• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Last_colossi
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:50 AM)
Last_colossi's Avatar
Walt Disney?

Edit: Specifically because Mickey Mouse is probably the most recognizable character in history and 99% of people know who made Mickey Mouse.

Edit#2: ^Probably BS but I'm just spitballing here^
Cocaloch
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:50 AM)
Cocaloch's Avatar

Originally Posted by thoseAREmySHOES

my family is dying



My initial thought after Jesus and Adolf Hitler was Genghis Khan. Now I know the areas that his empire covered may not all have been densely populated, but the sheer size of it had to come with some serious recognition. I'd be curious to see how he stacked up to Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great and such due to the drastic differences in the population densities.

With this argument the answer would have to be Victoria. She ruled over a larger and far more populous empire.
Tragicomedy
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:51 AM)
Tragicomedy's Avatar

Originally Posted by Mr. Poolman

Tell me, what age is it? and since which event do we count?
There is your answer.

Thanks, Louis CK!
Platy
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:51 AM)
Platy's Avatar
I love how the most famous person in history could not even be a person in human history at all xD
Benzychenz
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:53 AM)
Benzychenz's Avatar

Originally Posted by Arc

It's gotta be Julius Caesar right?

Is he the guy that invented the Caesar salad?
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:53 AM)
OrangeGrayBlue's Avatar
In terms of recognizing their picture, I think it's been proven to be MLK jr.
Cocaloch
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:53 AM)
Cocaloch's Avatar

Originally Posted by ForsakenLotus

Slight tangent, but does the perception of a figure versus historical evidence matter at all?

These aren't really easily distinguishable. Certainly the popular understanding of just about any figure won't actually fit well with that of historians.

Originally Posted by ForsakenLotus

But my point isn't specifically to say any one of these people didn't exist, but rather can they count if so little is actually known versus the widespread belief of events based on believers of their respective faiths?

Maybe it shouldn't matter at all. I don't know. Thoughts?

You should think about why we have sources on everyone else that we have sources on. Sources exist for a reason. People that enter the historical record do so because of a specific reason. That will always have an effect on our ability to piece our understanding of them together. You're drawing a sharp divide between religious figures and other historical figures that doesn't end up working particularly well.
Jest Chillin
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:54 AM)
Jest Chillin's Avatar

Originally Posted by ForsakenLotus

Slight tangent, but does the perception of a figure versus historical evidence matter at all? For instance, most scholars believe there was a man named Jesus who at least a few events described in the Bible and other texts line up, but there is a big gap between historical evidence and what millions of people believe. Same with Muhammad, although my cursory Googling shows possibly less historical evidence that the man existed. The same might be true of the first Buddha.

But my point isn't specifically to say any one of these people didn't exist, but rather can they count if so little is actually known versus the widespread belief of events based on believers of their respective faiths?

Maybe it shouldn't matter at all. I don't know. Thoughts?

The question posed is famous human. What they are known for and whether or not the things they are known for actually happened or happened the way commonly believed doesn't matter. Only that they are known.
Luap
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:54 AM)
Luap's Avatar

Originally Posted by Abounder

Like Louis CK says, we are in the year of Jesus + 2017 years. No one else comes close

Just watched that yesterday. Funny as fuck.
SilentRacoon
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:56 AM)
SilentRacoon's Avatar
Hitler and Jesus no doubt about it.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:56 AM)
Snowman Prophet of Doom's Avatar
Genghis Khan, Hitler, Dylan, Dylan, and Dylan.
Doukou
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:57 AM)
Doukou's Avatar

Originally Posted by Last_colossi

Walt Disney?

Edit: Specifically because Mickey Mouse is probably the most recognizable character in history and 99% of people know who made Mickey Mouse.

I don't think either of these are true.
Gabriel_Logan
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:57 AM)
Gabriel_Logan's Avatar
Hitler will be infamous for thousands of years.
EGM1966
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:58 AM)
EGM1966's Avatar
Presumably a religious figure like Jesus.

Ideally at some point it will be someone like Einstein.
Hollywood Duo
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:59 AM)
Hollywood Duo's Avatar

Originally Posted by Gabriel_Logan

Hitler will be infamous for thousands of years.

