posted on July 17, 2000 06:35:30 PM new
It occurs to me, given marwin's postulation, that most of history's great villiany was likely perpetrated by age impaired persons. Infamy also favors the youthful.
Utilizing such logic, I could make a good case for some sort of mandatory suspended animation at birth.
I'll give some more thought to a good age for defrosting.
posted on July 17, 2000 06:49:43 PM new
stockticker: Oh yes, he is one of the great figures in the History of Science and I have much respect and admiration for him.
You will note that he was already teaching that bodies of different weights accelerate at the same rate before 1592. Before he was 28.
Nevertheless I fully agree that he continued throughout his life to search, question, and to produce the best answers he could.
He is definitely in the 1% group.
I think we should have a huge monument in his honor somewhere in the country. The size of the statue of Liberty.
posted on July 17, 2000 11:57:46 PM new
May I point out that prior to 1900 the average age people died was under 40. You had better get something done in a hurry. And outside of developed nations it was even younger.
Miscreant -and proud of it!
[ edited by newguy on Jul 18, 2000 12:00 AM ]
posted on July 18, 2000 01:42:38 AM new
Obviously a post meant to get a rise out of the over 40 crowd (business people one and all, making miracles happen and producing great things where it counts - at home; and philosophy Wow!), a mean spirited post, and to what end? Proof that you are useless past a certain age? Jeez, most(99%?)people are next to useless at ANY age, young or old. As an example, check out the Ebay Outlook posts. The General Public can't seem to read, think, act, or speak in an intelligent and/or civilized fashion - and this is just in response to a simple auction format.
If developing a cure, or painting a masterpiece, or out violining Vivaldi (who, incidentally, produced and died young) were a prerequisite to be allowed to comfortably exist, it stands to reason those one percenters wouldn't be around either because they would either be starved or enslaved prior to the arrival of those Super Intelligent Teen Years, or their parents wouldn't have been able to have them in the first place, due to all the restrictions and taxes, as suggested, for non-performers.
My idea for why the great ideas (and I do not quibble with your statistics, I merely argue the point as if they were real and mattered)seem to peter out after 40? They don't stop having them, people just reach a point where they realize there is more to life than setting the world on fire (in Alexander the Great's case this would, of course, be literal) and they disappear into joyful anonymity to spend the booty from their one great idea. By the by, anybody get e-mail from Pierre lately saying where he's taking our money to visit these days?
posted on July 18, 2000 08:47:52 AM new
We could always turn what marwin said on its head and say that the fact that before the 20th century so many people died before reaching age 40 indicates that before 1900, most people were just too stupid (or annoying) to live beyond what we now consider "middle age".
I wouldn't be 20 again for anything. I now know how ridiculous I was at that age and have NO interest in reliving it.
[ edited by HartCottageQuilts on Jul 18, 2000 08:48 AM ]
posted on July 18, 2000 11:03:11 AM new
Neil Young still writes great music. Bob Dylan released one of his best records ever (Time Out of Mind) a couple of years ago. Modern composers like Phillip Glass keep on truckin'. Picasso and Dali were as good as ever in their later years. Mark Twain and Roald Dahl wrote some of their best stuff in their later years. Mario Puzo's distinguished writing career virtually began when he was in his late 40s. Thomas Edison's career hardly ended at 50. The great innovators don't usually begin innovating in their later years, because they are talented enough to start in their youth. However, unless they purposefully retire or die, they rarely stop innovating.
Also, as was pointed out 99% of young people aren't any more creative or talented than the 99% of over-50s.
James.
posted on July 18, 2000 11:10:22 AM new
jamesoblivion: Sorry, Picasso, Dali and Dylan produced all their good stuff when they were young. Meaning under 40.
Don't know about the others, you may well be right.
posted on July 18, 2000 12:57:02 PM new
By marwin's standards only one or two of our presidents ever accomplished anything. I guess the rest were just fluff, and I should give their contributions to society the same weight that I give the original spew of this thread. Not likely to happen...
posted on July 18, 2000 01:29:41 PM new
marwin, if you want a REAL education on the accomplishments of someone over 40, read here:
http://www.english.udel.edu/lemay/franklin/
It's a documentary history of Benjamin Franklin, but according to you and your poo-poo-ing of anyone over 40, Benjamin Franklin was a useless nobody.
