World's Greatest Draft (2 Viewers)

[timschochet]

Now Larry just sent me a pm listing various "Neo-Platonists" who were influential among the early Christians, so this is a much better argument and defense of his statement. It doesn't change the fact that the majority of these ideas were lost to the Christian world until the Muslims gave it back to them.

So he tried to take it to PM and you brought it back? Christ.

I was trying to give him credit here after I criticized him.

 

[flysack]

Right. I thought this whole draft was interesting until we got into a religious discussion, over and over and over and over and over...Either they quit, or I will.

I find the entire thing trite and annoying. I'm with Ozy here. Take it somewhere else, or I'm leaving Dodge with Ozy.

Rollins doesn't run away! I put him one step under Chuck Norris on the list of who the boogey man checks his closet for when it goes to bed!

Shhhh, it's all a clever psychological ploy to get them to stop. (if you speak of this again, I won't be your friend anymore)

 

[Mario Kart]

Hey, the religious threads are reserved for Aisle 6. Go over there and talk about religion. This is the drafting thread. Quit peeing in it.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

you really doubt that Judas was a real person? Seriously?

I doubt that the Jesus described by the Bible existed. Why wouldn't I doubt Judas?

I can understand doubting that everything the Bible says happened actually happened, but stating the every single Biblical character outside of Jesus is as fictional as the Greek God Nike is just uninformed and, honestly, beneath you... You know good and well that a vast majority of the characters actually existed (even if their stories could be exaggerated a bit in the Bible)...

I didn't say that. I just said that for the purposes of this draft, there was no need to debate the existence of Jesus.

like I said... where were your complaints with Moses or Abraham? Where are your complaints about Homer and Sun Tzu? Why single out the Bible?

And LIKE I SAID, I was only voicing my displeasure, not really trying to make a big deal out of it. Contrary to what you try to do with every perceived slight.

 

[mad sweeney]

Now Larry just sent me a pm listing various "Neo-Platonists" who were influential among the early Christians, so this is a much better argument and defense of his statement. It doesn't change the fact that the majority of these ideas were lost to the Christian world until the Muslims gave it back to them.

So he tried to take it to PM and you brought it back? Christ.

I was trying to give him credit here after I criticized him.

I hear you on this one Tim. It's hard to not want to get the last word in.

 

[flysack]

Now Larry just sent me a pm listing various "Neo-Platonists" who were influential among the early Christians, so this is a much better argument and defense of his statement. It doesn't change the fact that the majority of these ideas were lost to the Christian world until the Muslims gave it back to them.

So he tried to take it to PM and you brought it back? Christ.

I was trying to give him credit here after I criticized him.

I hear you on this one Tim. It's hard to not want to get the last word in.

 

[BobbyLayne]

I have been wavering between two men here, and have finally come to a decision. One of them I am fairly certain belongs in the top 5 in his category, but I am going to pick the guy who I believe to be top 3 an arguably first in his category. Ironically enough, Herbert the Hippo jokingly suggested I take a Doctor with this pick, and I am going to do just that. My writeup is very long, but I think well deserved - this man's body of work in carrying out what he believed his duty to his fellow man is extraordinary.This man devoted his life to helping others. He defined what it means to be a Humanitarian, and in fact has an award for humanitarian work named after him. He is important as a humanitarian not only for the work he did, but also for his raising awareness worldwide on the importance of helping our fellow man. Frankly, I challenge anyone to find a man who more embodies this category than this man:Albert SchweitzerOne of my all-time favorite people. Great pick.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Let me restate my point: Many, if not most of the people on Larry's list, whom he claims were "influenced by Jesus", were actually influenced MORE by Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, at least in terms of what they did with their lives. Humanity owes the preservation of the writings of these three philosophers to the Muslim religion, which kept these writings alive and relevant during the Christian dark ages. Just another argument why Islam may in the long run be just as influential as Christianity, and why Muhammad is more influential than Jesus.

I really don't want to perpetuate this discussion, but I do need to correct one inaccuracy here. It wasn't the Muslims that kept the writings of antiquity alive during the Dark Ages in Western Europe, it was the Christian Byzantine empire that maintained those writings and are also predominantly responsible for delivering them to Italy at the beginning of the Renaissance. You know, that would be the Empire founded by the World's greatest leader, Constantine.

 

[thatguy]

I have been wavering between two men here, and have finally come to a decision. One of them I am fairly certain belongs in the top 5 in his category, but I am going to pick the guy who I believe to be top 3 an arguably first in his category. Ironically enough, Herbert the Hippo jokingly suggested I take a Doctor with this pick, and I am going to do just that. My writeup is very long, but I think well deserved - this man's body of work in carrying out what he believed his duty to his fellow man is extraordinary.This man devoted his life to helping others. He defined what it means to be a Humanitarian, and in fact has an award for humanitarian work named after him. He is important as a humanitarian not only for the work he did, but also for his raising awareness worldwide on the importance of helping our fellow man. Frankly, I challenge anyone to find a man who more embodies this category than this man:Albert SchweitzerOne of my all-time favorite people. Great pick.

Thanks, BL.