True but do we rate fame as people alive today know him or all people throughout human history.
Cocaloch
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:59 AM)
Cocaloch's Avatar

Originally Posted by Doukou

I don't think either of these are true.

I think the latter is far more off the mark than the former.
keuja
Member
(04-21-2017, 01:59 AM)
keuja's Avatar

Originally Posted by OrangeGrayBlue

In terms of recognizing their picture, I think it's been proven to be MLK jr.

Proven where? In the us? Show his picture to a random dude in China or India, it's almost certain they won't know who he is.
Dmax3901
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:00 AM)
Dmax3901's Avatar

Originally Posted by ForsakenLotus

Hitler.

Edit: I feel like we should limit it to people we factually know existed.

Romans were pretty good at bureaucracy, I think it's safe to assume he existed. Obviously without all the magic and shit but he was definitely an Israelite alive at that time.
Santiako
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:00 AM)
Santiako's Avatar

Originally Posted by Gabriel_Logan

Hitler will be infamous for thousands of years.

There's no way to know that. He'll still be in history books, but he might not be widespread recognised.
Ozzy Onya A2Z
(04-21-2017, 02:00 AM)
Ozzy Onya A2Z's Avatar
Stay with me, I think eventually time will tell that a lurking GAFfer will become the most famous human ever.
Cocaloch
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:00 AM)
Cocaloch's Avatar

Originally Posted by EGM1966

Presumably a religious figure like Jesus.

Ideally at some point it will be someone like Einstein.

Why is a scientist the ideal?
Carnby
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:00 AM)
Carnby's Avatar
Muhammad Ali.
Sapiens
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:01 AM)
Sapiens's Avatar
That little kid who played Webster.
OG Shaka Zulu
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:01 AM)
OG Shaka Zulu's Avatar
I'm going to go with Jesus.

Originally Posted by Lactose_Intolerant

Michael Jackson

Even tribes in the Amazon know who he is.

LMAO.
MisterHero
Super Member
(04-21-2017, 02:01 AM)
MisterHero's Avatar
Superman is real, he hasn't been born yet
Angelus Errare
Banned
(04-21-2017, 02:02 AM)
Angelus Errare's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rhomega Beta

I would argue Elvis.

Not even close outside of America.
Caddywompus
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:02 AM)
Caddywompus's Avatar

Originally Posted by ForsakenLotus

Slight tangent, but does the perception of a figure versus historical evidence matter at all? For instance, most scholars believe there was a man named Jesus who at least a few events described in the Bible and other texts line up, but there is a big gap between historical evidence and what millions of people believe. Same with Muhammad, although my cursory Googling shows possibly less historical evidence that the man existed. The same might be true of the first Buddha.

But my point isn't specifically to say any one of these people didn't exist, but rather can they count if so little is actually known versus the widespread belief of events based on believers of their respective faiths?

Maybe it shouldn't matter at all. I don't know. Thoughts?

Because then you could add Mickey Mouse to the arguement if it doesn't matter
Regginator
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:03 AM)
Regginator's Avatar
I second Jesus and Muhammed.
Drewton
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:04 AM)
Drewton's Avatar
Michael Jackson
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
(04-21-2017, 02:04 AM)
Soapbox Killer's Avatar
I mean don't we use Jesus' life as the timeline split? Dude lives 33 years and gets to reset the human clock...yeah lets go with him.
Kurt Angle
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:05 AM)
Evil lore
joeygreco1985
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:05 AM)
joeygreco1985's Avatar

Originally Posted by SilentRacoon

Hitler and Jesus no doubt about it.

Yup, and covering both ends of the spectrum too
jem0208
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:05 AM)
jem0208's Avatar
I'd say Hitler.
Mimosa97
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:05 AM)
Mimosa97's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rhomega Beta

I would argue Elvis.

Not outside of the US.
Last_colossi
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:06 AM)
Last_colossi's Avatar

Originally Posted by Doukou

I don't think either of these are true.

Probably? I'm just guessing here.
Mimosa97
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:07 AM)
Mimosa97's Avatar

Originally Posted by aBarreras

i was thinkg too of michael jordan over ali

Yup it's close but outside of the US Mohammel Ali is still more famous.

