I think my poor vocabulary is highlighted in this essay.
"In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field." (Time limit: 45 mins)
A scientist, a leader, a doctor - these are examples of people who leave lasting impressions in their respective fields. Most of them pursue their fields after being motivated by others who had taken the same paths before them. They are propelled towards their goals by others who had already reached those goals. However, to assume that others, who are not inspired by past achievements in their chosen fields, cannot make noteworthy contributions would be wrong. Such an assumption would disregard the cases which, amongst others, include contributions which were firsts in their fields, fortuitous discoveries, or those that are made indirectly.
First of all, the statement downgrades the meaning of the word "pioneer." A pioneer is someone who proposes something that has never been thought of before. Therefore, pioneers are not influenced by the past achievements, but rather influence others who will work after them in their pioneered field. When Newton and Leibnitz invented calculus, they were not influenced by the work of others. Similarly, before Einstein, no one had given any thought to the reality that is known as relativity. Such examples are scattered over history which disprove the given statement.
In scientific fields, we also encounter something known as a serendipitous discovery or invention. A serendipitous discovery is an unintentional discovery. It is something which takes place by chance. One of the most famous examples is the discovery of the drug penicillin. We all know how significant penicillin has been for the human race. A serendipitous discovery may not take place in the intended field, but it may still be significant.
The quote also ignores people who make valuable contributions in an indirect way. Let us consider the case of philanthropists who make donations or take part in charity. Usually, the donated money goes to some sort of organization like a cancer research center, children's home, etc. Now, the people donating the money may not have any idea how cancer research is done or how to run a children's home, but they are still making a significant contribution, although not directly.
It is clear from the above examples that a contribution in a field can be significant even if the contributor has not been affected by history of that field. While usually, people are more determined to do something significant when they are inspired by the feats of others in that field; it is not the necessary criterion. As explained above, for a significant change to occur, all that is necessary may be as simple as pure luck.
"In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field." (Time limit: 45 mins)
A scientist, a leader, a doctor - these are examples of people who leave lasting impressions in their respective fields. Most of them pursue their fields after being motivated by others who had taken the same paths before them. They are propelled towards their goals by others who had already reached those goals. However, to assume that others, who are not inspired by past achievements in their chosen fields, cannot make noteworthy contributions would be wrong. Such an assumption would disregard the cases which, amongst others, include contributions which were firsts in their fields, fortuitous discoveries, or those that are made indirectly.
First of all, the statement downgrades the meaning of the word "pioneer." A pioneer is someone who proposes something that has never been thought of before. Therefore, pioneers are not influenced by the past achievements, but rather influence others who will work after them in their pioneered field. When Newton and Leibnitz invented calculus, they were not influenced by the work of others. Similarly, before Einstein, no one had given any thought to the reality that is known as relativity. Such examples are scattered over history which disprove the given statement.
In scientific fields, we also encounter something known as a serendipitous discovery or invention. A serendipitous discovery is an unintentional discovery. It is something which takes place by chance. One of the most famous examples is the discovery of the drug penicillin. We all know how significant penicillin has been for the human race. A serendipitous discovery may not take place in the intended field, but it may still be significant.
The quote also ignores people who make valuable contributions in an indirect way. Let us consider the case of philanthropists who make donations or take part in charity. Usually, the donated money goes to some sort of organization like a cancer research center, children's home, etc. Now, the people donating the money may not have any idea how cancer research is done or how to run a children's home, but they are still making a significant contribution, although not directly.
It is clear from the above examples that a contribution in a field can be significant even if the contributor has not been affected by history of that field. While usually, people are more determined to do something significant when they are inspired by the feats of others in that field; it is not the necessary criterion. As explained above, for a significant change to occur, all that is necessary may be as simple as pure luck.
