Name your choice of 5 inventions most benefiting humanity

I didn't mean just the concept of the alphabet, I was considering the mechanics of creating a literate society. Writing was created in more than one place (usually as a result of increasing complexity in trade), split between an alphabet (phonetic) and pictograms.

To me the important thing is not the broad concept 'writing was developed'. Why was it developed, what prompted the need to create records. Who required it? Was it the function of a priestly caste or did it create the new career of scribe? Wet clay or papyrus or knotted cords? Mass production of texts or single copies interpreted by 'experts'?

Being literate requires the synthesis of many other skills and is a powerful tool for enabling new technologies. This is my own opinion, however, and is only a bit of a diversion from the main topic.

agriculture
language
democracy
labor unions
public welfare

reply to owi
Owi, as you know, Language is #1 on my list.

I congratulate you for including "democracy" on your list, which is a fine choice. However, to define a true invention, one must zero in on THE invention.

If I were going to expand the number of inventions on my list, I would probably add a Constitution as an important invention. So you and I are not too far apart in our judgment.

-----BumbleBeeBoogie

Beer. It's gotta be beer!

Reply to Mr. Stillwater
Stillwater, beer is great idea, but the last invention on my list is from the modern age. Can you guess it?

-----BumbleBeeBoogie

Well it's gotta be the beercan! Or the ringpull thingy on the beercan. Or those neoprene jackets you wrap around the beercan to keep it cold.

Invention #5: The Electron Microscope
BumbleBeeBoogie's list of the 5 inventions most benefiting humanity:

1. Language
2. Alphabet (including the Index)
3. Mathematics (specifically Geometry)
4. Printing Press
5. Microscope (specifically the Electron Microscope)

Number 5 of my list of inventions most benefiting humanity is the Microscope, specifically the Electron Microscope. While the world of science was reaching out to explore unimaginable size and distance, the microscope allowed scientists to move in the opposite direction: to see the very small in everything. The electron microscope was a giant step beyond conventional microscopes in this exploration of the small. I cannot begin to imagine all of the benefits to humanity this invention created and will continue to create in all branches of science, including health.

-----BumbleBeeBoogie

Inventor of the Electron Microscope
James Hillier
Born Aug 22 1915

Electron Lens Correction Device
Electron Microscope
Patent Number(s) 2,455,676

Inventor Hall of Fame - Inducted 1980

Physicist James Hillier is recognized for his contributions to the development of the electron microscope. Hillier's work on the electron microscope began in college. He and a fellow graduate student built a model in 1937 that magnified 7,000 times.

Invention Impact:

A generation later more than 2,000 electron microscopes were in use in the laboratories of the world, some capable of magnifying 2 million times.

Inventor Biography:

Born in Brantford in Ontario, Canada, he received his B.S. in 1937 and Ph.D. in physics in 1941 from the University of Toronto. Hillier was a research engineer at RCA Laboratories from 1940 to 1953, at which time he joined Melpar Inc. as research director. In 1954 he returned to RCA, where he became the general manager of RCA Laboratories in Princeton, New Jersey in 1957. When he retired in 1978, Hillier was executive vice president and senior scientist of RCA Labs. Hillier holds 40 patents.
--------------------------------------
Hungarian Leo Szilard conceived, and filed patent applications on, many of the key inventions of the 20th century. His ideas included the cyclotron, linear accelerator, electron microscope, nuclear chain reaction, and nuclear reactor.

Szilard himself did not build all of these devices, or publish these ideas in scientific journals, and so their credit often went to others. As a result, Szilard never received the Nobel Prize, but two of his inventions did. Ernest Lawrence received the 1939 Nobel Prize for the cyclotron. Ernst Ruska received the 1986 Nobel Prize for the electron microscope.
-----------------------------
In 1930, Vladimir Zworykin's experiments with G.A. Morton on infrared rays led to the development of night-seeing devices. He also began to apply television technology to microscopy, which led to RCA's development of the electron microscope. His work also led to text readers, electric eyes used in security systems and garage door openers, and electronically-controlled missiles and vehicles. During World War II he advised several defense organizations, and immediately after the war, he worked with Princeton professor John von Neumann to develop computer applications for accurate weather forecasting.
-------------------------------
ERNST RUSKA
1986 Nobel Laureate in Physics

Ernst Ruska was awarded the 1986 Nobel Prize for his fundamental work in electron optics, and for the design of the first electron microscope.

