Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think any invention would have happened eventually without the actions of the credited inventor. The question really comes down to how long it would have taken and what the impact would have been on civilization had the invention not happened at the time that it did.
Electric lighting - What would the impact have been had Edison not invented (actually perfected, as electric lighting had been around since 1800 or so) the incandescent light bulb when he did? Had it taken another 20-30 years, the oil industry may have managed to keep it from hitting the market. As it was, they nearly succeeded with Edison's product, and another quarter of a century may have afforded big oil the opportunity to block the product.
The horse-drawn chariot - This was, perhaps, one of the most important military inventions of history. It's the predecessor to nearly every mobile military unit that is currently in existence, and it was at the core of nearly every major empire's ascension. How far back would civilization have been pushed had the chariot not come into existence for another 500 years?
On a related note, the domestication of horses is thought to have happened circa 4000-3500 B.C. What if that domestication hadn't taken place for another thousand years?
Many inventions were key to historical incidents, so the question really comes down to how changed would history be if they hadn't happened when they did?
ETA: On the flip side, how different would history have been had some inventions happened earlier or in different places? For example, had gunpowder been invented in the Middle East rather than the Far East, the entire region could be vastly different today. Had the Clovis Culture domesticated the horse rather than hunting it to extinction (common theory on what happened to the North American horse circa 12,000 B.C.), how different would the Americas have been by the time the Europeans arrived?
I think paper is an obvious choice. There was not really a demand for something like it at the time it was invented because there were already a lot of readily available if expensive substances to write on.
Certain inventions that only served as relatively short-term transitions to something better might fit here. Maybe 8-track tape players, for example?
But I wonder about music. Specific songs obviously would not get made, but I wonder if there would always be someone with a very similar song waiting in the wings? Given tens or hundreds of thousands of years of music history, I'm guessing something similar to, say, Deep Purple's "Smoke on the Water" would eventually get made even if Deep Purple never made it. But would it be a hit when it came out? Maybe not if mass-market musical tastes had changed by that time.
I'd say "no" --I don't think there has been any discovery in history that would not have been made by someone else a few years later. Even if one genius is 50 years ahead of his contemporaries, that is still insignificant in the overall scheme of things.
Of course, the Aztecs never discovered the wheel--but that is probably just the stagnating effect of religion on the intellectual development of a society. Like the Dark Ages, times of pervasive religion are the antithesis of intellectual achievement.
The sheer numbers of human beings has long since risen to the level of statistics, which swamps out the efforts of any individual. In a population of 1,000 people, a single person's achievements could be momentous; there would be countless opportunities for improvement that had not yet been optimized. But when the population is heading towards 7 billion (even ignoring the huge numbers of people that lived before), any idea has already been thought of, and explored, at least a few hundred times.
With intelligence spread out in the population in a normal, bell-shaped curve, every population will have a few super-genius level people that are capable of increasing current knowledge, or discrediting existing misconceptions. But that doesn't mean everyone capable of pushing the boundaries of knowledge is going to: unless a business (or government) is offering jobs studying or researching the field, it won't happen. As always, pushing the boundaries of human knowledge occurs as people "earn a living" in whatever manner the current civilization offers.
At least in previous generations, developed nations set up systems where intellectually gifted young people of the working class were schooled to "earn a living." Due to increasing job specialization, they narrowed their field of study in high school, and then more in graduate school. Finally, those that have managed to fund a young adulthood in school (and without a full time job), were ready to enter those fields where their intellect may truly advance mankind--at least the subset of these that either profit private industry, or are a focus of charitable and government grant money.
It is interesting to note that when "genius" children were followed in previous studies, they almost never were the ones that significantly increased current knowledge and understanding--though they often achieved professional distinction. Genetic Studies of Genius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have to say no. Almost every basic invention has/had and alternative way of doing it. Take fire for example - the invention wasn't fire itself, but how to start a fire. Multiple people around the world figured it out on their own, and some did it by making sparks with stones and others by rubbing sticks together. The same is true of all basic forms of agriculture - multiple cultures came up with their own way of doing it.
