The most influential humans in history
Who do you think are the 10 most influential humans in history?
Here is my list.
1. Jesus
2. Newton
3. Muhammad
4. Buddha
5. Confucius
6. Gutenberg
7. Columbus
8. Pasteur
9. Einstein
10. Maxwell
never thought about it. For me, the most important person in history is myself.
He said "influential." You said "important" about "yourself."
Literal defintion of only thinking about yourself. LOL!
Genghis Khan has to be up there somewhere
100% he should be top 5, along with Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar.
The head of admissions at the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts
Arnt all the prophets like Jesus all descended from Zoroaster?
Aristotle is a glaring omission
Oppenheimer
Napoleon is up there. He modernized all of Europe and the Napoleonic Code is the basis of laws in many countries today.
Solon
How are you defining "influential"? Jesus wasn't particularly influential, honestly, but his disciples and followers sure were. Is Jesus' supposedly dying for our sins the influential bit, or is the effective proselytizing done by the people who came after? Seeing how most of the information about his life is contradictory or unsupported, are we supposed to believe any of it? And if so, which bits? Far easier to argue that the people at Nicaea were more influential than Jesus, because they pruned and then promulgated a set series of Gospels which defined the Christian faith for 1500 years. I guess the question is, do you have to actually achieve something in order to be considered influential?
Guys like Socrates or Aristotle, whose thoughts have been studied and reinterpreted for thousands of years, certainly deserve to be up there. Augustus Caesar, who created an autocratic form of government which has been a political and cultural lodestone for two millenia, has to be considered too. Liu Bang (the first Han Emperor) created a dynasty with which modern Chinese still associate.
Jesus is influential as he planted the seed of Christianity. A seed starts out small, but grows large over time.
Then wouldn't you technically have to say any of the Hebrew prophets, too? They predate Jesus, and he doesn't come to exist without that foundation.... so technically you could argue they're the seed
Also, it is sort of debatable from a historians standpoint what "seed" he planted. After all, you see the massive proliferation of Christian sects with wildly divergent views - which of those is Jesus responsible for? All of them? If so, how can they all be so contradictory? Just one? Then are the rest not really Christianity? If you want to paint with a broad brush (in general), then you have to be able to reconcile those differences.
I believe that Catholicism is the fullness of the truth. Other Christians have some parts of the truth, but not the fullness of the truth.
Fair enough. I'd think that a better, or more defensible answer, might be Pope Leo I. His geopolitical involvement with the Huns, his assertion of Papal primacy, his theological contributions to the Council of Chalcedon - there is a strong argument (in my mind, at least, which isn't worth much in the end) that his achievements in many areas make him a more foundational figure for Catholicism and the Church than anyone before or since. His thought and actions started the Bishopric of Rome on it's journey to becoming the Papacy, laying the bedrock for Rome's secular and theological predominance, and given the massive impact of the Church as an institution on European history (and therefore the history of the New World, too), that seems pretty impressive to me
This is obviously debatable but I agree. Jesus only operated in his home region and spoke to the people there, but his disciples spread it to the whole world like mad. If anything Paul did more to spread it. But then they all did it in his name (and there's where the 'spirit' argument comes in, where Jesus guides them all in spirit) so it just depends on where you draw the line. Pretty semantic debate imo at the end of the day
This is a very autistic response. It’s like saying the sun isn’t actually influential, but rather the photons it emits.
It's called nuance. I know it is in short supply around here, but sometimes issues aren't able to summarized in a single sentence.
We have almost no idea what Jesus believed. We have no credible first hand evidence for anything he ever said. All we have are the carefully pruned and interpreted writings of some of his followers, many of which are contradictory. When you can sit here and tell me what it was Jesus believed beyond a shadow of a doubt, we can have this conversation. But since you don't know that, didn't bother to think about it, or do any of the extremely minimal mental leg work to get to that point, I sincerely doubt you'll be willing to put in the effort now.
Another science vs religion debate.
Setting aside the pedantic comments above, obviously Jesus is the most influential figure in human history. OP and others have brought up some good names, as well. Without rejecting the others, I'll throw out some ideas, in no particular order:
1) George Washington, who without the United States would likely not exist. (Really stupid people are like, "Der, George Washington founded America." Average people are like, "No, the stalwart Congress, in conjunction with the French, as well as the Atlantic ocean, and on-going conflicts in Europe, won the American Revolution." And really, really smart people are like, "Yeah, the colonies would not have won the war nor would they have won the peace without George Washington, who is essentially the founding father of the United States.")
