The World's Greatest Idea

by Farndon, John

  Brought to you by KeVkRaY

  John Farndon is the author of many books on contemporary issues, including China Rises and India Booms (Virgin), and Bird Flu and Iran in the Everything You Need to Know series (Icon). He also writes widely for children, including the best-selling Do Not Open (Dorling Kindersley), and has been shortlisted four times for the Junior Science Book Prize.

  He is also the author of Do You Think You’re Clever? The Oxford and Cambridge Questions, also published by Icon Books.

  www.john-farndon-books.co.uk

  Published in the UK in 2010 by

  Icon Books Ltd, Omnibus Business Centre,

  39–41 North Road, London N7 9DP

  email: info@iconbooks.co.uk

  www.iconbooks.co.uk

  This electronic edition published in 2010 by Icon Books

  ISBN: 978-1-84831-248-7 (ePub format)

  ISBN: 978-1-84831-249-4 (Adobe ebook format)

  Printed edition (ISBN: 978-1-84831-196-1)

  sold in the UK, Europe, South Africa and Asia

  by Faber & Faber Ltd, Bloomsbury House,

  74–77 Great Russell Street, London WC1B 3DA

  or their agents

  Printed edition distributed in the UK, Europe, South Africa and Asia

  by TBS Ltd, TBS Distribution Centre, Colchester Road,

  Frating Green, Colchester CO7 7DW

  Printed edition published in Australia in 2010

  by Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd,

  PO Box 8500, 83 Alexander Street,

  Crows Nest, NSW 2065

  Printed edition distributed in Canada by

  Penguin Books Canada,

  90 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 700,

  Toronto, Ontario M4P 2YE

  Text copyright © 2010 John Farndon

  The author has asserted his moral rights.

  No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, or by any

  means, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.

  Typeset by Marie Doherty

  Contents

  Cover

  About the author

  Title page

  Copyright information

  Introduction

  The ideas

  #50

  #49

  #48

  #47

  #46

  #45

  #44

  #43

  #42

  #41

  #40

  #39

  #38

  #37

  #36

  #35

  #34

  #33

  #32

  #31

  #30

  #29

  #28

  #27

  #26

  #25

  #24

  #23

  #22

  #21

  #20

  #19

  #18

  #17

  #16

  #15

  #14

  #13

  #12

  #11

  #10

  #9

  #8

  #7

  #6

  #5

  #4

  #3

  #2

  #1

  The panel

  Introduction

  When the notion of writing a book entitled The World’s Greatest Idea was first suggested to me, my first reaction was that it was absurd. How can ideas as profound and complex as justice or logic or Marxism be reduced to a simple popularity contest? And what’s meant by greatest, anyway? Is the greatest idea the one that brought humanity the most benefit or the one that had the most impact? How can you say which is better – coffee or capitalism, marriage or monotheism? The whole concept is of course nonsensical – and so fatally flawed with contradictions that it is doomed to failure. And yet …

  There’s something rather beguiling about the notion of The World’s Greatest Idea, something that slyly seduces you into thinking about it before you can stop yourself and say, ‘Hold on; this is ridiculous!’ So this book is about yielding to that temptation. And if you do yield, I hope you will find, as I did, that it is actually a thoroughly fascinating game.

  Ideas matter. They shape our experience of the world. They bring us good things and bad. They alter our lives for better or worse. They change our beliefs and our hopes for the future. Ideas such as fire, metals and pottery dramatically changed how we live. Democracy and capitalism established fundamental principles underpinning the way society is run. Ideas such as the abolition of slavery and feminism are vital attempts to right a wrong. Each one of these ideas is important and has had a huge impact on humanity, whether good or ill.

  That makes them worth thinking about, and that’s at the heart of my aim in writing this book – to provoke thought. In writing each of the entries, I haven’t simply argued the case for it being a great idea. Indeed, it won’t always be obvious whether I personally think it’s a great idea or not. Instead, what I’ve done, I hope, is provide food for thought, with some of the background to the idea and its impact on the world as well as some of the arguments for and against.

  There are lots of footnotes (some quite long), not because this an academic treatise in which every statement needs careful qualification or reference, but because often it can be a little aside, an extra snippet of information, that actually triggers ideas. This is not a book full of answers, nor even opinions; it is simply intended to spark ideas and give readers enough material to get them thinking about what really matters – which ideas we really need and which we can do without.

  There is another purpose, too, which is to simply revel in humanity’s ingenuity – to appreciate the wealth of brilliant ideas that people have had through the ages. There are so many things we take for granted – from tea and refrigeration to logic and romance – that someone, somewhere actually introduced to the world. And it’s worth raising a glass to them – and therein lies another great idea.

