Talk:Pythagoras

Deleted content

He was the first man to call himself a philosopher, or lover of wisdom. Many of the accomplishments of Plato, Aristotle and Copernicus were based on the ideas of Pythagoras. Unfortunately, very little is known about Pythagoras because none of his writings have survived. Many of the accomplishments credited to Pythagoras may actually have been accomplishments of his colleagues and successors.

I have deleted this.

The very first claim is specious at best, useless and confusing at worst: without being backed up by a clear primary source, there is no need to make a mention of it. It is also confusing, as we don't know whether a historical or a modern context is being put upon the term philosopher: 'philosophy' in the 6th Century BC referred to an investigator of natural principles (e.g. Thales, Anaximander, Democritus). Ipso facto, the person who wrote this may not be translating with a view to clarity: it would be far more clear for a reader today to be told that "he was the first man to call himself a scientist" or some other term approaching the idea of an investigator into nature. But even beside the contextual problems, why is this even noteworthy in an introductory paragraph? And is it true? Several other pre-Socratics approach calling themselves philosophers, as Heraclitus hints in writing that "men who are lovers of wisdom must be inquirers into many things." The second statement is a spill-over into the first statements mistake. Pythagoras had a strong influence upon Plato's metaphysics as well as later mathematicians and astronomers. That is not to say he made their achievements possible. The last two statements then contravene what the former two sentences have wagered. It is rather a mess.

I will keep this removed from the article until it is brought up to snuff or there is a robust reason for why it should be kept. across the synapse 19:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

See my comment immediately above yours. Primary sources for Pythagoras as introducer of philosophos include: Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, 5.3.8-9, Diog. Laert. 1.12, 8.8, Iamblichus VP 58. I've added the citations to the article & done a modest bit of additional pruning to reflect your concerns about some of what is admittedly crap in what you removed. But be more careful & less confident with "specious at best" etc.—the primary source for philosophos was in fact already included in the article's first footnote! Wareh 19:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

He was the first man to call himself a philosopher, or lover of wisdom

I saw this scentence and was wondering if we could authoritatively state that, before Pythagoras, nobody in the world called themselves a philosopher or a lover of wisdom. Instead of such a blanket statement, I felt a scentence that mentions this within the context of the reference material or of the region would be right. Sudarshanhs (talk) 17:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

He was the first man to call himself a philosopher, or lover of wisdom

Actually, Pythagoras was the first to use the term 'philosophy.' Perhpas this could be used instead? Winderful1 (talk) 15:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Pythagoras in Miletos?

According to The Histories by the Herodotus, book V, chapter 126:

"126. This was the counsel of Hecataios; but Aristagoras was most inclined to go forth to Myrkinos. He therefore entrusted the government of Miletos to Pythagoras, a man of repute among the citizens, and he himself sailed away to Thrace, taking with him every one who desired to go; and he took possession of the region for which he had set out."

Herodotus mentions Pythagoras in his Book IV, chapter 92 as "Pythagoras the son of Mnesarchos". Therefore it looks like Pythagoras lived in Miletos, too. Do you know some other sources confirming/rejecting this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.127.65.104 (talk) 18:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

"Roles" of numbers in decad

I've removed this material, since it was unsourced, and the "roles" assigned to the numbers do not, by and large, agree with the epithets that appear in the Iamblichan Theology of Artithmetic (listed by David R. Fideler in Appendix II of Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie, The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library, ed. David R. Fideler [Grand Rapids: Phanes, 1987]). If a good source for the removed material exists, it can be readded. Deor (talk) 21:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Young man line?

According to the articule Pythagoras was a young man when Polycrates took over Samos yet according to the dates Pythagoras would have been about 30. Not really young.

572 B.C minus 538 B.C

~~Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.20.158 (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

First reference to Pythagoras in 2nd cent. CE?

This would explain the lack of reference to a man Pythagoras until 150 AD, given that he would have been of interest to contemporary philosophers (Aristotle referred to the so-called Pythagoreans).

What about Livy's (died 12/17 CE) mention of him? Roberts translation from Wikisource:

His master [Numa's] is given as Pythagoras of Samos, as tradition speaks of no other. But this is erroneous, for it is generally agreed that it was more than a century later, in the reign of Servius Tullius, that Pythagoras gathered round him crowds of eager students, in the most distant part of Italy, in the neighbourhood of Metapontum, Heraclea, and Crotona. (1.18)

Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.186.86.199 (talk) 20:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

And what about Heraclitus and Xenophanes--both contemporaries of Pythagoras who mentioned him (and apparently as a man--known to them by reputation if not in person):

[This book] (see p. 48 and following) goes into some depth about the references to Pythagoras in Xenophanes and some other contemporaries and near-contemporaries.