Humph!
posted on July 18, 2000 02:56:12 PM new
kiheicat: Thank you. I have already read BF's bio and also among others the part of his writings where he describes how to best attack Indian encampments, with large dogs, which he recommends one lets go hungry for several days, to increase their ferocity.
Regarding Heads of State, whether American or foreign, the point you bring up is most interesting because we tend to think of them as having an enormous influence on society.
Yet, when you analyse how we got from where we were to where we are, you quickly realize that politicians and Heads of State had for the most part little to do with it, other than generally delaying progress.
Even in instances which result in a considerable local improvement, such as the Chinese and Russian revolutions, you will find that a progress-deficit had built up, as compared to other Nations, and that this progress-deficit was leveraged for a political change.
To keep this post brief, here is just one example.
The invention of Penicilin, has probably had more impact on society, than several Presidencies put together.
The age of Presidents doesn't matter because by and large they don't matter. Penicilin does.
posted on July 18, 2000 03:10:13 PM new
Well, I won't comment on American presidents, but I consider Sir Winston Churchill to be one of the great statesmen of the 20th century.
posted on July 18, 2000 03:28:16 PM new
You need to find the bacteria before you can find the antimicrobial to kill it. Therefore, thank Louis Pasteur, who in his 50s, and 60s, discovered staph, strep, and pneumococcus. He also came up with the rabies vaccine, and a process to make milk safer, called pasteurization.
Pastorleon, I'm still curious about your Latin phrase...
posted on July 18, 2000 03:28:27 PM newpastorleon, my eyes popped out of MY head when I read that too.
This has got to be a troll thread. Nobody is really THAT stupid...are they?
OTOH, most of the people I associate with are over 35, so maybe I'm not getting exposed to this sort of youthful sagacity.
It occurred to me that had my delightful 20-something parents been left to care for me I probably wouldn't have lived past the age of 5. Dad decided to change HIS world with drugs, and Mom totally fell apart trying to deal with him. I was left in the care of my grandparents, great-grandparents, assorted great-aunts and uncles, and their enormous circle of octogenarian (and nonagenarian) friends. What a pity, eh?
posted on July 18, 2000 04:42:53 PM new
Marwin delights in stirring up the proverbial hornet's nest. He starts feeling a tad peckish if he can't rile people in some manner.
posted on July 18, 2000 04:46:35 PM new
pastorleon: Yes, "considerable local improvement".
Check out what life was like in China prior to 1948, the constant famines, no schools, no medical anything, misery everywhere. To put it quickly and simply, it was a feudal society. Maybe one could compare pre-WWII China to England or Germany in the 1600's as far as standards of living are concerned.
Now, lets take another picture of the situation, say about 25 years later...in the mid 1970's.
Children are at school everywhere. There are colleges and universities and students graduate by the hundreds of thousands every year. No hunger, no famine, anywhere. Medical care. Everybody is dressed cleanly as opposed to wearing the rags of misery. Everyone has a roof.
That is called a "considerable local improvement".
Now, Russia, another feudal system. A peasantry which is still sold with the land for all practical purposes. Hunger and famine are daily companions. No schools, of course. Misery of the most abject kind everywhere. In some regions ancient practices have remained in effect, such as the bride having to spend the first night with the Landlord. Gruesome corporal punishment is the norm all over the land.
A few decades go by and what happens in 1957? SPUTNIK!
In the course of 40 years a Nation has moved from an ancient Feudal system, to being the first in the History of Humanity to place something in orbit around the earth.
That is called a "considerable local improvement" too.
posted on July 18, 2000 05:24:02 PM new
To annoy Marwin right back, start a discussion about disgusting illnesses or cats. Or disgusting cat illnesses. Make sure you use lots of gory descriptions...:P
-and proud of it! 
