7 ms·

I think this is like saying: the greatest scientist of all time is "et al", who mastered all disciplines (including mathematics). Edit (clarification): I mean

I think this is like saying: the greatest scientist of all time is "et al", who mastered all disciplines (including mathematics). Edit (clarification): I mean, by conflating multiple people's work as one (by whatever criteria, in this case a common pseudonym), comparison becomes meaningless.

eru 6y ago
'et al' may be the most published author. But ibidem gets way more citations. > I mean, by conflating multiple people's work as one (by whatever criteria, in this case a common pseudonym), comparison becomes meaningless. Meaningless in a strict sense. But good enough as a hook for an article. Compare also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakob_Maria_Mierscheid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakob_Maria_Mierscheid
svat 6y ago
Are you, by any chance, reading the subtitle as “The greatest mathematician, who never lived” (i.e. Bourbaki was the greatest mathematician, and he never lived) rather than as (what's written) “The greatest mathematician who never lived” (i.e. among the mathematicians who never lived, Bourbaki was the greatest)? The latter is a common snowclone especially in headlines, like (from https://www.google.com/search?q=%22the+*+*+you+haven%27t+heard+of%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22the+*+*+you+haven%27t+hea...) “The Most Important Filmmaker You Haven't Heard Of”, “The Coolest Apps You Haven't Heard Of”, “Meet Vulfpeck, the best band you haven't heard of yet” — e.g. the last one doesn't mean that Vulfpeck is the best band, just that among bands you (probably) haven't heard of, it's (according to the author) the best.