Should there be new categories for Nobel Prize?

Fields which aren't covered under existing scheme and could be recognized for their impact on future generations just like existing fields of Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Economics, Literature and Peace does. Maybe Nobel could be upgraded from a Swedish institution to a global one with additional funds.

These are the categories I think should be added.

1) Philosophy: If you can consider Literature's role in civilization growth then why not something more theoretical - a creative thought can spring from not only authors but also media, advertising, movie industry, schools and colleges.

2) Pure inventions: Why can't creative inventions be put in the same category as natural sciences?

3. Environment: A prize in this field would encourage people to improve on our present concern about environment. Before 1967, according to news archives when they added Economics, it wasn't even recognized as a proper university subject anywhere in the world but clubbed with other Humanities. Today, economists are consulted for each and every issue related to nations development and progress. Likewise, it is possible to put environment on the same pedestal.

5 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Pure inventions is not a good idea. The point of the Nobel Prize is to recognize and reward fields where there is little recognition or reward, yet a lot of importance. Inventions are certainly important. But they are already heavily rewarded, since if you make a great invention, you will make a lot of money selling it. And recognition also goes along with that in many cases. Do we really need to highlight the work of the person who invented the internet (thank you Al Gore) since we all know how important it is without such recognition? So inventions should not qualify for a prize.

    I doubt Nobel would have wanted a philosophy award since it is not easy to see how that betters humanity. It's a field for which there are no wrong answers and conflicting viewpoints can have equal merit. How would you pick an idea worth rewarding? How does that idea better society? I'm sure there are people who think that it does. But I don't see that personally.

    Environment is a pretty small field (in number of researchers, not in scope) and the research in it are already carved up into the other science fields that are rewarded.

    But hey, I'd be willing to allow number 1 and 3. I don't think they add anything, but I have nothing personal against them. Your number 2, on the other hand, should not be an award category.

  • subra
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I think all the three are only branches of the fields which are covered by Nobel prizes . For example all the writers are philosophers only in a way .

  • 1 decade ago

    Well Al Gore won a nobel for his work with global warming so they already sort of have an environment prize.

  • : )
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Who wants to go and talk to Nobel about it?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    lol yeah. They have a literature one, and no philosophy. how stupid. They need one for mathematics too.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.