Who do you think the greatest geniuses of all time are? Not necessarily the people with the highest processing power or speed, but the people whose work makes you wonder how a human being could possibly think in such a unique or creative way.
for me it's a toss up between Nietzsche, Bach/Beethoven, Siddhartha, Zhuangzhi, and Shakespeare
>doesn't include Kevin McDonald, author of the Culture of Critique series
cuck detected
>no Goethe or Dante
Way to go
You're a fuckin moron
Leibniz
Nietzsche, Bach/Beethoven, Siddhartha, Zhuangzhi, and Shakespeare are LIGHT YEARS behind
>no Kafka
>no Joyce
Nobody.
They are all just men. Talent is overrated and effort is underrated.
talent aint shit homie
...
Shakespeare, da Vinci, Leibniz, Joyce, Aristotle, Euclid, Mozart, and Freud. There are no doubt many more. I haven't read Goethe yet. And I've only read a small section of Faulkner. Emily Dickinson also deserves mention.
Joyce ok, but who are you kidding trying to put Kafka up there, man.
Aristotle
>First person to formalize logic
>Basically invented and kickstarted biology and zoology by himself
>Devised a cosmological system that would be in use for centuries
>Wrote a complete philosophical system that encompassed almost all fields of human knowledge, making deep and everlasting contributions to ethics, aesthetics and metaphysics
How can one man be so based?
Newton
Einstein
Gauss
Euller
Michelangelo
Shakespeare
Bach
Mozart
Beethoven
There is a difference between creativity and raw brainpower. If we are talking of raw intelligence most mathematicians would score higher than even the greatest artists, yet creativity is a mysterious and extremely admirable thing.
No matter how much Von Neumann tried he would never be capable of doing what Mozart and Shakespeare did, yet I guess his IQ was probably higher.
>le mozart
>le bach
>le Shakespeare
>absolutely tremendous my dear uuaaaahh
>oh no, of course not!
>Nietzsche Ah! Now we have a real jeenyus. Yes, indeed.
>Zhuangzhi
i don't know who you're quoting, but I laughed anyway
this list is not culturally diverse enough
bin ladin
beckett. can't think of anyone else really. newton, einstein, basically all the big name 20th century mathematicians and physicists. ask me again in ten years..
>no von neumann
oh shit, how could I forget shostakovich and chopin?
meme tier
just because his genius his universally heralded by other genius' does not make it a meme.
hegel
Define greatest
Define genius
despite being clever, he didn't come up with anything revolutionary. not saying his work wasn't important though, it definitely was.
besides game theory, and being the main figure in early computing and coding, among other things.
Is there some /pol/ brigade today that I wasn't informed on?
I guess I'm biased, as a physics student. I admire alterations in our perception of reality more than anything. But I guess game theory has a part in that. I'll get back to you once I've read all his papers.. all fucking 150 of them. lol
some shitposters gone into overdrive. maybe they think they're being attacked with bats or something.
>up there
You mean down there. He obviously belongs in his own category.
Why not Coelho, then?
>Aristotle
>Euclid
>Mozart
>Bach
>Dostoyevsky
>Da Vinci
>Dante
>Homer
>Freud
>Galileo
>J.K. Rowling
>Debussy
>Von Neumann
>Planck
>Marx
>Nietzsche
>Goethe
>Virgil
>Aquinas
>Obama
>Einstein
>Newton
>Leibniz
>Julius Caesar
>Joyce
Fiona Apple
Johann Sebastian Bach
John Barth
Ludwig van Beethoven
Frederic Chopin
John Coltrane
Miles Davis
Eric Dolphy
Bill Evans
William Faulkner
William Gaddis
Herbie Hancock
James Joyce
Franz Kafka
Curtis Mayfield
Herman Melville
Charles Mingus
Thelonious Monk
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Vladimir Nabakov
William Shakespeare
Igor Stravinsky
>kafka-esque
as someone who is pretty new to Veeky Forums I'm pretty sure
>J.K. Rowling
is a meme here or something, right?
Me
not even memeing but Bach is nowhere near as genius as people give him credit for
many composers who came after him completetely BTFO him
...
...
>No matter how much Von Neumann tried
you realize he owes his genius to Norbert Wiener, right? He knew it as well. He wasn't half as smart as Wiener and he had to constantly pick Wiener's brains to come up with his own theories.
Newton
> If I presse my eye on [the] left side (when I looke towards my right hand) as at a, [then] I see a circle of red as at c but [within the] red is blew for [the] capillamenta are more pressed at n & o & round about [the] finger [than] at a towards [the] midst of [the] finger. [That parte] of [the apparition] at q is more languid because [the] capillamenta at o are duller & if [the] finger move towards e two much it vanisheth at q & appeareth semicircular. but if I put my finger at e or s [the] apparition wholly vanisheth. By putting a brasse plate betwixt my eye & [the] bone nigher to [the] midst of [the] tunica retina [than] I could put my finger I [made] a very vivid impression. But of an ellipticall figure because [the] edge of [the] plate [with which] I prest my eye was long & not round like my finger
Kafka never felt particularly smart to me. He always just gave the impression of being perfectly composed and honest.
Can you say more about this? I always felt Beethoven to be superior, but I cant say why: I am a pleb when it comes down to music. However, today it seems that the fashion is to place Bach as the number 1 of all time in music (that is common in Veeky Forums debates also), so your view is quite interesting to me.
Bach is a composer who's music you learn in like, your first year of music college. He is nowhere near as "complex" as people say he is. He WAS basically the master of music *for his time period* but music got waaay more complex since then, especially in the 20th century.
