# Who was the Most Important Person in History? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 3, 2009, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753 "2009-01-03T23:03:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/61 "2009-01-04T15:14:58Z")
> [@ch4rl3s](#): > > Yes, Jesus’ ideas on social responsibility and wealth work about as well as Communism in the real world. Both of them would require a change in the attitudes and beliefs of people to work. I think the difference being Jesus told people they should change and act a certain way. Communism seemed to assume that if you imposed the system, the people would be happy in it, or could be forced to change to it. Jesus’ system is one designed for changed people, where communism is one to change people. Trying to change people doesn’t work. But I believe they can change themselves. > > Communism is a human system that requires changed people. It’s not going to work. Jesus’ system doesn’t claim to be one for humans as they are in this world, it asked people to change to it. > But amonst people who have changed themselves to the system, it appears they can treat each other nicely and for mutual benefit. > > I agree that people are flawed and we should deal in that world. If people were perfect there would be no need for laws and police. > But If people were just a little better, there would be **less** need for laws and police, etc. Why shouldn’t we strive for that? Why shouldn’t we tell people they can be better? I liked the way you put that. IMO that was the brilliance of what Jesus recognized and taught. People have to sincerely desire and strive to change themselves from within rather simply try to create and enforce the right rules, with no internal growth. It’s easy to be cynical in the world as it is but IMHO the only real solution is a gradual generation by generation internal change in attitude. In the meantime, laws and governments are the tools we have for now. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/62 "2009-01-04T15:21:16Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I liked the way you put that. IMO that was the brilliance of what Jesus recognized and taught. People have to sincerely desire and strive to change themselves from within rather simply try to create and enforce the right rules, with no internal growth. > > It’s easy to be cynical in the world as it is but IMHO the only real solution is a gradual generation by generation internal change in attitude. In the meantime, laws and governments are the tools we have for now. I wouldn’t call 2000 years a shortage of test generations. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/63 "2009-01-04T15:21:56Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > Hello! > > Probably none that you would accept, but one third of the planet accepts it without question. My point is that there is no one anywhere making this sort of claim about Mohammed. I doubt this is true, but let’s say it is. It isn’t necessarily a point in Jesus favor, and the idea that no one is making this claim about Mohammed is a point against him. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/64 "2009-01-04T15:27:26Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I wouldn’t call 2000 years a shortage of test generations. Me neither, but looking at man’s progress, limited as it is, I think the concept shows itself to be true. The internal change in enough people brings about the social change, and the laws that follow. The laws wouldn’t exist without the internal change. I’m thinking of women’s rights, Civil rights movement, etc. I don’t consider the lesson a failure because mankind is so slow in grasping and implementing it. ---
**Author:** ![Toxylon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f05b48/32.png) [@Toxylon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Toxylon)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/65 "2009-01-04T15:30:25Z")
The guy / gal who succeeded in friction fire for the first time. Without the voluntary creation of fire humans would have never ventured outside the tropics, would never have developed anything resembling human culture, we would have no ceramics, no metals, no glass, no electricity, no engines, no nothing. Just the immediate boon of fire-at-will must’ve been stupendous. Primitive cultures use fire for innumerable every-day needs, not just for warmth, light, and a way to make food safe to eat and digestible (many important early food plants are poisonous if eaten raw) - huge deals alone. Anyone who has made fire with two sticks knows what a big gap there is between getting smoke and getting an actual flame, even with well-proven materials and instruction. The person succeeding in it without any prior knowledge must’ve been dedicated to the extreme as well as brilliant. