3 ms·
No, what the author is trying to say that the only reason that Carver is listed alongside Einstein and Marie Curie is that he was black, and that it was conside
by duncan_bayne 12y ago
No, what the author is trying to say that the only reason that Carver is listed alongside Einstein and Marie Curie is that he was black, and that it was considered politically necessary to include him for that reason.
His accomplishments, while real and greater than mine and probably yours (no offence), aren't in the same league as those two.
- yellowapple 12y agoNo offense taken :) However, I'm still getting the impression that botany/biology/etc. are being viewed as somehow "lesser" than the sorts of physics Einstein and Curie did. Would you object to, say, Gregor Mendel being on that list? They're roughly comparable, after all (highly-respected botanists with Christian faiths and rather-groundbreaking (pun intended) discoveries in botany).
- duncan_bayne 12y agoAh, now that's a different discussion :) Yes, I was wondering about that. Mendel I think would belong on that list; I think membership in it depends upon fundamentally changing a field, rather than 'just' significantly improving it.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]