TED Conversations

Kevin Brian Carroll

This conversation is closed.

Would you keep it to yourself or give it away to someone who had already achieved the fame required to promote it to the world?

If you had uncovered the truth about reality (and humanity's unique role within it) and it was very much capable - as a initiating notion - of launching subsequent metaphysics and physics breakthroughs, but you had never prepared your life to be viewed as a credible messenger/educator within that specific cultural sphere, would you persist in trying to break this revolutionary notion as its author, or would you quietly hand it over to a much more notable individual whose claims of authorship would be much more successful in gaining widespread interest in the notion itself?

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Feb 9 2012: You know, your question reminds me of what Muddy Waters said about the Rolling Stones:

    "They stole my music but they gave me my name."

    I've always thought it is one of the saddest sentences ever uttered in the history of mankind; just imagine all the invisible things in between those words. Although there are discoveries in this world that are simply too great to keep them to yourself, try keeping your name with yours.
    • thumb
      Feb 10 2012: Sadly, the world of big ideas is just as competitive as the world of great music. Fame is the motivator for most who achieve it, and those who've always had that fire in their belly are the ones who we all know and look to for our cues on how to live, love and interpret reality.

      Let's assume that this specific premise has the power to lift this public mahatma's profile into the realm of people like Einstein, Tesla, Buddha and Newton. And let's assume that this person is fully aware of what awaits him/her in fame and public accolades, and that this is what has motivated that person to make this deal.

      In other words, they'll be taking your music and your name, leaving you with only the knowledge that you could not have ever seized the headlines for your breakthrough that this person can seize, due to the career that he/she has already established in the given field of study. You'd be required to simply walk away and try to stay away from that field of study forever.
      • thumb
        Feb 10 2012: I am no scientist or engineer, so I do not know what it takes to be Einstein, Tesla or Newton. If it was that fire in their bellies that had made Muddy Waters and the Buddha who they were, no amount of teaching could have been given to anyone else to fully live out their talents and ideas except themselves. It would have been utterly "immoral" of them to walk away with such a fire that is bright enough to illuminate part of the world, if not all of mankind. What other way would they have chosen otherwise?
        • thumb
          Feb 13 2012: I honestly have no idea what allowed those men to be associated with their notions, but I do know that in our modern world, if you haven't been raised within or working within a specific "industry" (like music, film, academia, elite business) then you simply cannot barge in and set up shop. In the world of esoteric sciences (most call this field Metaphysics) you need to claim a divine guidance or supernormal capacity, and be able to convince the established hierarchy within the field of your capacity, if you want to be taken seriously. You certainly can't offer proof that there is a non-mystical, intellectually accessible foundation from which all of it rises. There are careers at stake for these folks, and since a non-mystical, intellectually accessible foundation would naturally cross contaminate the fields of theology, philosophy, religion, quantum physics and every siloed segment of physical science, you'd be dealing with thousands of careers on the line. In this modern world, the impact of breakthroughs leave a much more profound crater, and this would be why a Buddha or a Newton would probably be less likely to spring from nowhere - then again, Buddha was an Indian Prince (there's your pedigree in his case) and Newton was a well know academic as an adult, and had already focused his entire life in that regard. His initial breakthroughs were within the very tight confines of math, and later theories were generally associated with that discipline. Certainly not his heretical dabblings with biblical prophesy interpretation, and therein lies what I'm suggesting - that unless you've already become established in a filed of inquiry, your breakthroughs in that field will never be acknowledged or even given a fair airing.

          Those men didn't have to walk away from their bright fires. And yet, how many others have had to? We'll never know, because we never learned about their bright fires. We only know about the ones who were allowed to present those fires.
      • thumb
        Feb 14 2012: Life sure is a gamble, isn't it?
        • thumb
          Feb 14 2012: For most of us, yes, it is. For some, not so much. Luckily, this is just a development phase, but we can still screw it up. That said, it does take more than one false move to fail completely.
      • thumb
        Feb 16 2012: From what I've learned, skydiving is one of the safest extreme sports around. I'll say: go for it, brother.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.