<p>Here's an interesting question I've pondered today:
Who do you consider more intelligent: </p>
<p>Albert Einstein (or any scientist you consider more intelligent)</p>
<p>OR</p>
<p>William Shakespeare (or any writer you consider more intelligent)</p>
<p>OR</p>
<p>Leonardo DaVinci (or any artist/architect you consider more intelligent)?</p>
<p>I like Michelangelo more than I do DaVinci. I’m not sure if i think he was more intelligent but I loved his work on the Sistine Chapel way more than the Monalisa. (idk bout my spelling)</p>
<p>Hm… tough question. </p>
<p>Isaac Newton > Albert Einstein > Richard Feynman > Alan Turing > all</p>
<p>This is ridiculous. They were all geniuses in their own right. You couldn’t expect Einstein to belt out a sonnet, Shakespeare to design a building, or DaVinci to understand physics to the point where he could bring up a new and brilliant idea. I somewhat get what you’re trying to figure out but really, they were are brilliant in their own way and comparing them would be like comparing apples and oranges (please forgive the stupidly trite expression).</p>
<p>Then what defines genius? Were they all equally intelligent at what they did?</p>
<p>^^Blaise Pascal ftw.</p>
<p>I would have to go DaVinci for his overall body of work.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is funny.</p>
<p>On second thought, I’m going to rank the three. DaVinci, then Einstein, the Shakespeare. Obiously, I think they’re all brilliant. I realized though that they’re ranked in opposite order of the subjects I’m good at. DaVinci had math, which is so out there for me I don’t even care, then science, which isn’t my best subject but can be interesting, and then english, which is one of my favorite subjects.</p>
<p>Maple, have you read “Meno?”</p>
<p>I would recommend that you read it. I think that you would like it:)</p>
<p>personally, I think Massaccio was “better” if only because he pretty much “invented” art
I always have considered Titian more talented than DaVinci, but I guess daVinci was more mathematical and stuff</p>
<p>^what’s it about?</p>
<p>DaVinci.</p>
<p>He is the most well rounded.</p>
<p>The rest are geniuses, but not as well rounded.</p>
<p>(imho)</p>
<p>Ewww. You’re attempting to classify intellectual capabilities based off of a mere technicality of deciding which field (science, literature, or art) is more intellectually intensive. Nu Nu Nu, bad Maple T_T</p>
<p>It’s oriented around philosophy.</p>
<p>^I’d agree with that. I think I’m jealous at daVinci for being such a beast.</p>
<p>I’m also jealous at Einstein for being able to play the violin and do crzay physics</p>
<p>I’m also jealous at Pascal for being a genius in science and philosophy</p>
<p>lulz it would be so crazy to meet someone like that</p>
<p>Einstein - he got all the girls. :p</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They were pioneers in their own field, save Da Vinci. As someone else said, you can’t expect Einstein to write a beautiful play any more than you can expect Shakespeare to discover the theory of relativity.</p>
<p>Da Vinci, on the other hand, was good at many things. IMO, the only thing he was BRILLIANT at was art. However, he had superior skills in many areas but could definitely not do physics at Einstein’s caliber. </p>
<p>So here’s the question: is it better to be particularly skilled at many things (i.e. a Renaissance man) or brilliant at one thing (e.g. Einstein/Shakespeare)?</p>
<p>^ And then you divide it further, asking whether intelligence is evoked more through the ability to analyze human nature and to write beautifully through it, or through the ability to not only build upon a foundation of knowledge but to also ascertain and correct any weaknesses in that foundation. </p>
<p>I like Da Vinci the most, though. Shakespeare follows, and then Einstein.</p>
<p>da Vinci by far. His ideas were centuries ahead of his time and his inventions, in many ways, far outshone his art. However, no one understood his inventions until very recently and therefore they aren’t nearly as well known as his art.</p>
<p>I’m not afraid to rank them.</p>
<p>1) Einstein - This man saw a flicker of God’s thoughts. His thinking was on a totally different plane. No can touch him.</p>
<p>2) Da Vinci - A truly dynamic genius. Extremely powerful and inventive mind. World class talent in many different fields. </p>
<p>3) Shakespeare - A world class playwright and innovative wordsmith. However, he was not world class in nearly as many areas as Da Vinci, and he never transcended human perception/thinking in the way Einstein did.</p>
<p>DaVinci. if he had existed in another time who knows what else he could have done?! also, have you looked at his sketchbook? [davinci</a> sketches - Google Search](<a href=“davinci sketches - Google Search”>davinci sketches - Google Search) that guy gives james jean a run for his money.</p>