Since people have asked about the outcome of the Mike and Mike "Mount Sportsmore" thing that kicked off yesterday's post about iconic scientists, I made it a point to catch their final list today:
- Muhammed Ali
- Babe Ruth
- Michael Jordan
- Wayne Gretzky
They specifically put Jackie Robinson off in a special category of his own ("looking down from above"). Gretzky was apaprently the choice in a fan vote, beating out Secretariat, Jesse Owens, and Jim Brown. No mention of Pele at all, as far as I could tell.
Meanwhile, over in the "Mount Rushmore of Science" thread, the nomination geenrating the most controversy is Sigmund Freud. Who, I have to say, is probably a pretty good choice-- he's got almost the same kind of recognizability as Einstein, he's not any nuttier than Newton, and he did more or less create a whole field out of nothing. The real problem is, was what he was doing good science?
Other people generating significant comment include Gauss and Aristotle. There's some demand for a representative from the field of medicine (which remains as much art as science...), but no real consensus on a nominee. Best comment so far goes to Aaron M, though:
Why can't we have a mountain with Feynman and Pelé?
Have a suggestion? Go leave a comment.
- Log in to post comments
I personally would vote against Aristotle. "A or not A" is in my mind the root of many problems in Western society and thinking.
Freud is more of a cultural studies scholar than a scientist. He can be credited with loosening up the tightass morals that had reigned during the Victorian Era, but very little in the realm of science. If this was a literary/cultural studies Rushmore, then I'd be all over Freud.
On Freud: I dont think the question of what he was was doing is good science or bad science, but whether it was science at all. And the answer to that is no.
He tried using scientific language in his work, but so do ID proponents . How about we put Demski up there too.
There is nothing scientific about his work. Everything boils down to Oedipus syndome or Penis Envy.
I catch about 30mins-1hr of Mike and Mike each morning. I heard no mention of Pele yesterday or today. I don't even like soccer that much (it falls somewhere behind basketball, baseball, football[american], and hockey -- but ahead of NASCAR -- on my list of favorite sports), but I sent them an email this morning asking why they didn't bring up Pele. My main point was that outside of America, Babe Ruth is not a very important sports figure. Pele is, hands down, the most famous athlete in the world, EVER! At least Ali and Jordan have international appeal.
And Jim Brown needs some mad props. Not only was he arguably the greatest running back of all time (if not the greatest football player), his best sport was apparently lacrosse.
As for science, Freud shouldn't be on the list. He has great cultural relevance, but not scientific importance. Put him on a list of the greatest cultural icons, but give me Thomas Hunt Morgan when it comes to science. Or, if you want someone with more of a famous name, how about Gregor Mendel. He's got a bit of an iconic look.
Feynman and Pele wasn't me. Some "Aaron M" person, rather. Which brings me back to my old point about a serious overabundance of Aarons these days, but given my lack of success in getting everyone else to change their name, maybe I'll just let it ride.
Feynman and Pele wasn't me. Some "Aaron M" person, rather.
Mea culpa. I've corrected the text of the post.
This is what I get for blogging at work.
Oh, good. I had a serious identity crisis for a moment there.