The telephone is another great modern example, while Alexander Grahm Bell is credited with inventing it, many people were working on different ways of doing it. Antonio Meucci may have even done it before him.
I'd say "no" --I don't think there has been any discovery in history that would not have been made by someone else a few years later. Even if one genius is 50 years ahead of his contemporaries, that is still insignificant in the overall scheme of things.
Of course, the Aztecs never discovered the wheel--but that is probably just the stagnating effect of religion on the intellectual development of a society. Like the Dark Ages, times of pervasive religion are the antithesis of intellectual achievement.
The sheer numbers of human beings has long since risen to the level of statistics, which swamps out the efforts of any individual. In a population of 1,000 people, a single person's achievements could be momentous; there would be countless opportunities for improvement that had not yet been optimized. But when the population is heading towards 7 billion (even ignoring the huge numbers of people that lived before), any idea has already been thought of, and explored, at least a few hundred times.
With intelligence spread out in the population in a normal, bell-shaped curve, every population will have a few super-genius level people that are capable of increasing current knowledge, or discrediting existing misconceptions. But that doesn't mean everyone capable of pushing the boundaries of knowledge is going to: unless a business (or government) is offering jobs studying or researching the field, it won't happen. As always, pushing the boundaries of human knowledge occurs as people "earn a living" in whatever manner the current civilization offers.
At least in previous generations, developed nations set up systems where intellectually gifted young people of the working class were schooled to "earn a living." Due to increasing job specialization, they narrowed their field of study in high school, and then more in graduate school. Finally, those that have managed to fund a young adulthood in school (and without a full time job), were ready to enter those fields where their intellect may truly advance mankind--at least the subset of these that either profit private industry, or are a focus of charitable and government grant money.
It is interesting to note that when "genius" children were followed in previous studies, they almost never were the ones that significantly increased current knowledge and understanding--though they often achieved professional distinction. Genetic Studies of Genius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attrill
I have to say no. Almost every basic invention has/had and alternative way of doing it. Take fire for example - the invention wasn't fire itself, but how to start a fire. Multiple people around the world figured it out on their own, and some did it by making sparks with stones and others by rubbing sticks together. The same is true of all basic forms of agriculture - multiple cultures came up with their own way of doing it.
The telephone is another great modern example, while Alexander Grahm Bell is credited with inventing it, many people were working on different ways of doing it. Antonio Meucci may have even done it before him.
What about it???? [Ha! I outdid you by one question mark!]
Did you even read the first post? It's pretty obvious the question concerns items or techniques. It's equally obvious that when it comes to religions, no one but the primary initiator of that religion would have created it in quite that way, if even at all.
Your singling out of Christianity utterly misses that point. The same is true of Islam - no Mohammed, no Islam. Or of Buddhism - no Buddha, no Buddhism. Or Scientology - no L. Ron Hubbard, no Scientology.
Obviously, tales are unique to the inventor of the tale.
But items or techniques with a utility are simply a utilization waiting to be invented or developed - very unlike specific religions.
As Unsettomati said - that really is outside the scope of what the OP was asking.
But just for fun, let's look at Christianity. It was not "invented" by one person, it was developed by scores of people attributing sayings to someone hundreds of years after their death. There are absolutely no historical records of Jesus even speaking, never mind what he said. What "Christianity" was and is has been disagreed upon by many people ever since it's creation.
It also isn't a new creation, it draws heavily from other religions. It takes the entire cosmology and history of Judaism as it's foundation, and then introduces a large number of stories that closely echo stories from other religions of the time. It also isn't unique in any way, there were loads of prophets at that time, and especially in that part of the world. So it isn't so much unique as an invention, as it is unique in how many people adopted it afterwards (and even then it isn't unique when you consider Islam).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