2) Andrew Fleming, recognized discoverer of penicillin, and Edward Jenner, the first one in the Western world to observe and implement vaccination in an ordered way (forms of vaccination had existed for 1,000 years, including in the West).
3) Polish King Jan Sobieski, who led the defeat of the Ottoman Empire at the Battle of Vienna in 1683. This effectively ended the Islamic world's incursions into Europe.
4) Whoever invented the wheel. It's my understanding that the wheel was probably invented one time by one person thousands of years ago and made its way around the world (no pun intended). Even the brilliant empires of the Americas did not have the wheel, suggesting that the concept--while easily understood--takes a once in a millennium brain to abstract it out the first time, sort of like the concept of gravity--fairly easy concept to understand, but one person (maybe a tiny handful of people) in human history were able to abstract it out from nothing.
5) It's cliche now, but Nikola Tesla has to be up there with his alternating current.
6) Martin Luther, throwing off the shackles of the theologically wrong Catholic Church, which in it holds the fullness of nothing.
You have got to be kidding me. Martin Luther openly hated the Jews, he told monks that they could break their vows, and that salvation can be achieved by faith alone. Faith alone? Satan believes fully that God exists. It doesn't even make sense. Obviously good works will get you to heaven.
Oh, but you think because he pointed the finger at the Catholic Church for indulgences somehow makes him one of the most influential people in history? He caused a schism. He weakened the Catholic Church. The Catholic church is partially human; mistakes will be made. Luther could have handled his life a lot better and should not be considered of importance when talking about the most influential people in history.
Martin Luther was a raving anti-Semite. George Washington had slaves. I'm not saying Martin Luther was an important figure because he was anti-Semitic or that George Washington was important because he had slaves. You obviously understand this. Of course, the Catholic Church has been anti-Semitic for thousands of years, up to and including the present time as the Catholic Church preaches replacement theology (that the promises of God to Israel transferred onto the Catholic Church, which is incredibly prideful, not to mention anti-Semitic, an affront to God's character, and theologically absurd).
As to salvation by grace alone, I mean, the Catholic Church is just provably wrong, if you use the Bible as your source. "Obviously, good works will get you to heaven" is not Christianity. That's something--that's Islam, maybe Hinduism, Deism, Wicca, etc. But that's not Christianity.
Here is a small sampling of what Christianity is:
Romans 10:9: "If you confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
Titus 3:5: "He saved us, not because of righteous things we have done, but because of His mercy."
Ephesians 2:8-9: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast."
John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
Acts 16:30: "He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”
Romans 3:23: "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."
Philippians 3:8-9: "What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith."
Galatians 2:15-16 "We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified."
He literally was important and influential. The catholic church was beyond corrupt and acting horrendously. It was the epitome of theological corruption and ruling over poor people for money with the use of fear. You can't be seriously going back in time and calling people out for antisemitism lol. Core tenets of how Christianity started are diametrically opposed to Judaism itself; it isn't exactly unreasonable for a proper devout Christian, especially of that time period, to dislike Jews. That is irrelevant to him being influential though.
.
I would argue Mother Teresa was influential.
Napoleon
In an evil way, I would have to put Hitler near the top of list. A house painter convinced a country of people that Jews are responsible for their problems and do not deserve to live. T
In all fairness, Hitler didn't convince anyone that Jews were responsible for their problems. That goes on the Catholic Church. Antisemitism existed long before Hitler, Christian communities were massacring Jews on a fairly regular basis long, long before the Nazis. Hitler was just a better orator than most.
I think you are just splitting hairs here. His effectiveness as an orator lead to people implementing one of his objectives
Galilei, Euler, and Gauss have to be up there
Jesus is not confirmed as a real historical figure.
Confirmed or not, you have to be blind to say he has not had significant influence on the world.
Then why not Adam and Eve?
I think the consensus is that Jesus did exist. Whether any of what is written about him was something he actually said is debatable, and given the massive inconsistencies about him, I'd argue nothing Jesus "said" is historically reliable, but he was probably real.
Consensus among his followers, yes. Outside of that, probably not.