Background:
Born 1906 - Died 1988
Residence: Federal Republic of Germany
Affiliation: Fritz- Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Berlin

Ernst Ruska autobiography:
http://www.nobel.se/physics/laureates/1986/ruska-autobio.html
-------------------------------------

History of the Microscope: Light Microscopes, Electron Microscopes, Scanning Electron Microscope

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blmicroscope.htm

What is the Electron Microscope?
http://www.unl.edu/CMRAcfem/em.htm

I can see the usefulness of the electron microscope, but why not optics in general? Turn a microscope around and presto! the telescope (very handy), corrective glasses, magnifying glasses, the radio telescope, etc. Just an observation, you have certainly put together some great info!

reply to Mr. Stillwater
Mr. Stillwater: Because the telescope, corrective glasses and magnifying glasses, had already been invented, some centuries before, you twerp. :wink:

-----BumbleBeeBoogie

Thus they, as invention, have preceded the microscope. I think Stillwater has a point there. Without a simple magnifying lense there would be no microscope, no telescope, nor glasses... (I still think the ability to start and keep fire is most crucial to humanity ;-) )

Every dog, ant and tree already has language. I don't think anyone invented a thing that already exists as naturally as breathing.

That said, "most benefiting humanity":
1) Fire
2) Agriculture
3) Recorded language, literacy
4) Boats
5) Genetic engineering


The Five Least Beneficial inventions:
1) The concept of good and evil
2) Any label or self-identity that separates us from (and ignores) others.
3) Corporations as first-class super-citizens, above human beings.
4) Jobs. The idea that people must "work" to "earn" a living or satisfy great "needs". It makes us robots and legitimizes our slavery.
5) Advertising. Powerful social engineering tools to generate artificial demand actually only produce fear and greed.

I very much agree, CdB. THough you could replace 'jobs' with 'money' - that's indeed why we work and why the coporations became all powerful. Good old barter trade! Goose for a pan!

Boy you sure don't seem to have good judgement there CodeBorg...Communist?

There's a few things wrong with your ideas of "least beneficial inventions".

1) Concept of Good and Evil. (This isn't an Invention, it probably didn't come from some stupid "tree of knowledge" but it certainly is a genetic...or maybe even beyond that, a spiritual concept that we have no control over. It also is one of the very few things, and indeed the root of all things, that seperates us from the animals. If you want to be a dog be my guest, but frankly I don't like being a mindless mut.)

2) Any label or self-identity that separates us from (and ignores) others. (This again, really can't be helped. It's only human to establish ourselves as purely individual, seperating ourselves from everyone else in one fasion or another, and then grouping ourselves based on similar traits, compromising the occasional unfavorable trait for a good one. Such as a homophobe befriending a homosexual because they always knew eachother, or because they share a great common interest, and thus look past the few differences. This tollerance is probably what should be better sought, but you can not all be "the same". And so we will always make groups around specific traits, such as intelligents, looks, sex, and preferences on various things.)

3) Corporations as first-class super-citizens, above human beings. (Uh Corporations were, and never are "above human beings". And further more, would you rather be a Peasant? Because that's probably what you'd be if there weren't Companies that required your services. A King is a lot worse then a grumpy boss. And if you're Communist, don't even bother to reply to this one, you have no clue of what the world is, and will only lead yourself to ruin.)

4) Jobs. The idea that people must "work" to "earn" a living or satisfy great "needs". It makes us robots and legitimizes our slavery. (I don't have a specific problem with this, I think you're being too general. We need "jobs" but we don't need to be automatons. The Jobs we should do should be beneficial to ourselves or society, one or the other, and people should be better respected for the work they do.)

5) Advertising. Powerful social engineering tools to generate artificial demand actually only produce fear and greed. (Well, advertising wouldn't be such a problem if the products made were made to last. My Grandma has a fan she got from her sister in I think 1930, so it is a 73 year old fan. And it blows more air then any fan you could buy today for 200 bucks or more even. It is an excellent fan, and is no where near breaking. But progress comes from consumerism, we can't always be an agrarians society...competitiveness is how we must be or we would never have gotten to the moon. The Soviets failed because they were Communist, if you don't believe me look into it more. Their leadership lacked both a competitive spirit, and they lacked the know how of how to put fire into the spirit of those working on their space program. As accidents happend, they became so set back because they lacked a spirit of progress, their moon program was eventually canceled after the death of their lead designer AND the death of three Cosmonauts by decompression upon re-entry. It was too much for the communist spirit).

