Chris Langan - smartest man in the world

[Rick]

Here's my assessment of his type:

http://socionist.blogspot.com/2007/0...st-man-in.html

[Slacker]

I suppose that would explain my very negative reaction to him. I can't believe I watched all three parts of that youtube thing. The more I watched, the more I wanted to pull my hair out or vomit or something.

And I have underestimated the intelligence of LSIs before. They just don't "feel" smart to me for some reason.

[eunice]

I suppose that would explain my very negative reaction to him. I can't believe I watched all three parts of that youtube thing. The more I watched, the more I wanted to pull my hair out or vomit or something.

And I have underestimated the intelligence of LSIs before. They just don't "feel" smart to me for some reason.

All the LSIs I know IRL are very intelligent. I guess that's why they are so sure of themselves and think that they make the best decisions.

[Rocky]

I've been trying to understand, what's everyone's problem with this guy? For someone who is constantly told he's the "smartest" man in the world, he doesn't seem to be unordinarily self-centered. He says, "Do I think I'm better then everyone else? No, I still work in a bar." He also says he's open to the possibility of someone out there being smarter then he is.

Is it that most of you get defensive when other people are, allegedly, "smarter"?

[Angel von Himmel]

I've been trying to understand, what's everyone's problem with this guy? For someone who is constantly told he's the "smartest" man in the world, he doesn't seem to be unordinarily self-centered. He says, "Do I think I'm better then everyone else? No, I still work in a bar." He also says he's open to the possibility of someone out there being smarter then he is.

Is it that most of you get defensive when other people are, allegedly, "smarter"?

In my case it might have to do with having T in the ego block, same thing with slacker mom [I am pretty much as equally disgusted with the guy].

Other than that I think the problem most people have with him is that he seems to be very forceful of his theory. I mean, who wants some guy to stand around with a club or tazer ready to get you if you do not follow some predescribed theory he conquered up to make the world a better place? I think most people would want to just give the guy the finger and tell him to fuck off ... and rightly so.

[Rick]

I've been trying to understand, what's everyone's problem with this guy? For someone who is constantly told he's the "smartest" man in the world, he doesn't seem to be unordinarily self-centered. He says, "Do I think I'm better then everyone else? No, I still work in a bar." He also says he's open to the possibility of someone out there being smarter then he is.

Is it that most of you get defensive when other people are, allegedly, "smarter"?

I don't have a problem with this guy, actually, even though I think he is my conflicter. I could see myself having a few interesting conversations with him, nothing more. I think he's an interesting character.

[XoX]

I've been trying to understand, what's everyone's problem with this guy? For someone who is constantly told he's the "smartest" man in the world, he doesn't seem to be unordinarily self-centered. He says, "Do I think I'm better then everyone else? No, I still work in a bar." He also says he's open to the possibility of someone out there being smarter then he is.

Is it that most of you get defensive when other people are, allegedly, "smarter"?

I don't have a problem with this guy, actually, even though I think he is my conflicter. I could see myself having a few interesting conversations with him, nothing more. I think he's an interesting character.

I find him ok and intelligent in his own way (very "quick"). However I wouldn't trust his philosophies much. He seems like he HAS to develop some weird new philosophies because he is smart and they HAVE to be good because he is smart and smart people do good philosophies (or something). I'd rather spend a bar night with him than let him be my intellectual guide.

[ENFperator]

I've been trying to understand, what's everyone's problem with this guy? For someone who is constantly told he's the "smartest" man in the world, he doesn't seem to be unordinarily self-centered. He says, "Do I think I'm better then everyone else? No, I still work in a bar." He also says he's open to the possibility of someone out there being smarter then he is.

Is it that most of you get defensive when other people are, allegedly, "smarter"?

I don't have a problem with this guy, actually, even though I think he is my conflicter. I could see myself having a few interesting conversations with him, nothing more. I think he's an interesting character.

Well, same here. I don't have a problem with him too.

[Gilly]

Ever thought about the negative consequences of rapidly continued scientific development? What's applicable in one positive, constructive way (eg, nuclear power) can be used for something infinitely more harmful (nuclear weapons) than justifies its existence (if we are to take that saving human life is the good we are trying to acheive). Science is power, and people have enough power as is. The human race has demonstrated time and time again that it can only use such great power to ends involving its own degradation and destruction. If I agree with the smartest man on a single point, it's that people are just too dumb to be allowed to rule themselves, especially (IMO) with the responsibilities that they've created by continually advancing in technology.

