Re: Barbarians vs All Blacks 1973


huwgareth@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Greig Blanchett wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:23:13 GMT, Martyn Winters
> > <ziggy.stardust@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > >Walter Mitty wrote:
> > >> On 2005-12-10, Martyn Winters <ziggy.stardust@xxxxxxxxxxxx> dropped the ball when he ventured :
> > >>
> > >>>Doing equations are just a matter of training and mindset. It is just as
> > >>>valid to ask when a mathematician last created a great work of fiction?
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Oh twaddle. Thats like saying "anyone could be that good if they
> > >> practice hard enough. Most people can do basic equations but certainly
> > >> not more complicatedones : never mind formulating new theories
> > >> represented by said equations. Anyone can "understand" or "solve"
> > >> e=mc**2 but the genius was in the development of the equation.
> > >
> > >Similarly, anyone can write; "the cat sat on the mat", or they can
> > >understand and copy something like Conrad's "Heart of Darkness", but the
> > >genius was in writing it in the first place. QED.
> > >
> > >You are completely missing my point here, Mitty, as it seems is everyone
> > >else. My contention is simple: Mathematicians are generally held in
> > >greater esteem than Artists (the capitalisation is deliberate), and are
> > >also more readily given the accolade "genius" because they do squiggly
> > >things with equations, which are little understood by the general
> > >populace. This, I contend, is not only unfair, but inaccurate, because
> > >creating a work of fiction CAN be every bit a matter of genius as
> > >developing the framework of General Relativity. From this I draw a
> > >number of other conclusions that are incidental.
> > >
> > >What I am not saying is: Artists=Good. Scientists=Bad.
> > >Neither am I saying: Artists>Scientists (sic).
> > >
> > >Capisce?
> >
> > I think where you lost the plot was when you defended Damian Hurst.
> > Nobody is denying the genius of da Vinci, or Picasso, or Michelangelo,
> > or Monet, but conceptual artists like Hurst and Emin are artists,
> > alright, but they're bull*** artists. Their talent isn't their
> > "installations", their talent is their ability to sucker idiots like
> > the Turner committee into praising their tiresome schlock. They're
> > self promoting PR artists more than anything. As for mathematicians
> > getting all the creds, do they? How many people can name the great
> > mathematicians, let alone hold them in high regard or call them
> > geniuses? I think what you are saying says more about yourself than
> > other people, and in some ways it seems you're playing devil's
> > advocate, i.e. YOU hold mathematicians etc. in higher regard.
> >
> > --
> > greig
>
>
> There's no question that the average person (perhaps almost *any*
> person) could name more artists than mathematicians. I don't think that
> there is any question about that. In fact, I doubt that the average
> person could name even *one* (Hawking, Newton, Einstein were/are
> Physicists).

And the connection between naming and holding in awe is...

.