Your least beneficial remarks seems to be strait from some misguided Communist Ideal.

It's one thing to be charitable and to help others less fortunate, it's another to deprive someone of success, because there are less fortunate.

Charity and mild social programs would be better then a Communist system.

Hmm as for your selected "Invetions" ... cool ideas.

I would say we tamed fire though Not as much invented it. If nature did it before us, we really didn't "invent" it.

Let's just hope that we use Genetic Engineering properly, expand our life spans, cure ills, and regrow lost body parts, but nothing more, we should not make ourselves into "gods" without the act of reproduction that is a part of what makes us human.

I don't really have 5 inventions on my list.

1) Rationalization, more or less an invention of the Greeks. It has become the basis of science.

2) Abstract thought, this is vague, but I'm particularly referring to Eastern ideologies, where they invented a form of "clearing the mind" through abstract thoughts, such as "If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?" This philosophy allows us to ponder life beyond our bodies, and beyond our days.

3) The Gear, the gear is the most important item in all civilization, being the one peice that almost all technology needs to function. Turning all forms of energy, into mechanical energy, and redirecting it perpindicular, or any other way we so choose.

4) I'll take the "optics" cup, mentioned before, nothing has been more important then the ability to better see our universe.

5) Writting, can this one thing be praised enough?

Hi 5PoF, welcome to A2K... Thanks for all your thoughts here!
Just a few points to clarify:


1) COMMUNISM?
In 18 years of American education I've never read a book or even an article about Communism. So I don't actually know what it means (got any good links?) It seems many people use the term in an instantly negative light (almost with unthinking jingo-ism and persecution) but honestly I don't know enough about Communism to judge it either way. You may be right that I'm a Communist, but I haven't really thought about that one very much. Just not interested in it I guess.

If it's any consolation, I prefer not to blindly adhere to any particular group very much, so if Communism is something that provokes strong reactions in you, don't worry, I'm not all that committed to it!



2) GOOD AND EVIL
I've been tracking down the first instances of Good and Evil in history, and the idea seems to have been created sometime around Roman or Egyptian mythologies. Christianity really took it up strongly from there. In my experience the concept is:
a) extremely subjective, varies greatly, and
b) depends completely on what goals someone has.

In simple terms, anyone who agrees/disagrees with your goals is considered Good/Evil. By you.

Religions that are highly controlling and dominating get especially good mileage from the concept. In most cases I've seen, the instant someone calls somebody else "Evil" is the instant they are about to do something very unjust to that person. If you want to do something atrocious, start by dehumanizing the enemy, and absolutely don't listen to them or understand their experience as a human being. Just call them evil, then you're free to do any evil thing you want to them.

The idea just seems more destructive than constructive, more ignoring than learning, and more self-promoting than helping. Being judgemental reduces ones ability to learn.

If you think I'm Satan here, just give me a couple of weeks to think of another idea, and everything will be okay again. I just think the concept and origin of Good/Evil is quite illuminating.



3) LABELS
To use your example of homo/heterosexual ... I believe there are 6 billion individuals on this planet, each with their own distinct and unique preference, style, personality and appreciation of the world. Condensing them all into two narrow labels grossly ignores who they really are. And it robs you of true knowledge about them. Why not just appreciate the fact that everyone is their own individual, and not one person is perfectly straight or perfectly gay? Instead of applying a label, why not just listen?


I certainly don't mean to offend anyone with these ideas.
I just find them very interesting, illuminating and powerful.

Ok, just to clarify, I'm glad you didn't take my "Communism" comments as offensive, I just see your thoughts as that far liberal lol

Now, first I want to greatly claim on "Labels" because I see a bit what you mean now and agree.

I don't think people should be labeled for the sake of "benefits" or "punishments"....I'm white, and a Man that simply is that, and ok to note.

But I don't like how the Liberals in this country 'label' people, they say, "Well you're a black man, so we'll give you this...you're a woman so you can do this..." they basically say that because you're of a specific group or such, that you need certain things to make you "equal".