A lot of his music is very repetitive, doesn't do much with texture or timbre, doesn't have very interesting counterpoint, and stuff like that. I don't know why it's so trendy to call him GOAT now. I guarantee you the people saying that don't know any theory.
>Bach is a composer who's music you learn in like, your first year of music college.
I get that this is an 'issue'. There are a ton of students who kind of learn him because he's the guy you're supposed to and end up playing overly romantic piano renditions, but he is magnificent despite this.
>Bach
>doesn't have very interesting counterpoint
Wut?
>>doesn't have very interesting counterpoint
I mean relative to the composers who came after him, of course.
>relative to the composers who came after him
Give examples.
You have really good taste in jazz.
Kant, Aristotle and Bach. I know I'm missing Middle Ages thinkers but that's because they appear too distant to even fathom just like the pre-Socratics.
Thanks mate.
I don't really see why you equate complexity with superiority. Personally, I would say that what I see as greatest about Bach is the 'elegance' of his compositions. The voice leading, in all of his compositions that I have heard or read from the score of, is what I would call the definition of perfection. It's not necessarily complex but it's distinctly satisfying, and speaks uniquely. I'd be interested to see your opinion on this facet of his music compares to other more recent composers, and how their qualities make them better.
I'd also be interested to see examples of composers with better counterpoint than Bach.
Shakespeare, Tesla, and Da Vinci are my top three humans of all time.
Shit, I always forget Socrates. That motherfucker was more out and ahead of his time than anyone to ever live. Possibly the greatest mind to ever grace the Earth.
Mike Stoklasa, Christopher Langan, Albert Fish, Thomas Aquinas
barack obama, neil degrasse tyson, whoever the chinese guy was who invented the printing press, and rupi kaur
>tfw 99% of any realistic list will be male
>tfw the few female inclusions will be mediocre honorable mentions at best
Why did I have to be born a woman
>siddhartha
Nihilist
>bach/beethoven
Overrated
>zhuangzhi
You only like him because he's a chink.
>shakespeare
You only like him because you're an *nglo.
>logic is good or smart
>le science is good or smart
>systematic bullshit is good or smart
Try again.
STEMspergs are not intelligent, they're actually incredibly stupid. IQ is not a measure of intelligence, it's a measure of how well you fit the STEMsperg mould.
ok buddy who would you pick then?
get in shape
grow your dick out
Myself.
Lol
Mozart
Bach
Beethoven
Shakespeare
Plato
Aristotle
Confucius
Cao Xueqin
Homer
Dante
The Yahwist (if he existed)
The Court Historian (ditto)
Gauss
Einstein
Newton
Leibniz
Euler
Michelangelo
Heisenberg
Guido of Arezzo
Archimedes
Kant
Kierkegaard
>Homer
>a single person
Aristotle ruined philosophy by formalising it.
>he didn't come up with anything revolutionary
He invented game theory and discovered cellular automata; invented the universal constructor.
Franz Liszt is one of them for sure.
Slavoj Zizek
Alex Jones
Frank Zappa
Thomas Pynchon
my diary senpai
...
>Einstein
>Gauss
>Joyce
>Trump
Anyone else is wrong
Shakespeare, CS Peirce, Aristotle, Plato, Hegel, ST Coleridge
These minds stand far above the rest imo
Borges, Milton are two I'd throw out there.
Feel like most you guys only have a cursory understanding of the people they're naming here, or the ideas they came up with. pointless to call bach or beethoven a genius when you dont know the changes they brought about in classical symphonies and orchestras, or even know any music theory yourself. More like parroting. Deep understanding is underrated.
I guess then knowing what I know about:
Kubrick
Borges
Turing
Shakespeare
Aristotle BTFO
my list is hereI'm omitting to take into consideration their time and place. Just a list of the best thinkers I've read for sheer accuracy and subtlety
git gud kid.
Definitely do not fit the list.
sorry for the late reply but I would say composers who are more complex than Bach would be the big serialists like Schoenberg and Xenakis, composers who do counterpoint better would be some of the minimalists like Steve Reich (his works seem deceptively simple and are actually really interestingly composed) and composers who do voice leading better would be Wagner and John Adams (Nixon In China) and maybe Philip Glass too (Einstein On The Beach).
I would argue that they made complex music in a time that Bach and others had made possible for them to more easily make complex music
Also, Xenakis is interesting, but not a great composer I would say. Stockhausen would be a much more impressive modern example
>doesn't have very interesting counterpoint
Ok, troll or retard here, nothing to see.
De Witten, Clark Maxwell, Hawking, Penrose, Da Vinci, Plato, Beethoven, Bach, Shakespeare, Gauss, Archimedes, Ramanujan, Cantor, Euler, Cannot name Newton without Leibniz,
Shakespeare, Puccini and Mozart
lel
J.K. Rowling and Obama were probably bait.
This.plato is where it's at
90% of philosophers are pure horeshat bunk retarded down syndromed shit eaters.
Ramanajan is a retarded/sci/ btw
*retarded sci meme* I meant
Please explain how being a meme disqualifies him.
Who is the court historian? Could you link me anything about him?
I hope they are people who haven't been born yet. Goethe, Da Vinci, Jesus Christ, Nicola Tesla (read the FBI archives) have claims to this throne.
The most pseud post in here. And that's saying something.
not
an
argument
and I suppose reddit spacing is?
>reliable bachelor of attendance butthurt
uma delicia
One hit wonders don’t count.
She’s the voice of a generation, user.
I should have said if he was a single person. Same with the Yahwist/J writer.