  For similar reasons, the range of ideas in this book is entirely arbitrary. There is no attempt to rigidly define what is meant by a ‘great’ idea or even an ‘idea’. It was compiled entirely on the basis of a straw poll among a panel of experts, each of whom had their own reasons for their choice. The result is extraordinarily eclectic, and we have ideas both as basic as sewerage and as high-flown as quantum theory.

  My own initial view when writing this book was that a great idea would be one that changed the world for the better. But as I came to explore the ideas, I realised that very few ideas are unmixed blessings, and even ideas I think are damaging are often worth giving some time to.

  After the list compiled by the panel and myself was finalised, we set up a website and invited visitors to the site to vote for which idea they thought was greatest. The entries in this book are ordered to reflect the results of that poll. The online voters put the Internet top which is quite extraordinary. The Internet is indeed an amazing an idea, and has had a huge impact on the way we communicate in the brief time it’s been around. But is it really the greatest idea ever? Is it really greater than logic or democracy or the abolition of slavery? Or does it rather reflect the demographic of the voters who put contraception third and marriage bottom?

  What do you think?

  To get you thinking, here’s a selection of comments from contributors to the website:

  ‘To pick an easy target, monotheism is listed as one of the top fifty. For all their noble beliefs and ideals, it is easy to argue that different monotheistic beliefs’ inability to accept one another have caused more grief and suffering than any other single thing in history and, quite possibly, still do. Somehow we would like to feel a great idea should be positive, but quite a n
umber are very double-edged. Ironically, however much suffering it has caused, it would be hard to find an idea that has had a greater impact than monotheism, so if impact is a measure of greatness then it deserves a far better vote, even though many could argue that the impact has far greater negative value than positive.’ David Macdonald

  ‘Just because an idea hasn’t yet become reality, it doesn’t mean it can’t be great. Time travel and teleportation seem great ideas – which if ever realized would seem sensational. And how about ideas for a better world? Thomas More’s Utopia, Einstein’s vision of a world government, Martin Luther King’s dream? And maybe even Marxism, since it has never been realized in the way Marx envisaged. No, they’ve never happened, and may never do, but they remind us that great ideas can give us a vision of a better world, better things, and give us goals to aim for, whether it’s how to make a self-cleaning house or how to bring world peace.’ John

  ‘Surely the invention of anaesthetic would have to be one of the greatest ideas ever? Can you imagine life beforehand, when even the most minor surgery or dental procedure could be agonising?’ Susan

  ‘It’s so obvious to me what the world’s greatest idea was. It’s amazing that nobody has put it forward yet. If you’re looking at ideas that completely changed the world and that we couldn’t live without and which everyone uses every day, then it’s got to be…..Mathematics.’ Geoff H

  ‘Psychoanalysis should definitely be on the list. Think of how much it’s changed the way we perceive ourselves!’ Helena H

  ‘Hope isn’t remotely wishy-washy. You could argue that it’s not exactly an idea, but the conceptualisation of it is. And where would we be without aspiration and vision? None of these other things would be possible if we didn’t have the possibility of imagining change. We’d still be fighting each other for the best cave.’ Sarah W

  ‘I think the greatest idea was time telling, or time measurement. Humans evolved a “time consciousness” that is far superior to that of other mammals. We have superior memories, and we also have superior foresight. Somewhere along the line, a human must have decided that dividing time into intervals, and measuring or marking these intervals in some way, would be useful. Indeed, if you combine time measurement with foresight (which is influenced by memory), you get planning.’ Anon.

  ‘Most definitely the Holodeck. Depending upon your relationship with the space/time continuum, it may be that the Holodeck has yet to BE invented. However so, placing this virtual technicality aside I’d say this magnificent potentiality is by far the greatest idea. In fact, I had tea with Philip Ball on the Holodeck just this morning!’ Amy

  ‘As much as it pains me to say this, my vote went to mass production. It completely changed the shape of society and how we function in our day to day lives. I wouldn’t say it’s been entirely positive idea, but does the greatest idea of all time have to be?’ Currie

  ‘Mass production? But surely the greatest idea has to be something that has facilitated humanity’s progression? Mass production is responsible for making and continuing to keep over half the world’s population below the poverty line. Also why did monotheism make it, but Hinduism didn’t? Surely it should just be religion?’ NK