 

[flysack]

Let me restate my point: Many, if not most of the people on Larry's list, whom he claims were "influenced by Jesus", were actually influenced MORE by Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, at least in terms of what they did with their lives. Humanity owes the preservation of the writings of these three philosophers to the Muslim religion, which kept these writings alive and relevant during the Christian dark ages. Just another argument why Islam may in the long run be just as influential as Christianity, and why Muhammad is more influential than Jesus.

I really don't want to perpetuate this discussion, but I do need to correct one inaccuracy here. It wasn't the Muslims that kept the writings of antiquity alive during the Dark Ages in Western Europe, it was the Christian Byzantine empire that maintained those writings and are also predominantly responsible for delivering them to Italy at the beginning of the Renaissance. You know, that would be the Empire founded by the World's greatest leader, Constantine.

Just because I'm not commenting, doesn't mean I ain't listening!

 

[larry_boy_44]

Let me restate my point: Many, if not most of the people on Larry's list, whom he claims were "influenced by Jesus", were actually influenced MORE by Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, at least in terms of what they did with their lives. Humanity owes the preservation of the writings of these three philosophers to the Muslim religion, which kept these writings alive and relevant during the Christian dark ages. Just another argument why Islam may in the long run be just as influential as Christianity, and why Muhammad is more influential than Jesus.

I really don't want to perpetuate this discussion, but I do need to correct one inaccuracy here. It wasn't the Muslims that kept the writings of antiquity alive during the Dark Ages in Western Europe, it was the Christian Byzantine empire that maintained those writings and are also predominantly responsible for delivering them to Italy at the beginning of the Renaissance. You know, that would be the Empire founded by the World's greatest leader, Constantine.

 

[Mister CIA]

Unless seen reading this topic, I am officially on auto-skip and will make up picks in the evening.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Cool, so I leave to go to a bible study meeting and come back to, well, get into the middle of a theological debate on the relative importance of the higher tier players in their respective religions.

As I said early on when tim tried to go down a losing road about Christ - there is a fine line here between commentary on a pick and the usual several posts debating importance, and turning this thing into a full blown religious discussion, or democracy v. communism discussion, and on and on and on.

There should be posts discussing the picks. Don't cross the line and make this a religious debate. I haven't gone there and I'm more equipped then most to do it. That isn't the purpose here. Let's move on, agree to disagree on the theological implications and agree that in terms of this thread, either Christ or Muhammed are top tier, round one picks that can anchor any team of 23 greats in world history.

And not for nothing, but my comments on Andy about 4 pages back were fracking funny and they got overshadowed by this stuff so knock it off. Your cramping my style here.

 

[timschochet]

Let's discuss painters.

Claude Monet

Vincent Van Gogh

Leonardo Da Vinci

Rembrandt van Rijn

Salvador Dali

Pablo Picasso

Paul Cezanne

Pretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants.

Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Let's discuss painters.Claude MonetVincent Van GoghLeonardo Da VinciRembrandt van RijnSalvador DaliPablo PicassoPaul CezannePretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants. Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

None of them can create the perfection of my personal work of greatness, stick figure eating pizza. The lines are stunning, the insight into the mind of a stick figure eating pizza are spiritual, and it's a stick figure eating pizza. Even when it's bad pizza, it's still pretty good.

 

[timschochet]

Let's discuss painters.Claude MonetVincent Van GoghLeonardo Da VinciRembrandt van RijnSalvador DaliPablo PicassoPaul CezannePretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants. Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

None of them can create the perfection of my personal work of greatness, stick figure eating pizza. The lines are stunning, the insight into the mind of a stick figure eating pizza are spiritual, and it's a stick figure eating pizza. Even when it's bad pizza, it's still pretty good.

I dare you to nominate yourself and email Arsenal one of your drawings. Arsenal might just be eclectic enough that you can avoid #20.

 

[Mario Kart]

Let's discuss painters.Claude MonetVincent Van GoghLeonardo Da VinciRembrandt van RijnSalvador DaliPablo PicassoPaul CezannePretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants. Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

None of them can create the perfection of my personal work of greatness, stick figure eating pizza. The lines are stunning, the insight into the mind of a stick figure eating pizza are spiritual, and it's a stick figure eating pizza. Even when it's bad pizza, it's still pretty good.

I dare you to nominate yourself and email Arsenal one of your drawings. Arsenal might just be eclectic enough that you can avoid #20.

I've seen Yankee's work on display at the Met. I had fun admiring his work as I was peeing all over it.

 

[Abrantes]

Let's discuss painters.Claude MonetVincent Van GoghLeonardo Da VinciRembrandt van RijnSalvador DaliPablo PicassoPaul CezannePretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants. Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

Really? I'd put both of your second tier dudes above your first tier, or at least all four on the same tier.

 

[timschochet]

Now here's how I see the novelists/short story writers:

GREAT

Victor Hugo

Charles Dickens

Leo Tolstoy

GOOD

Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Edgar Allen Poe

INCREDIBLY OVERRATED

James Joyce

Marcel Proust

NEVER READ, SO I'M UNSURE

Miguel Cervantes

DOESN'T BELONG IN THIS CATEGORY

Geoffrey Chaucer

Take that, Flysack!