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/66 "2009-01-04T15:34:47Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Me neither, but looking at man’s progress, limited as it is, I think the concept shows itself to be true. The internal change in enough people brings about the social change, and the laws that follow. The laws wouldn’t exist without the internal change. > I’m thinking of women’s rights, Civil rights movement, etc. I don’t consider the lesson a failure because mankind is so slow in grasping and implementing it. Nothing much changed before or after Jesus. Things didn’t get hopping until the 18th Century. That sort of implies a lack of causality. I’d also note that the women and civil right’s movements had as many if not more Christians on the wrong side, just the same as with the current homosexual rights movement. I’m not blaming that on Christianity. But people tend to interpret their religion in a way that allows them to feel morally just in the _status quo_. So again, Jesus should have been able to predict that and propose a solution. Representative democracy provided a solution to protect human rights in a way that was proof against the tyranny of the majority (like the Christian majority.) ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/67 "2009-01-04T16:07:50Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Nothing much changed before or after Jesus. Things didn’t get hopping until the 18th Century. That sort of implies a lack of causality. > > I’d also note that the women and civil right’s movements had as many if not more Christians on the wrong side, just the same as with the current homosexual rights movement. I’m not blaming that on Christianity. But people tend to interpret their religion in a way that allows them to feel morally just in the _status quo_. So again, Jesus should have been able to predict that and propose a solution. Representative democracy provided a solution to protect human rights in a way that was proof against the tyranny of the majority (like the Christian majority.) I’m unclear about what you think Jesus should have predicted and proposed a solution for. I’m also not claiming causality. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/68 "2009-01-04T16:42:31Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I’m unclear about what you think Jesus should have predicted and proposed a solution for. For people abusing the absoluteness of scripture to avoid having to justify themselves. He may have predicted it happening, but he didn’t propose any solution to the problem beyond telling people “to not do that.” > [@](#): > > I’m also not claiming causality. If Jesus hasn’t caused anything changes in the world _yet_, i.e. he didn’t cause the advances we’ve made since the 18th century, then you’re basing his importance to humanity on the theoretical good he will do when we reach a state that is capable of actually incorporating his philosophies. That’s assuming that we ever do reach such a state and assuming that his ideas will work for our benefit then. That seems like a rather large leap of assumptions to make. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/69 "2009-01-04T17:30:04Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > I did check my ‘facts’ such as they were available. > [http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/](http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/) That reference says neither that Gutenberg took his surname when he invented the printing press nor does it say Gutenberg was not his real name… And I chide myself for being both argumentative and OT to boot. But if you are going to be persnickity and snarky, you should at least get it right. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/70 "2009-01-04T18:16:47Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > Evening sven! > > With respect, I don’t believe one can reasonably compare Christ to Mohammed. Indeed not. There is no one else who splits off part of the credit for the influence of Islam to anywhere near the degree to which St. Paul splits off part of the credit for the influence of Christianity. ---
**Author:** ![Jesse\_Leigh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7ea924/32.png) [@Jesse\_Leigh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jesse_Leigh)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/71 "2009-01-04T18:26:22Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Evidently they can be. Isn’t that what you’re doing? I’m sorry, Cosmosdan, but I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Could you phrase it a little differently perhaps? What is it you think I’m doing - presumably that I ought not? TIA - Jesse. ---
**Author:** ![Jesse\_Leigh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7ea924/32.png) [@Jesse\_Leigh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jesse_Leigh)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/72 "2009-01-04T18:35:15Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > That reference says neither that Gutenberg took his surname when he invented the printing press nor does it say Gutenberg was not his real name… > > And I chide myself for being both argumentative and OT to boot. But if you are going to be persnickity and snarky, you should at least get it right. Hello again! Are you sure you read the article. **It _clearly_ gives Mr. Gutenberg’s birth name.