  The Ideas

  Abolition of Slavery

  The Aerofoil

  Arable Farming

  Banking

  Bread

  Calculus

  Capitalism

  Coffee and Tea

  Computer Programming

  Contraception

  Copper and Iron

  Democracy

  Electricity Grids

  Epic Poetry

  Evolution by Natural Selection

  Feminism

  Government

  Honour

  Hope

  The Internet

  Laws of Motion

  Logic

  Marriage

  Marxism

  Mass-production

  Monotheism

  Music

  Pottery

  Printing

  Qi

  Quantum Theory

  Refrigeration

  Romance

  The Sail

  The Scientific Method

  The Self

  Sewerage

  Simplified Chinese

  The Steam Engine

  The Stirrup

  The Telephone

  Universities

  Use of Fire

  Vaccination

  Weaving and Spinning

  Welfare State

  The Wheel

  Wine

  Writing

  Zero

  #50 Marriage

  ‘Marriage is a great institution,’ said Groucho Marx, ‘But who wants to live in an institution?’ Groucho was wrong, of course. Nearly 100 million people around the world volunteer to be incarcerated into the marital asylum every year. In some countries, the popularity of marriage is dropping slightly. In the UK, for instance, the number of single adults exceeded the number of married adults for the first time in 2007, but more than a third of singles had been married previously (divorcees and widows). But for most people, everywhere in the world, marriage is still the normal experience.

  A hundred years or so ago, many anthropologists believed that marriage was quite a new thing. They believed that in prehistoric times sexual relations were a free-for-all, and some even argued that this was the ‘natural’ way for men and women to behave. Who knows if this was some kind of wish-fulfilment, but there is actually no evidence to suggest that this was so at all. Marriage is the norm in all recorded history, and so it seems to be in most ‘primitive’ tribes around the world. Of course, marriage takes different forms, but it always involves a publicly recognised union between a couple who undertake to live together for life.

  Anthropologists have various explanations as to why people would marry even in the simplest of societies, but there are several powerful benefits. First of all, it’s good for the stability of society if people get married. If people remain unattached, there’s potential for at least a lot of stress, if not conflict, as people continually compete for sexual partners. Once two people are married, it’s clear they have made their choice and other single people must look elsewhere. That doesn’t prevent married couples ‘having a fling’, of course, but at least it sends a clear message. It also makes it clear who is responsible for looking after any children and, in theory, assures women that the burden is going to be shared.

  Then there are also powerful personal reasons. People want to make a choice and demonstrate their commitment to one person. Lifelong pair bonding is common in many animal species and it seems that this is how we humans like it, too. We want to have the kind of emotional bond that marriage provides and also the close companionship through life. Of course we can survive by ourselves, but the boon of a constant partner to share both troubles and joys is something few people would want to miss out on. The statistics in modern society are telling. Single people suffer far more from illness, far more from depression, and die younger than married people. Marriage is not a guarantee against loneliness but it certainly helps.

  Of course, our perception of what marriage means has been hugely coloured by history. As soon as people began to live in settled societies, it became entangled in legalities. To avoid disputes over property ownership, for instance, it was vital that it was clear who the legitimate offspring were. Marriage provided a simple framework for legitimacy. For the same reason, adultery, especially by a woman, became deeply problematic, and often criminalised. Gradually, as society became more and more complex, marriage gathered an increasing burden of problems, tied mostly to the protection of property. Among the upper classes in particular, the high stakes involved in property meant that in many cases couples couldn’t be free to make their own romantic choice, but marriages had to be arranged for them, along with very elaborate financial agreements. The result is that marriage, for many people, became a business deal rather than a personal and emotional
choice.[1]

  People used to modern Western attitudes to marriage as, essentially, a romantic union would be surprised by how pragmatic couples were about this. For a woman, marriage provided security and the reassurance that she and her children were going to be recognised and provided for. For a man, it was a reassurance that any children were his own, and also offered the comfort of a companion and helpmeet to look after the house. It didn’t necessarily matter that your spouse wasn’t the target of your romantic dreams. Countless men had mistresses and concubines to satisfy that side of their nature, without necessarily leading to the divorce courts. It was more of a problem for women, of course, because extra-marital relations could muddy the inheritance waters. Women became increasingly disadvantaged as the need to preserve legitimacy placed more and more control in the man’s hands, eventually often making even the woman herself his property.

  All of this, though, was essentially a problem for the moneyed classes. Among poorer people in the West, property wasn’t such an issue. Men and women married, or had their marriages arranged for them, and generally lived well together. The husband husbanded the land and their meagre resources outside the house; the housewife looked after things in the house, and brought up the children. It was, on the whole, companionable and practical.[2] There were surely many problems and times of stress, but people rarely divorced over romantic difficulties; couples were too dependent on each other and the stakes were far too high.