 

[Mario Kart]

Mario Kart

Leaders -

Military - Sun Tzu (post #45) (1.01)

Scientist -

Inventor -

Discoverer/Explorer - Giovanni da Pian del Carpine (post #1281) (2.20)

Humanitarian/Saint/Martyr -

Novelist/Short stories -

Playwrights/Poets - Geoffrey Chaucer (post #1295) (3.01)

Villain -

Athlete -

Composer -

Musicians/Performers -

Painter - Claude Monet (post #2236) (4.20)

Artist/Non-Painter - Auguste Rodin (post #2248) (5.01)

Philosopher -

Religious Figure -

Celebrity -

Intellectual -

Rebel -

Wildcards -

 

[BobbyLayne]

Let's discuss painters.Claude MonetVincent Van GoghLeonardo Da VinciRembrandt van RijnSalvador DaliPablo PicassoPaul CezannePretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants. Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

7 so far? I would put Dali in Tier 8.1. Pablo2. XXXX3. Da Vinci4. Cezanne5. Rembrandt6. XXXX7. XXXX8. Monet9. XXXX10. XXXXSomewhere - Van GoghWC - Dali (e.g., pick again)

 

[BobbyLayne]

Now here's how I see the novelists/short story writers:

GREAT

Victor Hugo

Charles Dickens

Leo Tolstoy

GOOD

Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Edgar Allen Poe

INCREDIBLY OVERRATED

James Joyce

Marcel Proust

NEVER READ, SO I'M UNSURE

Miguel Cervantes

DOESN'T BELONG IN THIS CATEGORY

Geoffrey Chaucer

Take that, Flysack!

Sung to the tune 'Olde Tyme Religion'Well gimme that hard driving narrative

Well gimme that hard driving narrative

Well gimme that hard driving narrative

Its good enough for me

 

[Usual21]

Unless seen reading this topic, I am officially on auto-skip and will make up picks in the evening.

Same here. That being said...6.07 - Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, (Caravaggio) - Painter

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, (29 September 1571 – 18 July 1610) was an Italian artist active in Rome, Naples, Malta and Sicily between 1593 and 1610, considered the first great representative of the Baroque school of painting.

Even in his own lifetime Caravaggio was considered enigmatic, fascinating, rebellious and dangerous. He burst upon the Rome art scene in 1600, and thereafter never lacked for commissions or patrons, yet he handled his success atrociously. An early published notice on him, dating from 1604 and describing his lifestyle three years previously, tells how "after a fortnight's work he will swagger about for a month or two with a sword at his side and a servant following him, from one ball-court to the next, ever ready to engage in a fight or an argument, so that it is most awkward to get along with him." In 1606 he killed a young man in a brawl and fled from Rome with a price on his head. In Malta in 1608 he was involved in another brawl, and yet another in Naples in 1609, possibly a deliberate attempt on his life by unidentified enemies. By the next year, after a relatively brief career, he was dead.

Huge new churches and palazzi were being built in Rome in the decades of the late 16th and early 17th Centuries, and paintings were needed to fill them. The Counter-Reformation Church searched for authentic religious art with which to counter the threat of Protestantism, and for this task the artificial conventions of Mannerism, which had ruled art for almost a century, no longer seemed adequate. Caravaggio's novelty was a radical naturalism which combined close physical observation with a dramatic, even theatrical, approach to chiaroscuro, the use of light and shadow.

Famous and extremely influential while he lived, Caravaggio was almost entirely forgotten in the centuries after his death, and it was only in the 20th century that his importance to the development of Western art was rediscovered. Despite this, his influence on the new Baroque style that eventually emerged from the ruins of Mannerism, was profound. Andre Berne-Joffroy, Paul Valéry's secretary, said of him: "What begins in the work of Caravaggio is, quite simply, modern painting." And in the years following his death, he was more imitated by other artists than any other master for whom we have record as documented by the art historian Benedict Nicolson. Caravaggio's influence can be seen directly or indirectly in the work of Rubens, Jusepe de Ribera, Bernini, and Rembrandt, and artists in the following generation heavily under his influence were called the "Caravaggisti" or "Caravagesques", as well as Tenebrists or "Tenebrosi" ("shadowists").

1

2

3

 

[Mario Kart]

8. John Madden's Lunchbox - Pick sent to misfitblondes, larry & thatguy - pick when ready

9. higgins

10. Big Rocks

11. Mad Sweeney

12. Doug B

13. DC Thunder

14. Thorn

15. Yankee23fan

16. Acer FC

17. FUBAR

18. Arsenal of Doom

19. Larry Boy 44

20. Mario Kart

 

[Abrantes]

Unless seen reading this topic, I am officially on auto-skip and will make up picks in the evening.

