2 ms·
Indeed. To add to this - first to develop or not, Leibniz published first, and Newton's shameless unfounded accusations against him cannot be reasonably defende
by bllguo 3y ago
Indeed. To add to this - first to develop or not, Leibniz published first, and Newton's shameless unfounded accusations against him cannot be reasonably defended. I don't see any pro-Newton arguments in this situation besides "tribal obligations" that you mention.
In the realm of calculus Leibniz is far more influential - his notation, for instance, is so superior that English mathematicians rejecting it arguably led to the stagnation of the field in England. And of course it is far more prevalent today.
- hermitcrab 3y agoIIRC Newton also exploited his role as President of the Royal Society to attack Leibnitz. Just because he was a genius, doesn't mean that he wasn't also an arsehole. Maybe if he was was a more mellow and less driven, he wouldn't have been the genius he was.