** Here y’go! > [@](#): > > Johann Gutenberg invented the printing press in the 1450’s, and the first book to ever be printed was a Latin language Bible, printed in Mainz, Germany. Gutenberg’s Bibles were surprisingly beautiful, as each leaf Gutenberg printed was later colorfully hand-illuminated.\*\* Born as “Johann Gensfleisch” (John Gooseflesh), he preferred to be known as “Johann Gutenberg” (John Beautiful Mountain).\*\* Ironically, though he had created what many believe to be the most important invention in history, Gutenberg was a victim of unscrupulous business associates who took control of his business and left him in poverty. Nevertheless, the invention of the movable-type printing press meant that Bibles and books could finally be effectively produced in large quantities in a short period of time. This was essential to the success of the Reformation. I’m having difficulty comprehending which part of this is unclear. Johann Gutenberg was _born_ Johann Gensfleisch. The man changed his name, it’s not a crime, it’s just a fact. Shalom - Jesse. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/73 "2009-01-04T19:20:07Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > Evening sven! > > With respect, I don’t believe one can reasonably compare Christ to Mohammed. > > Muslims revere Mohammed as a prophet, but then, they also revere Jesus as a prophet, they just believe Mohammed was a greater one. > > No Muslim thinks Mohammed is the Son of God, nor does any Muslim claim to have a _personal_ (as in, ‘I have met Him’) relationship with Mohammed, but millions of Christians have a _personal_ relationship with Jesus Christ. That’s one whopper of a mass delusion - for those of you who are of the opinion that Christians are all delusional. > > Muslims do not hold Mohammed to be **‘Begotten of GOD.’** Christians know that Jesus was. > > Muslims pray to Allah and they have no mediator between them and Allah. > > Christians pray to YAHWEH _through_ and 'in the Name of Jesus Christ, **‘The only Mediator between YAHWEH and man.’** > > **Jesus didn’t come to Earth to make a Name for Himself,** but rather to make His Father’s Will known to all, and to reconcile humankind to GOD. You can’t take ‘points off’ (or from) someone because you think He ought to have been aiming for something other than He was. He came as a **‘Suffering Servant’** and a **‘Sacrificial Lamb,’ the propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of humankind.** Jesus’ Earthly Ministry didn’t have the same goals as Mohammed’s. You’re right that Jesus inspired men, and that’s what He came to do, and still does today whether the majority of members of this forum believe it or not. > > Jesus is still working miracles every day and millions will testify to this. When was the last time you heard of Mohammed working a miracle? > > Mohammed was 100% human and Jesus was and is Divine, it’s like comparing apples and oranges. > > I’m not arguing against Mohammed or the impact he had on Islam, but rather pointing out that you cannot reasonably compare him to Jesus, **‘The Last Adam,’** and **‘The _Only_ Begotten Son of The Living God.’** > > Shalom - Jesse. Pretty much everything you’ve said simply attests to a difference in their approach. By the way, you’ll get much better results here if you stop asserting that things that only Christians believe are the Absolute Truth[sup]tm[/sup]. It really just makes you look . . . well, for lack of a better word that I can use in GD, silly. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/74 "2009-01-04T19:22:09Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > Hello again! > > Are you sure you read the article. **It _clearly_ gives Mr. Gutenberg’s birth name.** > > Here y’go! > " Born as “Johann Gensfleisch” (John Gooseflesh), he preferred to be known as “Johann Gutenberg” (John Beautiful Mountain)." > > I’m having difficulty comprehending which part of this is unclear. Johann Gutenberg was _born_ Johann Gensfleisch. The man changed his name, it’s not a crime, it’s just a fact. > > Shalom - Jesse. I’m having difficulty comprehending that you do not understand the difference between a “real” name and a birth name, particularly in the historic context of Gutenberg, and how names were assigned at the time. I suppose it’s possible you didn’t read your own cite carefully, or perhaps you had trouble with comprehending it. Casually-worded as it is, it’s not wrong the way you are wrong. You might begin by admitting (just for practice) error for the part where you said he took that name when he invented the printing press… In any case, Gutenberg was his real name, and if you want to argue otherwise, go read about how surnames were assigned back then, and how that was attached to a birth name. As to when that surname became part of his “real” name, why perhaps you’d like to do some research around that, also, before you go correcting others on either point. Perhaps you meant to say, “He was born Henne/Henchen (Johannes) zur Laden, or Gensfleisch.” Or perhaps you meant to say, “His surname zu Gudenberg was added after his birth but before his printing press years.” Here’s a little starter primer beyond your Bible-Antiques-based cite: _“As the youngest son of the family, he is mentioned in earliest documents as Henne or Henchen (i.e. Johannes) zur Laden or as Henne Gensfleisch. At this time names were not passed on from father to son and grandson. The patricians of Mainz were called after their houses and if they had several, they could carry several names. In relation to the father, only in 1427 or 1428 a document states the name “zu Gudenberg”, while Johannes Gutenberg was mentioned in 1430 for the first time as “Henchin zu Gudenberg” in a document.”