Same here. That being said...6.07 - Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, (Caravaggio) - Painter

One of my personal favorites. Absolutely love his style. His exaggerated use of light and dark is a wonder to behold.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Let's discuss painters.Claude MonetVincent Van GoghLeonardo Da VinciRembrandt van RijnSalvador DaliPablo PicassoPaul CezannePretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants. Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

7 so far? I would put Dali in Tier 8.1. Pablo2. XXXX3. Da Vinci4. Cezanne5. Rembrandt6. XXXX7. XXXX8. Monet9. XXXX10. XXXXSomewhere - Van GoghWC - Dali (e.g., pick again)

Was your evil twin posting last night or something? I could swear you posted something along the lines of the DaVinci and Michelangelo being in the top tier and then Van Gogh and two others being in the tier just beneath them. Now Van Gogh isn't even cracking your top 10 for painters, which frankly makes me want to weep for you.

 

[Usual21]

Unless seen reading this topic, I am officially on auto-skip and will make up picks in the evening.

Same here. That being said...6.07 - Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, (Caravaggio) - Painter

One of my personal favorites. Absolutely love his style. His exaggerated use of light and dark is a wonder to behold.

I totally agree. When doing my undergrad work in college, I needed to take a course in Art History. As soon as I saw this guy's work, I became an instant fan.

 

[Mario Kart]

3

 

[higgins]

6.09 - Marcus Aurelius, Leader.

link

Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus (often referred to as "the wise"; April 26, 121 – March 17, 180) was Roman Emperor from 161 to his death in 180. He was the last of the "Five Good Emperors", and is also considered one of the most important Stoic philosophers. His tenure was marked by wars in Asia against a revitalized Parthian Empire, and with Germanic tribes along the Limes Germanicus into Gaul and across the Danube.

Marcus Aurelius' work Meditations, written in Greek while on campaign between 170 and 180, is still revered as a literary monument to a government of service and duty and has been praised for its "exquisite accent and its infinite tenderness."

Marcus received an education from some of the greatest scholars of his day: Euphorion for literature, Geminus for drama, Andron for geometry, Caninius Celer and Herodes Atticus in Greek oratory, Alexander of Cotiaeum for Greek, and Marcus Cornelius Fronto for Latin. It is through Marcus' correspondence with Fronto that we have many of the details of his life during the reign of Antoninus. Through these letters Marcus appears as an intelligent, serious-minded and hardworking youth. They also show the growing importance of philosophy for the future emperor: showing impatience for the unending exercises with Greek and Latin declamations, he later became fond of the Diatribai ("Discourses") of Epictetus, an important moral philosopher of the Stoic school.

While on campaign between 170 and 180, Aurelius wrote his Meditations in Greek as a source for his own guidance and self-improvement. He had been a priest at the sacrificial altars of Roman service and was an eager patriot. He had a logical mind and his notes were representative of Stoic philosophy and spirituality. Meditations is still revered as a literary monument to a government of service and duty. It has been praised for its "exquisite accent and its infinite tenderness"[citation needed] and "saintliness"[citation needed], and has also been called the "gospel of his life."[citation needed] John Stuart Mill, in his Utility of Religion, compared the Meditations to the Sermon on the Mount.

The book itself was first published in 1558 in Zurich, from a manuscript copy that is now lost. The only other surviving complete copy of the manuscript is in the Vatican library.

Marcus Aurelius wrote Meditations in Greek at his base in Sirmium in modern-day Serbia and also while positioned at Aquincum on campaign in Pannonia in modern-day Hungary.

The significance of death was very important in the philosophy of Marcus Aurelius. He didn't believe in the afterlife. He wrote: 'We live for an instant, only to be swallowed in "complete forgetfulness and the void of infinite time on this side of us." "Think how many ere now, after passing their life in implacable enmity, suspicion, hatred... are now dead and burnt to ashes." According to Marcus Aurelius everything will be turned in absolute oblivion, even legends. "Of the life of man the duration is but a point, its substance streaming away, its perception dim, the fabric of the entire body prone to decay, and the soul a vortex, and fortune incalculable, and fame uncertain. In a word all things of the body are as a river, and the things of the soul as a dream and a vapour; and life is a warfare and a pilgrim's sojourn, and fame after death is only forgetfulness." 'Everything existing "is already disintegrating and changing... everything is by nature made but to die." 'The length of one's life is irrelevant, "for look at the yawning gulf of time behind thee and before thee at another infinity to come. In this eternity the life of a baby of three days and the life of a Nestor of three centuries are as one." 'To desire is to be permanently disappointed and disturbed, since everything we desire in this world is "empty and corrupt and paltry." For Marcus Aurelius, death was desirable, because it would make an end to all desires.

Bonus pic

 

[timschochet]

Oh JML...you've really made DC Thunder upset; hope you realize that.

 

[FUBAR]

Now here's how I see the novelists/short story writers:

GREAT

Victor Hugo

Charles Dickens

Leo Tolstoy

GOOD

Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Edgar Allen Poe

INCREDIBLY OVERRATED

James Joyce

Marcel Proust

NEVER READ, SO I'M UNSURE

Miguel Cervantes

DOESN'T BELONG IN THIS CATEGORY

Geoffrey Chaucer

Take that, Flysack!

 

[Mario Kart]

Oh JML...you've really made DC Thunder upset; hope you realize that.

He deserves to be upset. He is pawn scum right now.

 

[Mario Kart]

Oh JML...you've really made DC Thunder upset; hope you realize that.

He deserves to be upset. He is pawn scum right now.