This paper talks about the Heraclitus/Pythagoras material:

“Heraclitus' Critique of Pythagoras' Enquiry in Fragment 129,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 35 (2008), 19‑47.

The paragraph on sources is undoubtedly correct that later sources invent the "classical Pythagoras" and attribute to him all sorts of improbable things. But it's goes a little overboard when it suggests there are no references at all to Pythagoras as a person early on--even contemporary.

Bhugh (talk) 06:03, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Quite right. Herodotus mentions Pythagoras (Histories, iv. 95), as does Plato (Republic, 600 AB). I've removed the offending passage. Singinglemon (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Pythagoras was phoenician, not greek!

he was not a greek. hes father is from tyre , a phoenician mercant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.80.10.252 (talk) 14:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Your source? BlackPearl14^{[talkies!•contribs!]} 01:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

HIS FATHER MNESARHUS IS A CLASSICAL GREEK NAME —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.103.222.135 (talk) 20:15, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

no historic record writes his father was a phoenician.he was a agreek merchant in phoenicia.his name shows that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.103.222.135 (talk) 20:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Tetrachtys -> Tetractys

Perhaps Tetrachtys should be Tetractys? Bayle Shanks (talk) 09:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Nice catch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.49.8.244 (talk) 18:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that there is no image of the Tetractys on this page, and I think it would help if there were an illustration, since it's described but it's difficult to visualize. I can't add one myself because I don't have a registered account and the page is semi-protected, but here is the link to the one in the commons, so someone else could add it: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/66/Tetractys.svg/200px-Tetractys.svg.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.81.159.202 (talk) 21:30, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Pythaogras -> Pythagoras

And perhaps Pythaogras should be Pythagoras? (I'd have edited this myself, it the page weren't protected from vandalism...) sunadirE (talk) 01:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - done. --Annielogue (talk) 16:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

King Arthur

Read the article on King Arthur. Nowhere is the Arthurian legend presented as fact. The legend was created in romances over half a millenium after he was said to have lived. Those writing it knew it so, even if they prefaced it with "the following is based on real events from real history", Dan Brown stylee. Of course, there may have been a dude called Arthur, and he may have been a King, but if so, the Arthurian legend is no more likely to contain correct biographical facts about historical Arthur than a treatise on the tomato. If there are any, it is coincidence, not good history.

And yet the biographical facts in this article on Pythagoras are presented with authority. 'Pythagoras lived at 34 Greek Street' , 'Pythagoras liked to cut his sandwiches into triangles', 'Pythagoras invented playing cards'. Nobody knows! The legend of the dude Pythagoras was created by romantics 500 years later. These guys knew they were doing so. The story of the bean eating hippy Pythagoras is certainly a popular one to repeat, but not a real history. If there was a dude Pythagoras in the Pythagoreans , you are about as likely to find correct biographical facts about him in the article King Arthur than in this one.

Most of this article should be moved to the Pythagoreans, which also needs some scepticism. The bean-eating hippy legend can be repeated, but not presented as truth. Wikipedia, writing something down does not make it true. —Preceding unsigned comment addedby Matt me (talk • contribs) 10:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Sarmoung Brotherhood

n Studies in Comparative Religion (Winter 1974), it is said that according to the Armenian book Merkhavat, the Sarmoung Brotherhood, also referred to as the 'Inner Circle of Humanity', originated in ancient Babylon circa 2500 BC,[2] at around the time the Egyptians built the Great Pyramid of Giza. The Ouspensky Foundation state that the brotherhood was active in the golden Babylonian time of Hammurabi (1728-1686 BC) and is connected with Zoroaster, the teacher of Pythagoras (born c. 580 BC–572 BC, died c. 500 BC–490 BC). According to the Foundation, Pythagoras stayed for twelve years in Babylon.[3]; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmoung_Brotherhood Wblakesx (talk) 23:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Weasel Language / Edit Request

"...however some have questioned the scope of his contributions to mathematics and natural philosophy." This is vague, baseless, and obviously weasel language.72.200.108.251 (talk) 01:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

True. WP:SOFIXIT. Dicklyon (talk) 04:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

(I agree...)

(1) Please improve the 2nd paragraph to the parent article (i.e. the second lead paragraph) For starters, Please make the following changes:(a) Move the key sentence "It was said that he was the first man to call himself a philosopher, or lover of wisdom,[refferance 4] and Pythagorean ideas exercised a marked influence on Plato, and through him, all of Western philosophy." to the beginning (head) of the paragraph - i.e place it 2nd to the indroductory sentence: "Pythagoras made influential contributions..." (b) Improve the lengthy sentence: ("However,..."; currently the 3rd sentence in the paragraph) change to "However, because legend and obfuscation so cloud his work (even more than other pre-Socratic philosophers) many question the authenticity of his ascribed contributions." [the words 'to mathematics and natural philosophy' are redundant and slow the pace of the article]...

