Now, may be I'm wrong,
and indeed need some illumination on this, Yet:
Nobel always cite the WILL of Late Mr. Alfred Nobel; and it seems, one sentence that makes the terms both impossible condition & contradictory, and that seems to have been also modified by the executors as well, without being explicitly mentioned and signed by the testator w.r.t. modification; and that is, to execute the WILL: during the ‘preceding’ year, have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind…..for….Important Discovery OR Invention in: Physics, Chemical, Physiology/Medicine, Literature (outstanding work in Idealistic direction), Abolition reduction of standing armies/establishment and promotion of peace congresses/advance fellowship among the nations.
Firstly, it’s mentioned the ‘Year’ and not YEARS, with the term preceding it ‘Preceding’ i.e. immediate, with no ‘Posthumously’, been defined. Thus, this is a dilemma, as this is an impossible condition. If the dictionary meaning for ‘Greatest’ is defined as well above the average, which according to me should be corrected; as we ain’t talking about good of all time but the greatest of all time, which, again is impossible to be found every preceding year? Correct? And there are many instances, wherein, the award has not been bestowed every year, passed on to subsequent year.Secondly, there are awards that
neither successfully created peace congress, nor, in reduction of standing
armies/establishment. Several examples are present! Wherein, the idealistic
direction is: unrealistically aiming for perfection. Achieved?
To compile all these things, could this be achieved every year? Impossible terms being asked. As had that ought to have been true, things wouldn’t have been under the stress! 😊
© Pranav Chaturvedi 2024