Are people playing chess down by the pond?

No, because it is [A] vs. [A] and it sucks.

 

[Fennis]

6:08 - Ernesto "Che" Guevara

Rebel

No arguing that his face has beome an iconic image and is a representative of a rebel. Kind of ironic that he has made some capitalists lots of money.

 

[BobbyLayne]

6:08 - Ernesto "Che" Guevara

Rebel

No arguing that his face has beome an iconic image and is a representative of a rebel. Kind of ironic that he has made some capitalists lots of money.

You're not giving bonus points for t-shirt sales?

 

[BobbyLayne]

Let's discuss painters.

Claude Monet

Vincent Van Gogh

Leonardo Da Vinci

Rembrandt van Rijn

Salvador Dali

Pablo Picasso

Paul Cezanne

Pretty darn good selection, and of course, there's 13 still to be chosen, no doubt including some absolute giants.

Rather than rank at this point, I have tiers in mind: the first tier would have Rembrandt and Da Vinci. Second tier, Van Gogh and Picasso, third tier, Monet and Cezanne, fourth tier, Dali. As more people get picked, they will be placed into each tier. Thoughts?

7 so far? I would put Dali in Tier 8.1. Pablo

2. XXXX

3. Da Vinci

4. Cezanne

5. Rembrandt

6. XXXX

7. XXXX

8. Monet

9. XXXX

10. XXXX

Somewhere - Van Gogh

WC - Dali (e.g., pick again)

Was your evil twin posting last night or something? I could swear you posted something along the lines of the DaVinci and Michelangelo being in the top tier and then Van Gogh and two others being in the tier just beneath them. Now Van Gogh isn't even cracking your top 10 for painters, which frankly makes me want to weep for you.

Micheangelo isn't in the painter category
If you are so interested in what I said last night quote it
What I did say was if I was judging I would feel compelled to rank them da da da even though that's not how I see it
I don't have Van Gogh in my top 15, based on importance or influence; if I were judging, I would sneak him into the top ten to placate the massesMonet is cotton candy.

Van Gogh popular, which is about all he has going for him.

 

[krista4]

I've changed my mind multiple times in the last few minutes.

Mawlānā Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Balkhī (مولانا جلال الدین محمد بلخى), also known as Jalāl ad-Dīn Muḥammad Rūmī (جلال‌الدین محمد رومی), but known to the English-speaking world simply as

5.19 - Rumi, Poet.

Again, love the poet, I read him often, but I have no clue how to rank him among the world's poets and playwrights.

Toughest one yet to slot.

 

[krista4]

My skipped Pick-

5.08--Joan of Arc-Martyr/Saint

From the Wiki:

Joan of Arc is national heroine of France and a Catholic saint. A peasant girl born in eastern France, she led the French army to several important victories during the Hundred Years' War, claiming divine guidance, and was indirectly responsible for the coronation of XXXX. She was captured by the English, tried by an ecclesiastical court, and burned at the stake when she was nineteen years old. Twenty-four years later, the Holy See reviewed the decision of the ecclesiastical court, found her innocent, and declared her a martyr. She was beatified in 1909 and later canonized in 1920.[2]

Joan asserted that she had visions from God that told her to recover her homeland from English domination late in the Hundred Years' War. The uncrowned King XXXX sent her to the siege at Orléans as part of a relief mission. She gained prominence when she overcame the dismissive attitude of veteran commanders and lifted the siege in only nine days. Several more swift victories led to XXXX's coronation at Reims and settled the disputed succession to the throne.

Joan of Arc has remained an important figure in Western culture. From Napoleon to the present, French politicians of all leanings have invoked her memory. Major writers and composers who have created works about her include Shakespeare, Voltaire, XXX, XXX,XXX,XXX,XXX. Depictions of her continue in film, television, video games, song, and dance.

Great pick. One of the only women I thought had a chance for top slot in a category.

 

[Big Rocks]

Okay, I cannot let this guy fall any further...

6.10 Nicholaus Copernicus, wild card

Earlier in this draft I selected Galileo, who is known for spreading the idea of the sun, not the sun, was the center of the solar system. However, he was not the person who came up with this idea, it was Copernicus (well, technically others had postulated this theory as well, but we'll ignore them...). His book, On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres, described decades of his work that was ultimately published around the time of his death, though some of his peers were aware of the content of the book before publication. This book is regarded at an important time in history, as it started the Scientific Revolution along with the start of modern astronomy. Throughout his life, he also worked in other fields such as mathematics, physician, classical scholar, artist, translator, governor, military leader, diplomat, and economist. He lived from 1473-1543.

Right now, I'll put him as a wild card, but I may change that later.

Full bio here

mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("

In 1514 Copernicus made available to friends his Commentariolus (Little Commentary), a six page hand-written text describing his ideas about the heliocentric hypothesis. It contained seven basic assumptions. Thereafter he continued gathering data for a more detailed work.

In 1533, xxx delivered in Rome a series of lectures outlining Copernicus' theory. The lectures were heard with interest by xxx and several Catholic cardinals.