_ [http://www.mainz.de/gutenberg/english/zeitgum.htm](http://www.mainz.de/gutenberg/english/zeitgum.htm) In any case, as I mentioned, there is nothing in the cite you gave that says “Gutenberg” is not his “real” name; your cite only mentions that he preferred his house surname, and what his birth name was. It is your own incorrect inference that such a surname is not a “real” name, and I am doing my best to both correct your ignorance on that point as well as help you admit to it. The latter is proving most difficult. (Love the “L’il trivia” and the even more chipper “Here y’go!” But even more helpful would be accurate statements when proffered up so cheerfully as corrections. Most helpful of all would be an admission of error.) ---
**Author:** ![Jesse\_Leigh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7ea924/32.png) [@Jesse\_Leigh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jesse_Leigh)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/75 "2009-01-04T19:31:45Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > Pretty much everything you’ve said simply attests to a difference in their approach. By the way, you’ll get much better results here if you stop asserting that things that only Christians believe are the Absolute Truth[sup]tm[/sup]. It really just makes you look . . . well, for lack of a better word that I can use in GD, silly. Hello CC! My understanding is that we’re to post our understanding, opinion, and belief, as to what is the truth about the subject at hand. It’s quite all right if you don’t agree with me, you certainly have plenty of company. The argument you just used is silly IMO because everything you said to me I could say right back atcha about your beliefs. Atheists are _anything_ but neutral. I’m happy to ‘look silly’ for Christ any day! OTOH, maybe I really _do_ look silly! 🆒 Agape - Jesse. ---
**Author:** ![Jesse\_Leigh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7ea924/32.png) [@Jesse\_Leigh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jesse_Leigh)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/76 "2009-01-04T19:48:15Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > I’m having difficulty comprehending that you do not understand the difference between a “real” name and a birth name, particularly in the historic context of Gutenberg, and how names were assigned at the time. I suppose it’s possible you didn’t read your own cite carefully, or perhaps you had trouble with comprehending it. Casually-worded as it is, it’s not wrong the way you are wrong. > > You might begin by admitting (just for practice) error for the part where you said he took that name when he invented the printing press… > > In any case, Gutenberg was his real name, and if you want to argue otherwise, go read about how surnames were assigned back then, and how that was attached to a birth name. > > As to when that surname became part of his “real” name, why perhaps you’d like to do some research around that, also, before you go correcting others on either point. > > Perhaps you meant to say, “He was born Henne/Henchen (Johannes) zur Laden, or Gensfleisch.” Or perhaps you meant to say, “His surname zu Gudenberg was added after his birth but before his printing press years.” > > Here’s a little starter primer beyond your Bible-Antiques-based cite: > > _“As the youngest son of the family, he is mentioned in earliest documents as Henne or Henchen (i.e. Johannes) zur Laden or as Henne Gensfleisch. At this time names were not passed on from father to son and grandson. The patricians of Mainz were called after their houses and if they had several, they could carry several names. In relation to the father, only in 1427 or 1428 a document states the name “zu Gudenberg”, while Johannes Gutenberg was mentioned in 1430 for the first time as “Henchin zu Gudenberg” in a document.”_ > [http://www.mainz.de/gutenberg/english/zeitgum.htm](http://www.mainz.de/gutenberg/english/zeitgum.htm) > > In any case, as I mentioned, there is nothing in the cite you gave that says “Gutenberg” is not his “real” name; your cite only mentions that he preferred his house surname, and what his birth name was. It is your own incorrect inference that such a surname is not a “real” name, and I am doing my best to both correct your ignorance on that point as well as help you admit to it. The latter is proving most difficult. > > (Love the “L’il trivia” and the even more chipper “Here y’go!” But even more helpful would be accurate statements when proffered up so cheerfully as corrections. Most helpful of all would be an admission of error.) \*\*I understand fully how surnames came about. I also understand that _birth names_ are kept on record as ones actual name at birth. If he changed his name to Gutenberg then that became his name, but it wasn’t the name he was _given_ at birth. I couldn’t care less if his name were Humphrey Cheese, but you are so persistent and impolite that I feel it is necessary to take this to its conclusion. Please read the following carefully.