In my personal belief, the answer is not more technology, but less.

When humans and their (relatively) recent ancestors lived in pre-agrarian society, they lived the most luxurious lives of any mammal ever in existence. Having the capacity for primative tools, as well as bipedal locomotion, early humans were able to make use of a range of resources unimaginable to any other species, and spent a fraction of the time that both other animals then AND humans NOW spend in obtaining food, despite our so-called "technological advances." Wouldn't you love to be able to hunt for just two hours a day, then spend the rest of the day playing and fucking? You'd be almost entirely rid of a large majority of modern health problems (obesity, general sloth and depression, heart disease, various cancers; the list goes on), would live a relaxed, sedentary lifestyle, and be much, much happier on the whole than humans today.

So, if you want to know how to REALLY make everyone happier, and (for all the lefties in the crowd) absolutely equal in every way, there's your floor plan. And gues what? It's just about as likely as world-wide medical and scientific cooperation.

[Rocky]

That's how every other animal lives. We live better because we're smarter then them.

[mikemex]

ESTj. Like most ESTj, quite intelligent in some areas, pretty dumb in most others.

[Gilly]

That's how every other animal lives. We live better because we're smarter then them.

Exactly, and if we could be satisfied with a simple lifestyle, we would live it with infinitely more ease than a) any other animal would or could, as well as b) the way we live today. The human capacity for complex symbolic thought is its biggest downfall, and at the same time biggest strength: it allows for great technological development and societal complexity, for sure, but it also complicates the desires and potential neuroses that create the needs that end up being fed by our developments. All things being equal, there would be no need to prefer one over the other: one has fewer desires and fewer means to fulfill them, and the other has more needs and more means to fulfill them. However, we must take into account the effects of our continuous consumption of natural resources, growing global population, and land development that come with these desires and our waning ability to meet them. Personally, I think the damage to the environment and its occupants far outweighs the benefits afforded by hyperstimulation and massive consumption, and as such, I would like to see a return to simple lifestyles, however unrealistic and hypocritical that may be; it is only both of those for the sheer fact that, as my pessimism and continued anti-idealistic hypocricy demonstrates, the human will necessary for such a conversion will never be on the side of a return to simplicity.

[Rocky]

Theoretically this guy should be Se + Ti. In his normal life he tries to act like a normal guy, no better or worse then others, just trying to make a living, experiencing life, etc... but in his privacy he escapes inside his mind to create models of the reality around him and so on. He doesn't seem forceful with ideas in everyday life, but seems extraordinarily confident about them.

[Gilly]

I think xSTj is clear. He seemded more "serious" to me than the LSIs I know; they would be more likely to appear to "think out" their sentences and articulate their thoughts intentionally, while this guy seems to shoot from the hip, explaining the relevance of whatever the conversation turns to, to his system, as opposed to directing the conversation in a particular direction. He responds quickly and forcefully to every question, making no attempts at humor or lightheartedness other than in admitting his own personal simplicity. He also seems to value Ne, and "holding the universe in my head" sounds like Te to me.

[Rick]

I can see some abstract reasons for LSE, but he doesn't at all fit my image of an LSE. He is too compact and too controlled physically and emotionally, doesn't try to relax in conversation or turn it into a 'fun' situation ( ), and doesn't seem to be oriented towards his listeners. (LSI is how I've typed him)

[FDG]

Theoretically this guy should be Se + Ti. In his normal life he tries to act like a normal guy, no better or worse then others, just trying to make a living, experiencing life

How this is related to Se?

[Rocky]

Theoretically this guy should be Se + Ti. In his normal life he tries to act like a normal guy, no better or worse then others, just trying to make a living, experiencing life

How this is related to Se?

How is it not? If you just met the guy without knowing who he was you would have no idea what's going inside his head. It doesn't seem like he wants to seem like this "great genius" (he even hesitates when asked that in the interview), he just wants to seem like one of the guys. He doesn't want to be an egghead. He lives a normal life.

[Rick]

Theoretically this guy should be Se + Ti. In his normal life he tries to act like a normal guy, no better or worse then others, just trying to make a living, experiencing life

How this is related to Se?

How is it not? If you just met the guy without knowing who he was you would have no idea what's going inside his head. It doesn't seem like he wants to seem like this "great genius" (he even hesitates when asked that in the interview), he just wants to seem like one of the guys. He doesn't want to be an egghead. He lives a normal life.