On 1 November 1536, xxx wrote a letter to Copernicus from Rome:

Some years ago word reached me concerning your proficiency, of which everybody constantly spoke. At that time I began to have a very high regard for you... For I had learned that you had not merely mastered the discoveries of the ancient astronomers uncommonly well but had also formulated a new cosmology. In it you maintain that the earth moves; that the sun occupies the lowest, and thus the central, place in the universe... Therefore with the utmost earnestness I entreat you, most learned sir, unless I inconvenience you, to communicate this discovery of yours to scholars, and at the earliest possible moment to send me your writings on the sphere of the universe together with the tables and whatever else you have that is relevant to this subject ...[16]

By then Copernicus' work was nearing its definitive form, and rumors about his theory had reached educated people all over Europe. Despite urgings from many quarters, Copernicus delayed with the publication of his book, perhaps from fear of criticism — a fear delicately expressed in the subsequent Dedication of his masterpiece to xxx. Scholars disagree on whether Copernicus' concern was limited to physical and philosophical objections from other natural philosophers, or whether he was also concerned about religious objections from theologians.[17]

Copernicus was still working on De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (even if not convinced that he wanted to publish it) when in 1539 xxx, a Wittenberg mathematician, arrived in Frombork. xxx had arranged for Rheticus to visit several astronomers and study with them.

xxx became Copernicus' pupil, staying with him for two years and writing a book, Narratio prima (First Account), outlining the essence of Copernicus' theory. In 1542 xxx published a treatise on trigonometry by Copernicus (later included in the second book of De revolutionibus).

Under strong pressure from xxx, and having seen the favorable first general reception of his work, Copernicus finally agreed to give De revolutionibus to his close friend, xxx bishop of Chełmno (Kulm), to be delivered to Rheticus for printing by xxx.

Copernicus' major theory was published in the book, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), in the year of his death, 1543, though he had arrived at his theory several decades earlier.

In his Commentariolus Copernicus had summarized his system with the following list of seven assumptions:[25]

1. There is no one center of all the celestial circles or spheres.

2. The center of the earth is not the center of the universe, but only of gravity and of the lunar sphere.

3. All the spheres revolve about the sun as their mid-point, and therefore the sun is the center of the universe.

4. The ratio of the earth's distance from the sun to the height of the firmament is so much smaller than the ratio of the earth's radius to its distance from the sun that the distance from the earth to the sun is imperceptible in comparison with the height of the firmament.

5. Whatever motion appears in the firmament arises not from any motion of the firmament, but from the earth's motion. The earth together with its circumjacent elements performs a complete rotation on its fixed poles in a daily motion, while the firmament and highest heaven abide unchanged.

6. What appear to us as motions of the sun arise not from its motion but from the motion of the earth and our sphere, with which we revolve about the sun like any other planet. The earth has, then, more than one motion.

7. The apparent retrograde and direct motion of the planets arises not from their motion but from the earth's. The motion of the earth alone, therefore, suffices to explain so many apparent inequalities in the heavens.

De revolutionibus itself was divided into six books:

1. General vision of the heliocentric theory, and a summarized exposition of his idea of the World

2. Mainly theoretical, presents the principles of spherical astronomy and a list of stars (as a basis for the arguments developed in the subsequent books)

3. Mainly dedicated to the apparent motions of the Sun and to related phenomena

4. Description of the Moon and its orbital motions

5. Concrete exposition of the new system

6. Concrete exposition of the new system*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

 

[Ozymandias]

Now here's how I see the novelists/short story writers: GREAT Victor HugoCharles DickensLeo TolstoyGOOD Fyodor DostoyevskyEdgar Allen PoeINCREDIBLY OVERRATED James JoyceMarcel ProustNEVER READ, SO I'M UNSUREMiguel CervantesDOESN'T BELONG IN THIS CATEGORYGeoffrey ChauceTake that, Flysack!

I'm with you, but not quite all the way. I would rank Cervantes in the GREAT category. Yes, he is a little hard to understand sometimes in Spanish, (like Shakespeare is in English) and he coined words, like Shakespeare did. The first half of the book is tragicomedy, but the character of Quixote gains a certain nobility, even though he is a little mad. The second half of the book is more philosophical.I wouldn't put Edgar Allan Poe in the good; ok, but not in the same group as Dostoyevsky. I'd rank Proust a little higher than Joyce, but yes, he may be a little overrated. There is one American writer that I would consider great, and one English writer that is near great..

 

[krista4]

Sorry, another brief writeup, will expand later.

6.03 (103rd pick) - Paul Cezanne - Painter

(1839-1906) – "Cezanne is the father of us all." This lapidary phrase has been attributed to both Picasso and XXXXX, and certainly it doesn't matter who actually said it, because in either case is true.

While he exhibited with the Impressionist painters, Cézanne left behind the whole group to develop a style of painting never seen so far, which opened the door for the arrival of Cubism and the rest of the vanguards of the twentieth century

LOVE Cézanne. I have absolutely no idea where he'll end up in the final ranking, but he's awesome.

 

[Big Rocks]

As the scientist category judge, I can state now I'm going to have a difficult time ranking all the picks, as many of them helped revolutionize the world. Some people are going to be disappointed by the ranking of their pick, as I really don't see much of a difference between the eventual 11-20 picks, and even within the top 10.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Okay, I cannot let this guy fall any further...6.10 Nicholaus Copernicus, wild card

Nice pick.

