Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 1 month ago

I heard an atheist say that Stephen Hawking was smarter than Isaac Newton. Isn’t that ridiculous?

55 Answers

Relevance
  • 4 weeks ago

    what do you mean by smarter, knowledge of your surroundings or problem solving, either way you have to give it to hawkings, hundreds of years of advanced technolgies, maths,and cosmology things that would look like magic to newton.

  • 1 month ago

    does it really matter at this point

  • 1 month ago

    Nobody is claiming atheists are smart, but you have to admit that claiming a return of a deity that never shows up is kinda stupid.

    • Gloria
      Lv 7
      1 month agoReport

      Stupid - only to those who are impatience and not ready to accept the inevitable.

  • 1 month ago

    Peter Gore Seer,

    Poor Stephen At The End Of His Life I Became Smarter, Being Smarter Is A Race To A End.

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 1 month ago

    Many atheists tend to admire fellow atheists and their thinking. Isaac Newton, a devout believer in God and the Bible, lived before Mendeleev, who invented the periodic table. Yet, he felt that it was worth it to study alchemy, turning lead into gold. He may not have known that lead (period 6, atomic number 82) and gold (period 6, atomic number 79) were very close to one another on Mendeleev's table, but he undoubtedly knew that they had similar chemical qualities, which had to be made clearer in the 17th through 19th centuries when many elements were discovered which filled out most of our current table.

    What Newton had in terms of accumulated scientific knowledge in 1687 (when he wrote his first edition of the "Principia") was far less than his 20th-21st century atheistic Oxford colleague. Yet he established in that one work an entire body of knowledge that still holds true and is useful today, and he wasn't finished. We can't historically say the same thing for what Hawking produced in terms of his production of scientific knowledge.

    But as has been stated by other answerers, you really can't compare them in terms of "smartness"- they were undoubtedly both much smarter than your average person, but there are too many variables that such an evaluation cannot control.

    In my personal opinion, having greater knowledge of what Newton discovered as opposed to what Hawking discovered, I think that in view of the lesser amount of knowledge that he had at his disposal, and the tremendous staying power of his many discoveries, my opinion is that Newton has the upper hand in terms of using what knowledge he had to produce far, far more. Also, who is to say that ideas that Hawking promoted might later be proven wrong, as alchemy was?

  • 1 month ago

    How does atheism come in to play here?

    • Diogenes
      Lv 7
      1 month agoReport

      Most modern atheists have a significant scientific education, that's how.

  • Cowboy
    Lv 6
    1 month ago

    At least Hawking was right about alchemy and god.

  • Caesar
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    There is something ridiculous in that question for sure but is nothing about atheism, Stephen Hawking or Isaac Newton.

    Did you read about Newton's religious views In Newton's eyes, worshipping Christ as God was idolatry, to him the fundamental sin'. As well as being antitrinitarian, Newton allegedly rejected the orthodox doctrines of the immortal soul, a personal devil, and literal demons. Like many contemporaries he lived with the threat of severe punishment if he had been open about his religious beliefs. Heresy was a crime that could have been punishable by the loss of all property and status or even death...

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    Newton also believed in Alchemy.

    Anyone who thinks you can turn Lead in to Gold isn't that smart.

    • Roberta B
      Lv 6
      4 weeks agoReport

      Anonymous, hindsight is 20/20. You are looking at Newton through 21st century eyes.

  • 1 month ago

    That depends what definition you attach to the word 'smart'.

    Another problem is trying to compare intellectuals from different centuries.

    A third problem is relating how Stephen Hawking had to stand on the symbolic 'shoulders' of the scientific 'giant', Isaac Newton, in order to see further than Newton could see.

    What is ridiculous is making bland, meaningless statements without providing substance to make a logical case - for anything. Let's show due respect for both men, who were brilliant in their own fields of scientific endeavour.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.