3 ms·

Things get named after the person who popularized something, not generally after the first to discover it. It's called the Pythagorean theorem because that's w

by Natsu 5y ago

Things get named after the person who popularized something, not generally after the first to discover it. It's called the Pythagorean theorem because that's where western people who called it that learned it from, the other things being unknown to them.

yhoneycomb 5y ago
Whatever. Still a misnomer in my book. With that said, you are free to invent your definition of misnomer if you so desire.
ummonk 5y ago
Explaining why a misnomer came about isn't an argument for why we should continue to perpetuate it.
- toiletaccount 5y ago
  yeah the babylonians are still a little sore about this misattribution
- jjoonathan 5y ago
  Here's a reason: sharing, communication, and popularization are even more important than the underlying idea. The Babylonians can fight the Chinese, Egyptians, and 5 other claimants for the historical footnote of who figured it out first. I don't really care. If the Pythagoreans evangelized the concept at a critical juncture in the history of the discourse that eventually became my education, I think that's a fine reason to leave their name on the theorem. Of course, the Pythagorean theorem is a good springboard for discussing how this works, how attribution is often murky or flat out wrong, how evidence of various bits of math popped up far earlier in history than their official invention, yet remained sterile and ultimately went nowhere because they weren't shared, popularized, and expanded upon. Or it happened but stopped at cultural boundaries and didn't get to us by that path, so we give credit to the person who made that happen. In any case, receiving the idea is what we care about, not originating the idea. See: Euler did it first, Gauss did it first, ancient Indians did it first, ancient Chinese did it first, etc, etc.
- afarrell 5y ago
  We should perpetuate it for at least 3 more years because we have way bigger epistemological fish to fry.

by Natsu 5y ago

yhoneycomb 5y ago

Whatever. Still a misnomer in my book. With that said, you are free to invent your definition of misnomer if you so desire.

ummonk 5y ago

Explaining why a misnomer came about isn't an argument for why we should continue to perpetuate it.

toiletaccount 5y ago
yeah the babylonians are still a little sore about this misattribution
jjoonathan 5y ago
Here's a reason: sharing, communication, and popularization are even more important than the underlying idea. The Babylonians can fight the Chinese, Egyptians, and 5 other claimants for the historical footnote of who figured it out first. I don't really care. If the Pythagoreans evangelized the concept at a critical juncture in the history of the discourse that eventually became my education, I think that's a fine reason to leave their name on the theorem. Of course, the Pythagorean theorem is a good springboard for discussing how this works, how attribution is often murky or flat out wrong, how evidence of various bits of math popped up far earlier in history than their official invention, yet remained sterile and ultimately went nowhere because they weren't shared, popularized, and expanded upon. Or it happened but stopped at cultural boundaries and didn't get to us by that path, so we give credit to the person who made that happen. In any case, receiving the idea is what we care about, not originating the idea. See: Euler did it first, Gauss did it first, ancient Indians did it first, ancient Chinese did it first, etc, etc.
afarrell 5y ago
We should perpetuate it for at least 3 more years because we have way bigger epistemological fish to fry.