For better or for worse, the modern connotation of an intellectual is heavily slanted towards the matters of humanities and arts. I've had the pleasure of studying under some great computer scientists, but unfortunately, although geniuses in their field, very few of them could be considered an "intellectual" in the current form of its meaning.
Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
11–20 of 25 posts
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#12The emphasis is obviously on the "public" more than the "intellectual." Witness Thomas Friedman's place on the list!
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#13There are two biologists, one physicist, one neuroscientist, and one medical scientist. The list is dominated by individuals with careers in politics, religion, literature, philosophy, and history.
I agree, a list of the Top 100 Intellectuals would be dominated by mathematicians, scientists, engineers, and probably a hacker or to, but this list is titled The Top 100 PUBLIC Intellectuals, i.e. public policy, so I wasn't expecting any different.
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#14For better or for worse, the modern connotation of an intellectual is heavily slanted towards the matters of humanities and arts. I've had the pleasure of studying under some great computer scientists, but unfortunately, although geniuses in their field, very few of them could be considered an "intellectual" in the current form of its meaning.
Note that the list is of public intellectuals -- intellectuals who play a prominent role in public discourse. Most great computer scientists tend to stay out of the public realm, for the most part -- and perhaps with good reason.
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#15So, who are some computer scientists (and mathematicians) that should be on the list? That is a loaded but honest question.
That's an interesting question. I think that the software world (distinct from CS or Math) does have "public intellectuals", though they are rarely known outside software. I'd say that Eric Raymond, David Heinemeier Hansson, Paul Graham, Joel Spolsky, Kathy Sierra, and Linus Torvalds are "public intellectuals" within this space. Many of these folks have impressive tech accomplishments, but people know who they are largely because they've read their writings/essays about software (ie., I'm distinguishing people who are known purely on the basis of code). It's very difficult to become a software public intellectual without reasonably impressive technical achievements, though I'd probably say Lawrence Lessig is in the club.
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#16The emphasis is obviously on the "public" more than the "intellectual." Witness Thomas Friedman's place on the list!
[deleted]
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#17The emphasis is obviously on the "public" more than the "intellectual." Witness Thomas Friedman's place on the list!
"He has an anti-ear, and it's absolutely infallible; he is a Joyce or a Flaubert in reverse, incapable of rendering even the smallest details without genius."
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#18So, who are some computer scientists (and mathematicians) that should be on the list? That is a loaded but honest question.
Grothendieck, Knuth, Paul Cohen, Terence Tao, Shing-Tung Yao. In my opinion Godel was the greatest mathematician of the 20th century, but he's dead.
How can you possibly think that Grothendieck should be on a list of public intellectuals?
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#19So, who are some computer scientists (and mathematicians) that should be on the list? That is a loaded but honest question.
IMHO: Linus, Alan Kay, Alan Turing
Re: Only one computer scientist in the world's top 100 public intellectuals
#20They left off Charles Murray who incidentally derived a novel way of measuring intellectual influence semi-objectively.