He's not CONFIRMED (as all things social science), but the scholarly consensus pretty darn near agrees that he existed historically. The Christ myth theory (that Jesus was just a fictional or mythical figure) is dismissed as a fringe theory. Many separate sources and letters other than the Bible talk about this man Jesus and even his crucifixion (so scholars also agree that he was crucified, historically)
Mind you, this isn't trying to press Christian theology at all. Just pointing out that historians and critical scholars agree that he existed. He can exist harmlessly
For those whose historicity is not in question (excluding the likes of King David, Abraham, Zoroaster, etc.) - the obvious choices are Napoleon, Jesus, Muhammad, etc. etc. I consider these individuals as having uniquely affected history - that is, it is unlikely that history would have progressed as it did had these individuals not existed. I make this distinction because I think discoverers (Columbus, Gutenberg, Newton) cannot be considered influential in the same light, because had they not existed - the discovery would most certainly have been made in a similar time period by someone else. You could, of course, argue that there would be others to take the place of the likes of Hitler, Napoleon, etc. - that they were merely the product of their time. However, our current historical timeline is uniquely affected by the actions they took - which are uniquely a function of their character. Implicitly I've assumed that we're considering influence "because" of one's character, not merely as a result of one's existence (e.g. Gavrilo Princip).
For maybe some figures that others have overlooked - Equiano, King John, Voltaire.
Sure, but I think some discoveries are uniquely a function of someone's genius.
I’d say many influential people are modern and have made significant advancements to society. Some that come to mind below:
Certainly, here's the list of influential entrepreneurs with the explanations, but with the order of numbers renumbered as requested:
Steve Jobs: Founded Apple. Steve Jobs revolutionized the consumer electronics industry with products like the iPhone and iPad. His emphasis on design, user-friendly interfaces, and innovation not only changed the way we interact with technology but also made a positive impact on multiple industries
Elon Musk: Created numerous ventures including Tesla, SpaceX and Neuralink, that have advanced innovation in space exploration, electric vehicles, and neurotechnology. His vision for sustainable energy and interplanetary travel has far-reaching impact for humanity.
Jeff Bezos: Founded Amazon. He transformed e-commerce and pioneered the concept of online retail. His focus on customer satisfaction and logistics optimization reshaped how we shop and paved the way for the growth of e-commerce worldwide.
Richard Branson: Founded the Virgin Group. He has expanded his brand into various industries to drive innovation in music, airlines, telecommunications, and space travel.
Henry Ford: Henry Ford's introduction of the assembly line revolutionized the automotive industry, making cars more affordable and accessible to the masses.
Sergey Brin and Larry Page: Founded Google. Sergey Brin and Larry Page created the world's leading search engine, fundamentally changing how we access and search for information on the internet.
This once again needs debunking. Elon Musk did not found Tesla, and SpaceX has done absolutely nothing to "advance innovation" in space exploration. It has spent a lot of government money on developing commercially viable rockets. That is it. The technology it is "developing" is not new, nor is the concept of a re-usable rocket. If you said that Elon Musk was doing more pioneering in the field of using social media to illegally impact the value of public securities, you'd be closer to the mark than with the above.
Again with you. It doesn't matter that he didn't "found" Tesla. He's the one who's responsible for building the company into what it is today.
No Ozy, your only correct statement is the fact that Musk was not the one who created Tesla.
However, he had a built a vision for a sustainable energy future. His leadership, ideas and marketing prowess had helped guide Teslas trajectory to become a leading company in electric vehicles & sustainable energy today. He was the one who steered Tesla in the right direction to become successful.
Velit laboriosam ut omnis et dolores. Eligendi reprehenderit aut sit consequuntur. Sed molestias doloremque quo repellendus. Est ad vel placeat id. Fugiat incidunt repellendus et vel vel incidunt sequi.
Voluptates eaque natus quidem nihil nihil veritatis sapiente et. Amet repellat qui delectus aut. Est sint rerum at vel et.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Quibusdam ut unde repudiandae exercitationem magnam voluptas quia. Modi in in consequuntur ut quis. Architecto fugit magnam numquam ipsum. Quis omnis itaque qui hic.
Ipsam mollitia omnis odio consectetur est. Sequi saepe corrupti voluptate. Incidunt animi commodi dolorem qui at. Quo dolores voluptas excepturi unde corporis et quia dolorum. Voluptas consectetur voluptatem et sunt non animi mollitia.
Mollitia ipsam perferendis blanditiis perspiciatis ex dolorem dolor. Ea earum laborum cum rerum qui quis atque placeat. Fugiat ullam enim labore vel laboriosam non. Aliquam voluptas rerum atque atque voluptatibus ea.
Quo quia eum eius enim aut. Aspernatur quisquam eos facere perferendis ipsum occaecati tenetur. Qui et est dolores ipsum culpa.