You might say he hides his unusual abilities. I think that is related to vulnerable .

[FDG]

Theoretically this guy should be Se + Ti. In his normal life he tries to act like a normal guy, no better or worse then others, just trying to make a living, experiencing life

How this is related to Se?

How is it not? If you just met the guy without knowing who he was you would have no idea what's going inside his head. It doesn't seem like he wants to seem like this "great genius" (he even hesitates when asked that in the interview), he just wants to seem like one of the guys. He doesn't want to be an egghead. He lives a normal life.

Again, how is wanting to be average, or living a normal life, realted to Se? You're referring to his unwillingness to promote his intellect, that I agree is realted to Se over Ne, however this doesn't imply that need for averageness can also be associated to Se.

Edit: Rick said it better

[Rocky]

Theoretically this guy should be Se + Ti. In his normal life he tries to act like a normal guy, no better or worse then others, just trying to make a living, experiencing life

How this is related to Se?

How is it not? If you just met the guy without knowing who he was you would have no idea what's going inside his head. It doesn't seem like he wants to seem like this "great genius" (he even hesitates when asked that in the interview), he just wants to seem like one of the guys. He doesn't want to be an egghead. He lives a normal life.

Again, how is wanting to be average, or living a normal life, realted to Se? You're referring to his unwillingness to promote his intellect, that I agree is realted to Se over Ne, however this doesn't imply that need for averageness can also be associated to Se.

Edit: Rick said it better

Then maybe I didn't make myself clear; I don't think he wants to be "average", I just don't think he wants to act intellectually superior around others.

[Dioklecian]

He is ENTJ, don't forget that IQ tests are culture specific

[aestrivex]

He is ENTJ, don't forget that IQ tests are culture specific

hmmm... maybe he might not be LIE after all...

[Dioklecian]

I don't see it as a context. I think he should pay me to tell him his type.

[krieger]

A bartender that is good at playing IQ-games. Overrated. I type him ESFp.

[Jarno]

He's LSI-Se.

though his intelligence is overrated. Very good at math, very lousy at everything else that requires a brain.

And also good at conflict seeking, but which LSI-Se insn't.

[Galen]

Some sort of ISTj makes sense.

[Exodus]

bump

Just watched the interview with him again today. This guy reminds me a lot of Ashton, believe it or not.

Yeah, I get that too. They have similar speaking patterns and voices. Perhaps Ashton is LSI.

[discojoe]

Yeah, I get that too. They have similar speaking patterns and voices. Perhaps Ashton is LSI.

No.

[martynas0708]

Type this person.

[krieger]

probably ISTj, but he is kinda *yawn*.

here's a real genius:



i think ESTj.

[martynas0708]

I would consider the opportunity of LIE.

[Esaman]

Having watched all 3 parts of the video I think he is an INTj.
He is Ti base, because he talks about logical philosophical framework through which to derive absolute ethics and basically guide all behavior.

probably ISTj, but he is kinda *yawn*

You can end up doing a job which sometime require Se even though it is your PoLR, but you can't end up voluntarily spending most of your time in abstract thought with Ne in PoLR.

I am sure he is not as good as he thinks he is and there are things in the video to imply that, but I am fairly curious about his other thoughts.

Edit: Not curious any more. He takes Intelligent Design seriously.

[Saberstorm]

I am not impressed. He is no smarter than any random raving forum member.

[717495]

probably ISTj, but he is kinda *yawn*.

here's a real genius:



i think ESTj.

Aww awesome. Yeah I can definitely see ESTj.

As for Langan, I think ISTj.

[Pa3s]

All IEs are different ways of abstracting and generating construals about reality.

Aren't abstractions of reality the inherent feature of all introverted IEs?

[Korpsy Knievel]

Aren't abstractions of reality the inherent feature of all introverted IEs?

Yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyes.

[Absurd]

My take on Chris Langan's type.

[golden]

For an interesting take on Chris Langan I recommend the section about him in Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers. And yes, I think ISTj could work for his type. I also don't think that he is *constantly* engaged in abstract thought, nor do I think that being Ne polr would make it impossible to spend a lot of time in abstract thought.

[Gilly]

LSI beyond a doubt.

[EyeSeeCold]

Rational, Introvert, Logical.

I could take LSI or LII, but his approach to discussion and his life seems more ST-like.