 

[Mister CIA]

Okay, I cannot let this guy fall any further...

6.10 Nicholaus Copernicus, wild card

Earlier in this draft I selected Galileo, who is known for spreading the idea of the sun, not the sun, was the center of the solar system. However, he was not the person who came up with this idea, it was Copernicus (well, technically others had postulated this theory as well, but we'll ignore them...). His book, On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres, described decades of his work that was ultimately published around the time of his death, though some of his peers were aware of the content of the book before publication. This book is regarded at an important time in history, as it started the Scientific Revolution along with the start of modern astronomy. Throughout his life, he also worked in other fields such as mathematics, physician, classical scholar, artist, translator, governor, military leader, diplomat, and economist. He lived from 1473-1543.

Right now, I'll put him as a wild card, but I may change that later.

Full bio here

mytagid = Math.floor( Math.random() * 100 );document.write("

In 1514 Copernicus made available to friends his Commentariolus (Little Commentary), a six page hand-written text describing his ideas about the heliocentric hypothesis. It contained seven basic assumptions. Thereafter he continued gathering data for a more detailed work.

In 1533, xxx delivered in Rome a series of lectures outlining Copernicus' theory. The lectures were heard with interest by xxx and several Catholic cardinals.

On 1 November 1536, xxx wrote a letter to Copernicus from Rome:

Some years ago word reached me concerning your proficiency, of which everybody constantly spoke. At that time I began to have a very high regard for you... For I had learned that you had not merely mastered the discoveries of the ancient astronomers uncommonly well but had also formulated a new cosmology. In it you maintain that the earth moves; that the sun occupies the lowest, and thus the central, place in the universe... Therefore with the utmost earnestness I entreat you, most learned sir, unless I inconvenience you, to communicate this discovery of yours to scholars, and at the earliest possible moment to send me your writings on the sphere of the universe together with the tables and whatever else you have that is relevant to this subject ...[16]

By then Copernicus' work was nearing its definitive form, and rumors about his theory had reached educated people all over Europe. Despite urgings from many quarters, Copernicus delayed with the publication of his book, perhaps from fear of criticism — a fear delicately expressed in the subsequent Dedication of his masterpiece to xxx. Scholars disagree on whether Copernicus' concern was limited to physical and philosophical objections from other natural philosophers, or whether he was also concerned about religious objections from theologians.[17]

Copernicus was still working on De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (even if not convinced that he wanted to publish it) when in 1539 xxx, a Wittenberg mathematician, arrived in Frombork. xxx had arranged for Rheticus to visit several astronomers and study with them.

xxx became Copernicus' pupil, staying with him for two years and writing a book, Narratio prima (First Account), outlining the essence of Copernicus' theory. In 1542 xxx published a treatise on trigonometry by Copernicus (later included in the second book of De revolutionibus).

Under strong pressure from xxx, and having seen the favorable first general reception of his work, Copernicus finally agreed to give De revolutionibus to his close friend, xxx bishop of Chełmno (Kulm), to be delivered to Rheticus for printing by xxx.

Copernicus' major theory was published in the book, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), in the year of his death, 1543, though he had arrived at his theory several decades earlier.

In his Commentariolus Copernicus had summarized his system with the following list of seven assumptions:[25]

1. There is no one center of all the celestial circles or spheres.

2. The center of the earth is not the center of the universe, but only of gravity and of the lunar sphere.

3. All the spheres revolve about the sun as their mid-point, and therefore the sun is the center of the universe.

4. The ratio of the earth's distance from the sun to the height of the firmament is so much smaller than the ratio of the earth's radius to its distance from the sun that the distance from the earth to the sun is imperceptible in comparison with the height of the firmament.

5. Whatever motion appears in the firmament arises not from any motion of the firmament, but from the earth's motion. The earth together with its circumjacent elements performs a complete rotation on its fixed poles in a daily motion, while the firmament and highest heaven abide unchanged.

6. What appear to us as motions of the sun arise not from its motion but from the motion of the earth and our sphere, with which we revolve about the sun like any other planet. The earth has, then, more than one motion.

7. The apparent retrograde and direct motion of the planets arises not from their motion but from the earth's. The motion of the earth alone, therefore, suffices to explain so many apparent inequalities in the heavens.

De revolutionibus itself was divided into six books:

1. General vision of the heliocentric theory, and a summarized exposition of his idea of the World

2. Mainly theoretical, presents the principles of spherical astronomy and a list of stars (as a basis for the arguments developed in the subsequent books)

3. Mainly dedicated to the apparent motions of the Sun and to related phenomena

4. Description of the Moon and its orbital motions

5. Concrete exposition of the new system

6. Concrete exposition of the new system*** SPOILER ALERT! Click this link to display the potential spoiler text in this box. ***");document.close();

For me, it was a coin-flip between Copernicus and Kant.

