I don't think people 'chasing legacies' are generally concerned with whether 'most people' are remembered, that's exactly the point isn't it? Standing out?
A better 'problem' to point out might be the timespan over which few legacies that are remembered originate. 'I want to be the Tutankhamen of my time' is all very well, but there's no reason to think there will even be one.
Some people have tamed fire, invented wheel and overcame population bottlenecks. We don't know their names but their legacy is profound.
As a counterpoint, if they hadn’t done it, someone else would very likely have done it. Individual artworks would be a more unique legacy.
Re:Life is not short
by datavirtue on Monday June 27, 2022 @09:35AM
(#31894405)
Exactly. Inventions, knowledge, and other things are all inevitable--rediscovered and recreated from scratch each time. Art is our only unique contribution/feedback to the universe.
If you subscribe to determinism, all art pieces are also inevitable.
Quite clearly if population bottleneck wasn't dealt with noone else would be left to do it.
Re:Life is not short
by EUV071STR48 on Monday June 27, 2022 @06:48AM
(#31892762)
Sure, someone else would have overcome it. Could have been just around the corner. You don't know.
> overcame population bottlenecks
Their names were Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch.
Problem with this statement is that what matters after someone does really doesn’t matter to that person after only before, also, on a long enough time span nothing will matter after. Does what most people did 3000 years ago matter? 10000? A million? I wouldn’t chase legacies