I have 2 thoughts on this:
1) Jordan Peterson. I'm so against him being on the list. Lots of his advice is just common sense in psychological “You get motivated by action.” Duh. But beyond that there's countless examples of him pulling shit like
this. There's some admirable qualities of his or things he's done: like his ability in having open and honest debates or his analysis of Hitler, or him pointing out basics things like the reverse racism of saying things like "all white men are oppressors". But I fail to see him being worthy of being on such a list tbh.
2) Just like the human mind can't imagine/generate a color it has never seen, so too it can't generate anything else - every thought, reasoning, idea, shape, sound comes from a combination of previous inputs. Which is why I think it can't be understated how highly we should value and appreciate the "fathers" of things. Father's of physics, philosophy, math, science, engineering, etc., - if we could name them, they deserve to be on such a list.
I don't agree that the complexity of an idea is indicative of how difficult it was to think of. For example, I'd value - people figuring out that the earth is round thousands of years ago from just the shadows of lunar eclipses - as more difficult than todays satellites built. I'd value the pythagorean cup as more complex than a tomorrows skyscraper. For that reason I think there should be a very few names listed from the last few centuries. Newton, Tesla, Einstein - I think it's theories and discoveries like that which should be worthy on the list, when it comes to more modern names.