I'd say Michael Jordan and Messi are close second. (I know no one knows Messi in America but in the rest of the world he's the most famous athlete by a mile).
Very Berry Sunday
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:07 AM)
Jesus Christ if you count Fictional people

Michael Jackson if you count only real people.
Kain-Nosgoth
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:07 AM)
Kain-Nosgoth's Avatar
hitler and michael jackson yeah...
Cocaloch
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:07 AM)
Cocaloch's Avatar

Originally Posted by Caddywompus

Because then you could add Mickey Mouse to the arguement if it doesn't matter

Is Mickey Mouse a person?

More importantly, what does it mean that people existed outside of the historical conception of them? How are the person and later perceptions of them connected? The problem here is too difficult for an easy, or perhaps any, solution. It's best to simply avoid it.
Regginator
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:08 AM)
Regginator's Avatar

Originally Posted by Cocaloch

Why is a scientist the ideal?

Haven't you heard? You can't "believe" in science if you're religious.
Mimosa97
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:08 AM)
Mimosa97's Avatar

Originally Posted by Soapbox Killer

I mean don't we use Jesus' life as the timeline split? Dude lives 33 years and gets to reset the human clock...yeah lets go with him.

Did you like Louis CK's last special ?
HaloRose
Banned
(04-21-2017, 02:10 AM)
Constantine XI Palaiologos
charles martel
Charlemagne
OG Shaka Zulu
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:10 AM)
OG Shaka Zulu's Avatar
What is this Jesus ain't real stuff? He was real right, just not God?
Kurt Angle
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:10 AM)

Originally Posted by Lamel

Lil Uzi Vert.

Lil Yachty >
Zen_Arcade
Banned
(04-21-2017, 02:11 AM)

Originally Posted by iMax

I'm confused. Are you saying that people can't be aware of multiple religious texts?

He's saying that unless a person studies both (Or unless Mohammed is in the Bible), reading the Quran would make you aware of both while reading the Bible would only make you aware of one.

And while people CAN read multiple religious texts, most probably haven't.
ForsakenLotus
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:12 AM)
ForsakenLotus's Avatar

Originally Posted by Cocaloch

These aren't really easily distinguishable. Certainly the popular understanding of just about any figure won't actually fit well with that of historians.



You should think about why we have sources on everyone else that we have sources on. Sources exist for a reason. People that enter the historical record do so because of a specific reason. That will always have an effect on our ability to piece our understanding of them together. You're drawing a sharp divide between religious figures and other historical figures that doesn't end up working particularly well.

Oh I know how difficult it is to actually know about people from long ago, and that the difference between Alexander the Great and Jesus is probably semantic; but that's why I asked if it mattered.

I guess another way to look at the question is should we allow somebody who may very well have not existed at all if enough people believe that person existed? At one what point should we draw a distinction between historical figure or religious/fictional figure? Or should the line be there at all?

It's possible that my perspective is just wrong. I don't know. There just seems to be a difference between somebody who we think we know a decent bit about their life, like Julius Caesar, and somebody like Jesus who we have sparse information on the man we believe is Jesus but little evidence that backs up a lot of what most people would say happened in his life.

To pose a crude metaphor, in Iron Man 3 an actor played the role of the Mandarin. If 1,000 years later 35% of people in the world believed the fictional version of the character was actually the real person and scholars could only agree that the guy existed and a few other events while the majority of his life was hotly contested, how would he fit in the debate?

I'm totally being pedantic and I do apologize for that.
Septimus Prime
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:12 AM)
Septimus Prime's Avatar
I feel like Hitler's infamy will wane sooner, rather than later. He's a big deal now because he just happens to be the most recent evil conqueror type, but when comes someone else that evil, he will be replaced by that new person.
Doukou
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:13 AM)
Doukou's Avatar

Originally Posted by Last_colossi

Probably? I'm just guessing here.

I'd imagine a good chunk of people don't know that Walt Disney was a person before a company in America let alone worldwide. Mickey's popularity is debateable but I don't think he is that recognizable in newer generations.
Helmholtz
Member
(04-21-2017, 02:13 AM)
Helmholtz's Avatar
Jesus. Hitler.
RoyaleDuke
Banned
(04-21-2017, 02:13 AM)
Iggy Pop.

David Bowie.

Thread Tools