(2) Please remove the word 'Allegedly' (under the 'Influence On Plato' section; 1st paragraph) and place the introductory remark "Tradition has it,..." at the beginning of the first sentence.

(Thanks; that's all; Keep up the good work.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seipjere (talk • contribs) 17:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Clean-up attempt

I made a partial attempt to clean-up this article. I added a section on the (un)reliability of the sources to the top of the article. It's been taken from the beginning of the 1870 Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology article on Pythagoras. I rewrote the Life section; again, just pulling bits and bobs from the DGRBM article as I saw fit. I haven't done much to the rest of the article, although I deleted a couple of outlandish paragraphs and sentences, and I rearranged the article extensively. The section on Pythagoreans has no citations, and is a bit too uncritical for my tastes, but for now, I've moved it further down the article. This had the advantage of bringing the only really-well-written bit of the article upwards - the section on the Pythagorean theorem. Singinglemon (talk) 21:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, since it had no references, I decided to rewrite the section on Pythagoreans as well, using some of the material which was there before. It's not great, but I hope the page as a whole, looks more reliable now. Singinglemon (talk) 21:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit request from 94.173.119.63, 30 March 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

The yellow animation demonstrating pythagoras theorem ends with a mistake in the final equation. It should be a plus sign, not a minus sign, between the squares of the shorter sides.

94.173.119.63 (talk) 21:48, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a plus sign to me. Perhaps you need to adjust your monitor display. Deor (talk) 22:26, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks right to me. It is a plus sign, though the Vertical line | is much more bold than the Horizontal line ^_ . Unless I am mistaken.

N Not done since it seems there is no need to. ^Avicenna_sis @ 22:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

signs of confusion...

Hi folks,

Furthur to my post about the yellow Pythagoras Theorem animation plus sign, which I now realise must have seemed somewhat ridiculous;

OK, sorry to doubt that you hadn't checked the article for simple errors... I do beg your pardon.

After first checking my own sanity, I have checked using another browser on my computer and indeed the sign is now shown as a strong black plus. It is also showing as a somewhat lighter plus sign when the gif is enlarged using the browser ( Safari 1.3.2 ) I originally viewed the article with. However, for some reason when the animation plays through in the small size at the side of the main article page using this browser version it shows as a minus sign - I kid you not. Changing screen resolution does not help. Perhaps it is something to do with the browser version not displaying the particular font characters correctly at small sizes.

Anyway, thanks for a great animation and your time. I'm just tucking into a large plate of humble pie.

Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.173.119.63 (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Shape of the earth

I though Pythagoras was one of the most prominent early proponents of the Spherical Earth concept. If so, maybe we should mention that in the article about him. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

There are almost no reliable facts known about what Pythagoras thought, and that's especially the case for the mathematical and scientific doctrines which were later fostered upon him. I see the Wikipedia page on the Spherical Earth does credit him with this. The idea apparently comes from Diogenes Laertius, viii. 48:

He [Pythagoras] was the first to call the heaven the universe and the earth spherical, though Theophrastus says it was Parmenides, and Zeno that it was Hesiod.

James Evans (The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy, page 47) says about this passage: "the statements by later Greek writers merely reflect the propensity for attributing every discovery to one or another of their ancient wise men." Charles H. Kahn, (Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans: a brief history, page 53) just says that "the spherical earth is a distinctive innnovation of the Western [i.e. Magna Graecia ] cosmological tradition in Parmenides and Empedocles, whereas the Ionian tradition preserves the flat earth." Both Evans and Kahn agree that the idea may have originated in the Pythagorean school, but nothing more. We can add this to the page if you like, but with the health-warnings too. Singinglemon (talk) 15:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I've not updated this page, but I've updated the page on the Spherical Earth to indicate the doubts about ascribing the idea to Pythagoras. Singinglemon (talk) 19:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, if Pythagoras is taking undue credit, let's go back to what the sources say. It sounds like his 'school' adopted someone else's good idea. --Uncle Ed (talk) 02:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 69.196.66.216, 28 April 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

69.196.66.216 (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2010 (UTC) he is a very handsome man who is a eqyptian and was a mathematician. Nothing is known about him

Thanks for your thoughts; however, we only add information from reliable sources.  Chzz  ►  19:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

N Not done

'Pythagorean motto': "God is ever a geometer"

In researching the history of Greek gematria - the alphanumeric quality of a language - we are pointed to Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans. There is an ancient Greek motto: "God is ever a geometer" (ἀεὶ ὁ Θεὸς ὁ μέγας γεωμετρεῖ), whereas, counting the letters of the words (3,1,4,1,5,9) reveals the first six digits of pi (3.14159). This confirms that 'Step 1' of Greek gematria is simply counting the number of letters in a word/name and that 'Step 2' is the gematric sum of a word/name. There's a question of whether "God is ever a geometer" is rightfully accredited to Pythagoras, the Pythagoreans, or to Plato?