\*\* > [@](#): > > The life of Johannes Gutenberg > > [Six hundred years since the birth of Johannes Gutenberg—inventor of the printing press - World Socialist Web Site](http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/jan2001/gute-j03.shtml) > > Although the exact year of Gutenberg’s birth is not known, it is estimated he was born around the year 1400. He was the son of a merchant in one of the largest towns in Germany—Mainz, a town renowned for its wine with a population of over 6,000 and residence of an elector, one of the mightiest princes of the Church in Germany. Johannes Gutenberg was the third of three children. \*\*His _real_ name was Johannes Gensfleish, but he encountered some problems with his surname, which translates into English as “goose-flesh”. \*\*He _adopted_ the name of the area where his family lived, “Zum Gutenberg”. In his youth he was educated in Latin by the clergy, and without his training in Latin his later work may well have proved impossible. Cheers - Jesse. ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/77 "2009-01-04T19:48:53Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > I’m happy to ‘look silly’ for Christ any day! OTOH, maybe I really _do_ look silly! The second sentence would be more accurate if you were to delete the word “maybe”. If you haven’t done so already, you might want to take a look at the “How to talk to atheists” thread. And in another instance of your pattern of posting definitive statements without supporting evidence, there’s [a grammar thread in GQ](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=498749) awaiting some clarification on your part. ---
**Author:** ![Jesse\_Leigh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7ea924/32.png) [@Jesse\_Leigh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jesse_Leigh)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/78 "2009-01-04T20:12:02Z")
> [@Hunter\_Hawk](#): > > The second sentence would be more accurate if you were to delete the word “maybe”. If you haven’t done so already, you might want to take a look at the “How to talk to atheists” thread. > > And in another instance of your pattern of posting definitive statements without supporting evidence, there’s [a grammar thread in GQ](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=498749) awaiting some clarification on your part. HH, I _refuse_ to argue about grammar. It was a fun thread and a fun sentence to pick apart, but I have reams of books on grammar, and numerous supposedly up-to-date preferences in my favorites, but the fact is, _no one_ agrees on grammar anymore. Apart from a few basic rules, which we all (hopefully) still follow, it has become a matter of opinion and preference. As I stated in my post on the thread, ask ten experts and you’ll get ten differing answers to most grammar questions. I write books for a living and your asking me for a citation for correct placement of commas? Come on now! This isn’t in any way contructive - you’re simply arguing for the sake of it. Agape - Jesse. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/79 "2009-01-04T20:22:45Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > My understanding is that we’re to post our understanding, opinion, and belief, as to what is the truth about the subject at hand. It’s quite all right if you don’t agree with me, you certainly have plenty of company. Right, and I have no quibble with that, but in GD, you have to provide evidence for what you say. “The Bible says it, and I believe it.” doesn’t cut it. > [@Jesse Leigh](#): > > The argument you just used is silly IMO because everything you said to me I could say right back atcha about your beliefs. Atheists are _anything_ but neutral. But _I_ don’t go preaching in practically every thread I post in, do I? Thus that argument is ineffective against me. > [@Jesse Leigh](#): > > I’m happy to ‘look silly’ for Christ any day! OTOH, maybe I really _do_ look silly! 🆒 Looking silly tends to make your argument less effective, but maybe you’d rather do your work for God the way you want to rather than the way that actually works well. ---
**Author:** ![IAmNotSpartacus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/cc9497/32.png) [@IAmNotSpartacus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IAmNotSpartacus)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2009, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753/80 "2009-01-04T20:24:44Z")
> [@Jesse\_Leigh](#): > > I write books for a living and your asking me for a citation for correct placement of commas? What about his asking for a citation on the correct placement of commas? Is there a cite for contractions we can refer to? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-was-the-most-important-person-in-history/479753.md?page=5)