We already are all EQUAL, and this is how republican's mostly view it, just because we don't all have jaguars, or mansions, doesn't mean we aren't all equal. They shouldn't have quotas, or political correctness, because this is contradicting "equality" by saying because you are of a group, you are not treated fairly and so need some special benefit such as money, or more rights or protections, or you need to change the language so "he" becomes "he/she or they"...see what I'm saying?

Now as for your ideas of Good and Evil.

Completely wrong.

Good and Evil has been around since man could write, way back in the lands of Sumer, where the origins of Adam and eve came about.

It actually is this which is why you see such a difference in the European "gods" and the Judaic "gods", because Europe didn't really have the concept of morality that the Judaic peoples picked up from the Sumerian peoples about 3000 years ago.

But Good and Evil has always been around in some form or another, just not always in the polar black and white as Christianity constructed it.

But it's been there, the idea of opposites, of Good being you doing as you should, and evil being you changing, and not doing as you should, which is a common concept among pre-literate societies.

People are not inheritantly liberal as we define it today, people try to find traditions, culture, and history that hasn't changed...hence myths. Myths essentially captured a culture and kept that culture the same for thousands of years.

Today it's as if the Democrats are forcing change on us, destroying American "myths", destroying American Culture, why? Because through differences they gain strength, without culture, we won't be saving our freedom.

It happend to Rome, they lost their history, because too many immigrants didn't know what Rome was about, it was about not having one man rule the nation.

When no one remembered about how they over threw the Etruscan king, and men would lay down their Dictatoral powers after their 6 months, the time was ripe for Empire.

And while I'm not sure if it is malicious intent, or just the way things are turning, it seems greatly that the Democrats are spuring a "Communist Empire."

After all, democracy in Germany before WW2 led to Hitler...it can happen.

So that explains a few things, but has NOTHING to do with this topic lol

reply to 5PoF
5PoF, as the originator of this post, I request that you make some attempt to stay on topic. It also will help you avoid embarrassing yourself with your ill-informed comments, which I think are full of prunes. I don't know if they result from your youth, which is understandable, or simply the parroting of misinformation learned from others, who are also full of prunes.

You will learn more and have more productive dialogues in this forum if you don't present yourself in such a bellicose and accusatory manner. Otherwise people won't take you seriously.

To get you back on topic, why don't you post your own list of 5 inventions and why you chose them?

BumbleBeeBoogie

Let's hear it for the lowly pencil.

Well said BBB, and well taken.
There may be different ways to evaluate the most beneficial inventions to humanity. Each method produces very different results.


1) What would life be like without it...

If a hoe was never invented, how would we ever have grown crops?
Surely most of humanity would never have been fed! But then, it's such a simple and obvious device, this logic is kind of ridiculous.


2) What an innovative and new concept, a complete invention ...

The electric light was very difficult to develop, but through determination and hard work Edison found just the right material and changed the world. It required some real inventing!


3) What effects have rippled through civilization because of it ...

The automobile has generated many peripheral industries that now depend on and promote it's use. The ease of transportation is quite nice, but some think a reasonable rate of growth (with horse and buggy) has turned insanely out of control (to develop and consume every resource in sight). The effects of the automobile are so huge that it's hard to judge the balance of effects it has had, how beneficial or destructive it has been. Are we in a state of balance, or are we careening towards the implosion of civilization as we know it?


4) What is valuable? In the human reality of what's really important, what has provided true value?

People love their families. People appreciate the Earth. The quiet moments, sitting in wonder or gratitude are what provide personal growth, knowledge, awareness, and conscious living. So, the art of meditation is a wonderful invention! It allows people to fully realize themselves, their mind, heart and full richness of being. It deeply catalyzes love. What material invention can come even close?


5) "Most benefiting humanity" sets up a human-centric view or judgement ...

Most things that happen in the world have absolutely nothing to do with human beings. But let's focus just on humanity. What has separated and isolated humans from animals more than anything else? Call it blindness or arrogance, call it divine destiny, but what has removed us from participating in the world and set us on a higher level of superiority, benefiting us above all other living things?

Ego. Our own identity, insecurity, and cravings have generated vast consumer demand, racial motivation, and the driving force behind our species to dominate and control others. Ego is a Great Invention, with a capital-G, because it's so very important to be Great.

Nature is scum. Humanity rocks! We're number one!



The question sets up the answer.
The criteria provides its own solution.
When you choose how to be, then you have already chosen what to see.

Nature isn't scum. How did you ever come to the conclusion, that Nature was scum?

reference?