- Brad Watson, Miami, FL 65.34.180.54 (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 81.30.240.226, 17 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} there are a few spelling mistakes in the article on Pythagoras, so I feel the need to correct them.

81.30.240.226 (talk) 12:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done: Welcome and thanks for wanting to improve this article. This template is used to allow a non-autoconfirmed editor to make changes to a semiprotected article using another editor as a proxy. Please specify what you want changed in a 'please change X to Y' degree of detail and someone will make the changes for you, unless there is a problem. Thanks again, Celestra (talk) 13:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes

This article is one of a number (about 100) selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Penfding changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC).

"strange" results of a Y! search took user to a Wiki archived page, "talk: pythagor......", ad nauseam....

Bold text

...a search for "bogus string theory" offered few results, and too, Wiki ppl might (convivially?) ponder this and related results, etc.

--dave

75.250.7.74 (talk) 06:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

In Our Time

The BBC programme In Our Time presented by Melvyn Bragg has an episode which may be about this subject (if not moving this note to the appropriate talk page earns cookies). You can add it to "External links" by pasting {{In Our Time|Pythagoras|b00p693b|Pythagoras}}. Rich Farmbrough, 03:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC).

Edit request from 24.5.240.215, 8 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Please change the Date of Birth and Date of Death from "B.C." (Before Christ) to "B.C.E." (Before Current Era)

That is all.

24.5.240.215 (talk) 01:53, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Declining request per WP:ERA—either abbreviation is acceptable if used consistently throughout an article. Deor (talk) 02:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: See above. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 02:35, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Junks, 20 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} in the section, Influence on Plato, the link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Western_Philosophy should point here instead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_Western_Philosophy

Junks (talk) 15:43, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Done   — Jeff G.  ツ 16:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 82.22.255.145, 4 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Hi, I'm female,and if I wanted to read up about a Mathematician, Pythagoras, I don't see why I have to be told women (50% of the population) are common property. You state many women were part of the Pythagoras group, but you imply they were there for non-academic reasons, which you have no right to do. The quotes are unrelated (you state different sources) put together to make (until you come up with evidence) an inaccurate statement.

Please change 'The claim that they put all their property into a common stock is perhaps only a later inference from certain Pythagorean maxims and practices.[55] On the other hand, it seems certain that there were many women among the adherents of Pythagoras.[56]' to 'The claim that they put all their property into a common stock is perhaps only a later inference from certain Pythagorean maxims and practices.[55] It seems certain that there were many women among the adherents of Pythagoras.[56]

82.22.255.145 (talk) 18:58, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for that. I've made an edit which I hope removes any possible confusion. --Annielogue (talk) 22:14, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Sumerian's Discovery of a^2+b^2=c^2?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/science/23babylon.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=homepage —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.21.108.30 (talk) 00:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

The Babylonians' familiarity with the concept of Pythagorean triples (and speculation about whether they had a proof of the theorem) is already mentioned and sourced in the Pythagorean theorem section of this article and in the "History" section of the Pythagorean theorem article, where an image of the same cuneiform tablet pictured in the NYT article appears. What is your question or suggestion? Deor (talk) 01:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Pythagorean Hammers

I was having a difficult time finding anywhere on the internet the truth about the Pythagorean hammers; the story is clearly mythical, but everyone treats it as scientific truth (probably because the truth of the perfect proportions can be so easily demonstrated with strings that most people do not question whether the same would be true for hammers, or not). Anyway, fixed now, and I gave two sources. Terez27 (talk) 16:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 January 2012

i want to write the origination of phytagoras theorem that how dd it come into existence and how did he found that This is the origination:- One day phythagoras was drawing the same with some stick,he found that if a square is drawn on each side of 3-4-5 triangle,the area of the 2 small squares added together equals to the area of larger square He examined it with other right angle triangle and it true with them too.6²+8²=10² the set of 3 numbers viz (3,4,5) (6,8,10)(9,12,15)came to be know as phytagoras triplets

Vaibhavmav (talk) 17:50, 12 January 2012 (UTC)