 

[mad sweeney]

Now here's how I see the novelists/short story writers: GREAT Victor HugoCharles DickensLeo TolstoyGOOD Fyodor DostoyevskyEdgar Allen PoeINCREDIBLY OVERRATED James JoyceMarcel ProustNEVER READ, SO I'M UNSUREMiguel CervantesDOESN'T BELONG IN THIS CATEGORYGeoffrey ChauceTake that, Flysack!

I'm with you, but not quite all the way. I would rank Cervantes in the GREAT category. Yes, he is a little hard to understand sometimes in Spanish, (like Shakespeare is in English) and he coined words, like Shakespeare did. The first half of the book is tragicomedy, but the character of Quixote gains a certain nobility, even though he is a little mad. The second half of the book is more philosophical.I wouldn't put Edgar Allan Poe in the good; ok, but not in the same group as Dostoyevsky. I'd rank Proust a little higher than Joyce, but yes, he may be a little overrated. There is one American writer that I would consider great, and one English writer that is near great..

Tim is big on accessibility, I don't know if Cervantes is someone he'd put in great. Although how he got through Fountainhead with that criteria I don't know. i've made two passionate attempts to read it and can't get past halfway. Too much "he knew that she knew that he knew that she knew that he would never tell even though telling was what she knew he wanted to do but because he knew that she knew, she knew that he knew he wouldn't say it." Blech.My buddy that actually finished it said that the evilness of one of the characters was revealed on page 666.Pick coming

 

[krista4]

Larry, first off many of the people you mentioned were also influenced somewhat by Muhammad. And everyone you mentioned was certainly influenced by Paul of Tarsis. And everyone on BOTH your lists was influenced by Moses. Does this make Moses more influential than Jesus? Not to me.

Once again, the argument is that Jesus is 60% responsible for the creation of Christianity, and Paul is 40% responsible. Muhammad is 100% responsible for the creation of Islam. This is naturally a secular argument. If you believe that Jesus is God or the son of God, then of course he becomes a million times more important than Paul, who is only a normal human. If you believe that Muhammad is the final prophet given the word of Allah by Allah himself, then of course he becomes the most important person whoever lived. But we're trying to evaluate this is a secular manner, without these qualifications. And in that sense, I think the reasoning is solid to rank Muhammad above Jesus.

EVEN IF you give 40% of the creation of Christianity to Paul, Chrisitanity is still so much more influential than Islam that Jesus is STILL the most influential person in the history of the world...PLUS when you look at what is believed. Jesus lived a perfect life and literally died for the sins of his followers. Muhammad didn't.

Jesus is more important to Christians than Muhammad is to Muslims, Jesus is also important to Muslims (on a much smaller level) and Christians have BY FAR been more influential to the world than Muslims have...

I mean, look at our list. Chrisians of some sort vs. Muslims of some sort is like 40 to 2... That's insane...

Go wave a picture of Muhammed in a Muslim's face and tell me if you still believe this to be true.

If one existed...

 

[BobbyLayne]

Arsenal -

Based on your own criteria:

I will be assigning a grade in each of the following categories: Importance to their individual movement;

Influence on subsequent movements (or later Artists in the same); Innovation or advancement of their medium(s);Global recognition; Creation of widely recognized masterpieces (Art that the layperson would recognize, and know who did it);

Intangibles (facts or body of work that add to the overall historical influence of the Artist)

I fail to see how you can argue for a high placement for Van Gogh. He was of no importance when he was alive, and none of the other painters selected thus far had less influence after they became popular.What he has going for him: iconic work.

 

[timschochet]

Tim is big on accessibility, I don't know if Cervantes is someone he'd put in great. Although how he got through Fountainhead with that criteria I don't know. i've made two passionate attempts to read it and can't get past halfway. Too much "he knew that she knew that he knew that she knew that he would never tell even though telling was what she knew he wanted to do but because he knew that she knew, she knew that he knew he wouldn't say it." Blech.

My buddy that actually finished it said that the evilness of one of the characters was revealed on page 666.

Pick coming

First of all, I haven't read Cervantes, so again I can't comment. Regarding The Fountainhead I'm a little surprised; most people I know that have read it, whether or not they agreed with the philosophy, found it pretty accessible. Atlas Shrugged, OTOH, can provide a stumbling block for a lot of people. But I found both of them very accessible.

 

[Mario Kart]

11. Mad Sweeney

12. Doug B

13. DC Thunder

14. Thorn

15. Yankee23fan

16. Acer FC

17. FUBAR

18. Arsenal of Doom

19. Larry Boy 44

20. Mario Kart

I doubt it gets to me tonight... and tomorrow I will not have computer access. So, I may have to send my picks to Tim in the morning.

 

[krista4]

Now here's how I see the novelists/short story writers: GREAT Victor HugoCharles DickensLeo TolstoyGOOD Fyodor DostoyevskyEdgar Allen PoeINCREDIBLY OVERRATED James JoyceMarcel ProustNEVER READ, SO I'M UNSUREMiguel CervantesDOESN'T BELONG IN THIS CATEGORYGeoffrey ChaucerTake that, Flysack!

FWIW, flysack and I have only three of the same top five. My #6 might not even be selected in the draft. More .Tim, I'm shocked you haven't read Don Quixote. How did you miss this?