
New book suggests Arthur Conan Doyle based Moriarty on George Boole - ddoran
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/could-sherlock-holmes-s-true-nemesis-have-been-a-mathematician-1.3694917
======
Luc
Based on what is in the article I wouldn't call this a very strong thesis.

"[...] numerous persuasive similarities. Both characters held chairs at small
provincial universities; both won appointments on the basis of outstanding
early work; both had interests in astronomy; the two were of similar
appearance"

These coincidences are supposed to be persuasive? I know several people like
that. Plus the photograph and the illustration are nothing alike!

"[...] Boole was a man of high morals and excellent character, a social
reformer, religious thinker and family man. The new book by MacHale and Cohen
presents extensive arguments that may account for the dramatic contrast
between the two characters."

I haven't read the book but that's some damning praise. The arguments are not
persuasive, but at least they're long!

~~~
winchling
Come come, surely it must be the case that _either_ Moriarty was based on
George Boole _or_ he wasn't. Tertium non datur!

------
EGreg
Has anyone ever thought that he based Watson’s final opinion of Holmes as “the
best, and wisest man I have ever known” on the words of Plato about Socrates?

Plato: “the wisest, and justest, and best of all men whom I have ever known”
(Phaedo).

I love finding these little connections (like a detective) while reading or
listening to classics.

Like for example anyone play piano here? Earlier this year I finally heard the
Beethoven Emperor Concerto and realized that Schumann’s “Carnaval” the whole
theme of David is taken from that concerto!

Talk about imitation :)

------
DoctorOetker
Some of you may like this interview with Arthur Conan Doyle, he explains why
he created the Sherlock Holmes novels

Rough summary: previously the detective genre had detectives ultimately point
out the perpetrator without actually explaining to the reader how and why they
came to this conclusion, i.e. the detectives and perpetrators were simple
roles in a story, and the story never actually described the process of
investigation, which the Sherlock Holmes novels did, irrespective of whether
they were realistic or not... Then he starts ranting about spirituality and
ghosts and other quackery, like his own "experiences", ... I guess fantasy has
its positives and negatives

[https://youtu.be/rZFdH76H1lA](https://youtu.be/rZFdH76H1lA)

------
Kurtz79
"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how
improbable, must be the truth."

I'm sure Boole approved of that.

Fascinating how these two contemporaries achieved immortal fame through
completely different disciplines.

I wonder if in 100+ years people will rememeber prominent writers or
scientists of this age?

~~~
jacobush
At least the giants, like Jacqueline Susann and Harold Robbins.

~~~
kksskkss
Never heard of those and I do read a lot so they hardly qualify as giants even
though they have had their share of success. Stephen King, on the other hand,
is probably not going to be forgotten any time soon (I find his books dull tbh
but nobody cares about my opinion :).

~~~
mijamo
Posterity does not work like that. Many authors who were popular disappeared
completely from memory, while other who were relatively unknown became
extremely popular decades after their death.

Academics play a major role in what we remember about more than 100 years ago,
much more than actual success when the book was published. Octave Mirbeau was
much much more popular than Marcel Proust when they were both active, but you
probably know much more about the latter.

------
YeGoblynQueenne
>> Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s first Sherlock Holmes story appeared in 1887.
Holmes’ remarkable conclusions were based on data, logic, statistics,
probability, deduction and proof.

Actually, they were based on logical _abduction_. Not deduction.

 _Abductive reasoning (also called abduction,[1] abductive inference,[1] or
retroduction[2]) is a form of logical inference which starts with an
observation or set of observations then seeks to find the simplest and most
likely explanation. This process, unlike deductive reasoning, yields a
plausible conclusion but does not positively verify it._

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abduction_(logic)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abduction_\(logic\))

~~~
DoctorOetker
to be entirely fair, it's not how we teach math and logic to students and
readers, but all our axioms (which we still can't verify) are the result of
abductive reasoning. Sometimes we discovered that a specific abductive
reasoning was superfluous and could be derived from other axioms, turning the
ex-axiom into a theorem. So the current axiomatic systems and their
applications _seem_ entirely deductive usages, but the axioms are in fact
still of an abductive nature... this is much more visible in domains like
physics, where the teeth of time has not yet gnawed as thoroughly as in the
foundations of mathematics...

Edit: just adding: Some day physics might appear like an entirely deductive
system (apart from a very small set of axioms or postulates), and hard to
discern from the field of mathematics

------
clouddrover
I'm sure Arthur Conan Doyle drew from a number of influences to create
Moriarty. Adam Worth and Jonathan Wild are considered inspirations for the
character, for example:

[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/review-of-the-
na...](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/review-of-the-napoleon-of-
crime-the-life-and-times-of-adam-worth-master-thief-144917066/)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Worth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Worth)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professor_Moriarty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professor_Moriarty)

~~~
simplicio
There isn't much to the character in the Doyle stories, and he serves more as
a plot device than a well developed character. So I kinda think people are
trying to hard to find a RL souce for the character. Most of the brief
treatment Doyle gives the character can be explained as plot driven.

He's super-intelligent and evil because he needs to be a worthy enough
opponent to kill of Holmes. He's a Prof at a small University because he needs
a job that both proves his intelligence and is prestigious, but gives him
enough time to run a criminal empire. He runs his criminal enterprise via a
web of intermediaries because if he was directly involved Holmes could just
report him to the cops instead of needing a complicated plan to roll up his
criminal network. The specific references to his scientific work might be
inspired by some specific scientists, but it seems at least as likely they
just sounded to Doyle like the kinda thing a 19th century mathematical genius
would get up to.

------
mywacaday
I always though that his death was bit cruel
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Boole#Death](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Boole#Death)

Died at a young age due to old a lack of medical understanding.

I'm also from Cork and the phrase "What ails you cures you" is still used but
normally in the context of a hangover and the suggestion being to go get the
hair of the dog.

I wonder what current medical/scientific beliefs will seem as far fetched in
the year 2172.

------
cvaidya1986
“Everything I have to say has already crossed your mind." "Then possibly my
answer has crossed yours.”

------
Upvoter33
... and Boole is the great great grandfather of Geoff Hinton (back
propagation, etc.). The plot thickens!

