First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Incredulous Inventors should they be heavily recognized?
1433 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 6/4/08
If you're asking whether the the results other people create out of one man's findings should be accredited to him, I don't believe they should. In a general sense, of course, they deserve to be noted in some way for making it all possible, but let us not forget that they themselves utilized knowledge and material forged by those who preceded them. We may as well credit everyone if we're going to start looking back and saying, "Oh, we wouldn't have this new invention if it weren't for that guy back in the 1900s, so we ought to thank him."
Posted 6/4/08

chaire wrote:


padjoy wrote:


chaire wrote:

Leonardo da Vince
He had drew/wrote about flying machines (which actually flies), weapons of war (tank, siege weapons), and many other innovations that were hundreds of years ahead of his time


He drew it alright. But did he invented it?


That would be based on what you mean by "invent." There is no evidence of him making any of his designs of his inventions, but the fact that there are designs and that they actually work when they were recreated makes me say that he did invent.


Invention - a creation (a new device or process) resulting from study and experimentation.
Did Leonardo da Vince invented what he drew? Its a simple answer really...NO.
2634 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/4/08

Bleachloverf wrote:


Incontrovertible wrote:


Bleachloverf wrote:


NiNaBoN wrote:


Bleachloverf wrote:


NiNaBoN wrote:

Ya but Albert Einstein IS heavily recognized...


for what please be consively and explanatory.He's mainly recognized more so for his percieved intellect not for fortitude in innovation.


The Topic was '' Incredulous Inventors should they be heavily recognized'' You are telling me to be explanatory, and that he's mainly recognized for his perceived intellect. It is still being recognized .


As an Inventor <_<.Plz read the topic before using sublicated remarks.I asked for why inventors should be heavily recognized and i gave him as an example.<_< I never said that he wasnt heavily recognized.Your not elaborating as to why they should be recognized hense the word should plz reiterate your comment.


Shouldn't you give an example of an inventor that ISN'T heavily recognized instead of giving one that is?


I just gave an example of an Inventor that gives an necessitation as to why he should be recognized thats the whole point of this discussion.Not that he is or isnt already.Collective reasoning <_<.


I understand that, but it is redundant and unnecessary because he IS already recognized. Einstein is probably the most famous scientist. It was a poor example because almost everyone above the age of twelve knows who he is.
25644 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 6/4/08 , edited 6/4/08

Incontrovertible wrote:


Bleachloverf wrote:


Incontrovertible wrote:


Bleachloverf wrote:


NiNaBoN wrote:


Bleachloverf wrote:


NiNaBoN wrote:

Ya but Albert Einstein IS heavily recognized...


for what please be consively and explanatory.He's mainly recognized more so for his percieved intellect not for fortitude in innovation.


The Topic was '' Incredulous Inventors should they be heavily recognized'' You are telling me to be explanatory, and that he's mainly recognized for his perceived intellect. It is still being recognized .


As an Inventor <_<.Plz read the topic before using sublicated remarks.I asked for why inventors should be heavily recognized and i gave him as an example.<_< I never said that he wasnt heavily recognized.Your not elaborating as to why they should be recognized hense the word should plz reiterate your comment.


Shouldn't you give an example of an inventor that ISN'T heavily recognized instead of giving one that is?


I just gave an example of an Inventor that gives an necessitation as to why he should be recognized thats the whole point of this discussion.Not that he is or isnt already.Collective reasoning <_<.


I understand that, but it is redundant and unnecessary because he IS already recognized. Einstein is probably the most famous scientist. It was a poor example because almost everyone above the age of twelve knows who he is.

How is it unnecessary? It's just an example of one inventor their's no need to be obstinate about it anyways?.Otherwise i can simplfy your arguement as pointless rhetoric.Anyways Im not asking if he's already recognized i said should he be and plz elaborate as to why he should or shouldnt.You say he is but he's recognized for his intelligence not for being an Inventor <_<.You should see all the analogetic terms used to examplify einstein in movies or shows.Just based on a remedial answer thats he's he the smartest human in the world which i dont defer from.
223 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30
Offline
Posted 6/4/08

padjoy wrote:


chaire wrote:


padjoy wrote:


chaire wrote:

Leonardo da Vince
He had drew/wrote about flying machines (which actually flies), weapons of war (tank, siege weapons), and many other innovations that were hundreds of years ahead of his time


He drew it alright. But did he invented it?


That would be based on what you mean by "invent." There is no evidence of him making any of his designs of his inventions, but the fact that there are designs and that they actually work when they were recreated makes me say that he did invent.


Invention - a creation (a new device or process) resulting from study and experimentation.
Did Leonardo da Vince invented what he drew? Its a simple answer really...NO.


Does the new device have to be a physical model?
You can take the device and break it down to blueprints and designs that would inform people on how it is made.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.