is it fair to say George Washington Carver and Frederick Douglas are the top 2 intellects of American history
its even fair to say George Washington Carver was a greater genius than Isaac Newton
I say this because Carver was born into slavery, underprivileged, disenfranchised, racially discriminated and was able to succeed to become a great scientist
Newton was privileged in his society and did not have the same obstacles
Let’s say a kid was born with half his brain missing, and eventually he learned trigonometry.
Does that make him smarter than a kid with a normal brain who learned calculus?
Not that I want to suggest that Douglas or Carver were mentally handicapped, and not to say that they weren’t high achievers, but that makes them remarkable people, not “smarter”.
It’s just not something you can quantify.
I agree with Boyo Jim. You can’t measure a person’s intelligence based on their background. It’s one of those things where it’s the destination that matters not how far you had to travel.
A nitpick, but his name was spelled Douglass.
Sir Isaac Newton had nicer hair than Douglass and Carver combined.
But Isaac Newton had to deal with his severe mental issues, neuroses, and religious fanaticism. Without those he’d have been moar smartener. Plus he got sidetracked into alchemy and then put in charge of the mint. If he hadn’t been an aristocrat they never would have put him in charge of the mint, and he’d have worked moar smartener on smart stuff. So being an aristocrat should count against him! Or is that for him? Whatever.
Yeah, a lot of people would have accomplished more if it weren’t for the things that kept them from accomplishing more. I’m sure the smartest person ever was some kid who was born in a neolithic village 3000 years ago in central Asia and died of dysentery at age 6. But if he hadn’t died, and if he had been educated, and if he lived in a social system that allowed his talents to flourish, and he was properly motivated to use his talents for the greater good, then he would have accomplished all sorts of amazing things.
Newton may have been sidetracked into supervising the national mint – but he did a brilliant job at it. He cleaned the place up, regularized weights and measures, got rid of corruption and theft, and turned the place from a hell-hole into a model of good civil service.
If anyone could have made alchemy work…it would have been he!
The question is ridiculous. Intelligence is all about what you do with it rather than what circumstances you were born into. I can’t imagine anyone would compare the man who developed calculus, Newtonian physics, and countless other things with the guy who came up with a lot of uses for peanuts.
Newton was the son of a Farmer who managed to die 3 months before he was born and was raised by his grandmother. Rejecting his mother’s insistence that he should be a farmer he worked as a valet in order to pay for college. Hardly a privileged upbringing.
A lot of geniuses, a lot of obstacles to overcome, and no real way to compare who might have been “smarter than Isaac Newton.”
Thomas Edison had a total of three months of formal education and was hearing impaired.
Malcolm X lost his father when he was six; his mother had a nervous breakdown when he was 13; he dropped out of junior high school; he spent six years in prison. He managed to become one of the most influential African Americans in history even though he was assassinated before he turned 40.
Percy Julian pioneered the synthesis of steroids from plants.
C.W. Chappelle was one of 18 children, became an electrical engineer, an architect, designed a long-distance airplane in 1911, and headed several American business ventures in Africa.
“I’m the world’s strongest man.”
“No, you’re not; I’m a lot stronger than you.”
“Sure, but if I ate right and exercised, is what I’m saying.”
You’re comparing two scientists with a humanities-type guy. One is not inherently better, but you can’t really compare.
One made many significant findings and has his name attached to many things, even if he got into alchemy and things that seem strange from our modern perspective. The other is best “known” for inventing peanut butter, even though he didn’t actually do so. His inventions might affect us today but most people aren’t really aware.
IIRC by Douglass’ own admission, he felt that his slavery experience was not that bad compared to others, and was thankful for the opportunities in being taught to read. Save from one guy, he was spared the worst physical damage of slavery. He certainly didn’t regret not suffering more so that he could prove he was that much cooler.
I don’t know anyone who would argue that. But I’d like to see especially Douglass get more recognition today.
He also had to overcome being a douchebag. Well, not let it hold him back at least.
Being a douchebag was Edison’s secret to success!
Carver had another social burden to bear; there’s good evidence that he was gay. For some reason this aspect of his life is seldom discussed. While Carver is often mentioned as a black icon, he’s rarely mentioned as a gay icon.
He must have been quite an inspiration for Steve Jobs.
Which branch of mathematics did they create ?
I have no idea how to process this. Newton was a singularity - Humanity’s view of ourselves and our Universe was FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT before and after his work on Gravity, optics, the calculus, etc. 300+ years later, his model works for a large percentage of work being done in science. The two men you mention, while worthy of HUGE respect, are nowhere even REMOTELY close to Newton in their impact on the world.
I have no idea where you are getting your assertions, either about Carver and Douglass vs. Newton or your view of their standing in U.S. History.
I wonder how much further Carver might have gone if he had been born 50 years later and had a chance to go into more research? Really he is not more than a blip in the history of science (no offense intended) and I think part of the reason we hear about him is due to how he overcame racial stereotypes of the day - not for his science.