[ExI] instilling ambition

[Anders Sandberg]

On 22/01/2013 14:51, Stefano Vaj wrote:
> On 21 January 2013 01:34, Tomasz Rola <rtomek at ceti.pl> wrote:
>> BTW, another guy was Nicola Tesla. To me (perhaps I am misinformed) Tesla
>> was curious while Edison was ambitious. That Edison medal was awarded to
>> Tesla, rather than the other way is a (indirect and anecdotal) proof to
>> me, that there is something very uncivilish with this civilisation of
>> ours.
> This may well be a myth, and in any event I suspect that any age has
> had its fair share of misunderstood geniuses.
I suspect that in nearly any civilisation Edison would have won over 
Tesla. Edisos would have been talking at the agora, swaying the 
Athenians with his plans while Tesles would have stayed away out of fear 
of clay shards, probably arguing with Aristotle about the nature of 
perception. Both were smart, but Edison had enough ruthlessness and 
entrepreneurship to get something, while Tesla's showmanship was not 
enough to overcome his personal quirks.

> My concern is whether our own age is going to produce the quantity of
> geniuses I would like, and/or whether they are in a position to do
> work bound to produce sooner or later the kind of dramatic
> breakthroughs we have become accustomed to.

Charles Murray's mapping of genius in "Human Excellence" is interesting, 
since it suggests that the density of geniuses in time and space is 
highly variable. Understanding the processes leading to that would be 
quite helpful. I think some of the ideas proposed in the book sound a 
bit like the clustering of the creative class in Richard Florida's work.



-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
Faculty of Philosophy
Oxford University