein happened to get there before him. Sucks to be that guy, sitting there banging his head against the desk. "I knew I should've stayed up later on Thursday!"

[wolveraptor]

I think special artists and scientists are easier to "do with out" than persons of historic importance.
Surely, the Mona Lisa is a masterpiece, but without it there's other art around.
As for scientists, I think even without Einstein we'd still stumbled across "his" theories. Or others. It just needs someone with interest to make a breakthrough.

Another physicist (his name escapes me) was on the verge of relativity as well, but Einstein happened to get there before him. Sucks to be that guy, sitting there banging his head against the desk. "I knew I should've stayed up later on Thursday!"

Ever since Lamarck introduced the concept of evolution to Victorian minds, many biologists were thinking about the subject. Darwin published it first though, at the urging of a friend, who knew that other scientists would if he wouldn't.

Of course, all this is invalidated since some Greek philosophers proposed their own theory of evolution

[HemlockGrey]

Slighty OT, but, Stravo, have you considered the standard sardonic rebuttal to that arguement, which is "Yeah, but the odds are equally likely you've killed off Hitler"?

[Petrosjko]

Slighty OT, but, Stravo, have you considered the standard sardonic rebuttal to that arguement, which is "Yeah, but the odds are equally likely you've killed off Hitler"?

Excellent point.

[HemlockGrey]

When the official school Chastity Club started hanging posters with that nonsense around my school in the states that was what was written on the posters I hung up alonside them. Naturally, they were quickly taken down. I think upon my return I will be starting the school's first official Atheism & Sexual Promiscuity Club...

[Drooling Iguana]

It seems that a lot of events in world history, pivotal and mundane alike, were one-in-a-million chances. The person that had me thinking about that was Shakespeare. IIRC, most of his siblings died in childhood. It made me wonder how much easier English classes would be had a sibling survived, and he died.

You'd just have to sit through endless classes of Marlowe, instead.

[Stofsk]

It seems that a lot of events in world history, pivotal and mundane alike, were one-in-a-million chances. The person that had me thinking about that was Shakespeare. IIRC, most of his siblings died in childhood. It made me wonder how much easier English classes would be had a sibling survived, and he died.

You'd just have to sit through endless classes of Marlowe, instead.

Yes, but Doctor Faustus rocks. And without Shakespeare I suspect we'd read more Greek classics, like Sophocles, Euripides and Aescylhus.

On the other hand we might read more modern/postmodern shit.