Think about it....
2006-12-21 19:12:31 · 13 answers · asked by shadycaliber 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
You are suggesting perhaps that the more people think, the more they realise how much they do not know, and how many different shades of opinion exist?
This draws close to Bertrand Russell:
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
But Russelll also pointed out the escape from utter doubt and loss of opinion:
"When one admits that nothing is certain one must, I think, also admit that some things are much more nearly certain than others. "
2006-12-21 19:58:17 · answer #1 · answered by Pedestal 42 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. That doesn't make sense. The very act of thinking means you have an opinion. If they have no opinion then they're not thinking & they couldn't be the greatest thinkers!
I think, therefore I am opinionated! Tee hee
2006-12-21 19:27:24 · answer #2 · answered by amp 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I don't beleive this is true, the truth of the matter is that they focus the majority of their time on seemingly useless efforts that in the end seem to be the greatest of aid to mankind. I mean primitive scientists were carving up animals to study even two hundred years, believed to be in their day to be insane, but then they came up with the study of anatomy and the following medicines created. Great thinkers have many opinions and ideas, merely they don't wish to gain recognition from them, fame or wealth. They merely do it for their own pleasure and give little care as to the criticisms of others, and if it helps society, than it helps, or it doesn't, they give little thought on the consequences.
2006-12-21 19:13:39 · answer #3 · answered by Zidane 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, because all the greatest thinkers ~have~ had opinions. They may have been open to new ones or changed theirs, but they are remembered for their opinions & points of view. (Other than Buddha, who purified all points of his view and didn't technically need to 'think'.. :-P)
2006-12-21 19:15:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think of i could would desire to disagree with all your evaluations. Duran's resume is staggering, so is Foreman's. Roy Jones could have have been given knocked by ability of between the super all time punchers in middle or easy heavy, ie. Bob Foster. Tyson would desire to no longer knock out any heavy weight, he could have in no way been able to triumph over HolyField. Ray Leonard is the between the little doubt sickest quickest dudes ever. Joe gans isn't the GOAT, Ray Robinson is. Joe Louis won't beat lots of ATG's, yet he could fare ok against them, a high-quality Bowe is plenty to dumb to triumph over a high-quality Lennox Lewis, Hagler is the wonderful yet somebody could have beat him by ability of selection finally.
2016-12-11 14:09:02 · answer #5 · answered by lillibridge 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its not that they don't have opinions. Its that they are always prepared to be open-minded enough to reject those opinions in their search for truth.
2006-12-21 21:03:05 · answer #6 · answered by Dwain 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no.... it is not true that the greatest thinkers have no opinion at all.....they have opnion after their death & not at present time........example are--SOCRATES,GALLILEO........
2006-12-21 20:06:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i believe so becuz they know everything and knows nothing about a thing!
2006-12-21 19:16:38 · answer #8 · answered by livinhapi 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not no opinion. But ' no bias'.
2006-12-21 20:28:57 · answer #9 · answered by doo doo 2006 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i cant say nothing about that,
2006-12-21 19:24:13 · answer #10 · answered by Byzantino 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