This will be an unranked market to determine the 16 Philosophy and Religion contestants who will compete in the Manifold G.O.A.T. Tournament round of 64.
Subject to my final approval, the 16 candidates who have the most individual YES holders at the time of market closing will resolve YES, and all other candidates will resolve NO.
The percentages do not affect the outcome, only the number of individual YES holders.
My final approval is based on a few factors:
1. They are a documented historical figure.
2. If a person is nominated in two separate categories, I will resolve both as YES, but choose the next highest rated answer from either of those categories as an alternate, so they are not represented twice in the bracket.
The 16 chosen answers will move on to compete in this market:
/houstonEuler/who-is-manifolds-goat-round-of-64-p
Other Nominations:
/houstonEuler/which-16-business-and-culture-candi
/houstonEuler/which-16-politics-and-governancecan
/houstonEuler/which-16-science-and-technology-can
Related questions
๐ Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | แน869 | |
| 2 | แน314 | |
| 3 | แน193 | |
| 4 | แน133 | |
| 5 | แน107 |
@ZacParker No, I'm considering the categories as very loose guides for nomination, rather than strict qualifiers, because some people likely wouldn't fit in any category if they were treated explicitly.
I would veto any fictional characters, but other than that, am willing to let Manifold determine who qualifies as what, as those candidates will still have to perform in the G.O.A.T. tournament.
If there are any specific questions about a candidate, I'd be happy to answer them.
I'm not voting or betting in this market, but if there are any ties after the market has closed, I will be the tiebreaker.
I would be happy to offer my opinion on any potential ties in the comments.
I resolved Laozi N/A, because it's a consensus view among scholars that they did not exist.
@SanghyeonSeo made a convincing argument that his non-existence is obvious, which is why I made this decision.
@houstonEuler From discovery of Mawangdui and Guodian, I believe it is modern scholarly consensus that Laozi did not exist.
@ZacParker No, I'm considering the categories as very loose guides for nomination, rather than strict qualifiers, because some people likely wouldn't fit in any category if they were treated explicitly.
I would veto any fictional characters, but other than that, am willing to let Manifold determine who qualifies as what, as those candidates will still have to perform in the G.O.A.T. tournament.
If there are any specific questions about a candidate, I'd be happy to answer them.
I'm not voting or betting in this market, but if there are any ties after the market has closed, I will be the tiebreaker.
I would be happy to offer my opinion on any potential ties in the comments.
@Panfilo I wouldn't expect Hegel to be popular among rationalists, though the other two are more likely.
Literally not a philosopher. What are we doing. Smh. Just ceding this to the religion section.
Can we add Mozi?
ETA: nevermind, I realized I could add him myself.