3 ms·
We don't need to imagine that Newton was marked or dismissed for Principia at the time because we can take note of the actual history where he wound up surround
by notahacker 3y ago
We don't need to imagine that Newton was marked or dismissed for Principia at the time because we can take note of the actual history where he wound up surrounded by a circle of admirers (some of them famous in their own right) and president of the Royal Society (he had the good sense to keep the unorthodox part of his religious beliefs to himself). Although imagining something that fits a more exciting narrative than the actual historic record is kind of appropriate for a Graham Hancock subthread ;)
The cherry picking actually works the other way - for every great discovery that was universally derided by scientists (which isn't most great discoveries, not even ones that were controversial like natural selection) there are dozens of silly ideas based on complete misunderstandings and mountebanks painting themselves as brave challengers of the orthodoxy to an audience that doesn't really understand the orthodoxy.
- darkerside 3y agoThe takeaway is that both happen. Sometimes established science is right, and sometimes it's not. I don't mean to dismiss iterative discovery, but paradigm shifts have always required a leap of imagination. I guess you'll have to imagine (or not, your choice) what it was like to be Newton before the wild success of his works. There was a time where his ideas were not established science, and he didn't know how they would be received. https://www.sciography.com/Isaac-Newton.htm https://www.sciography.com/Isaac-Newton.htm > Newton said he was reluctant to publish his calculus at the time for fear of being mocked. You seem to have a pretty established idea of what is right, and I think I've gotten my idea across at this point, so you can take or leave it. Cheers.