Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:43:28 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I would just add that there were no "scientists" in the Renaissance. The
word "scientist" and our idea of what it means is a product of the last
century. To say he's overrated because he didn't publish is a trifle
harsh, IMHO. He certainly intended to. If you read his writings, you'll
find him constantly referring "the reader" that he intended his writings
for.
I would agree that he was no scientist in the same way that Galileo was.
However, I think it would as foolish to leave him out of the history of
science as would be to leave out any of the Classical philosophers or
other non-"scientists" who have shaped the way we see the world.
Cheers,
Ed
P.S. My vote's with Eric on this. Name one other
painter/sculptor/engineer/inventor/anatomist/philosopher/musician who's had
as much impact on Western society.
> Eric Seagel has commented that Leonardo di Vinci is "exceptionalism
>personified"; I would strongly argue that he is history's most overrated
>person.
___________________________________________________________
Edward Rodley email: [log in to unmask]
Exhibit Planner [log in to unmask]
Museum of Science, URL: www.tiac.net/users/erodley
Boston, MA
Opinions expressed are the author's alone (thankfully)
___________________________________________________________
|
|
|