Feb 9, 2007

IQ and Socionic Type: The Smartest Man in the World

What socionic types would you expect to have the highest IQs?

How well does IQ reflect your ideas of intelligence?

What is intelligence?

These are some things to reflect upon when viewing this video about the smartest man in the world - Chris Langan - who has an IQ of around 195:
part 1 - part 2 - part 3 (around 10 minutes each)

I have an opinion about his type. What do you think? (please comment)

I will present my version of his type in exactly one week, on February 16th.
___________________________________________________________

VOTE COUNT (voting now closed!)

We have 8 votes here:
ILE
ESE
LSI - 2
SLE
LIE
ILI - 2
Visitors are pretty sure he is a logical type (7 out of 8) and are split 50-50 regarding rational/irrational, extratim/introtim, and sensing/intuition.

If we add votes from the thread at the16types, taking care not to count people's votes twice, we get the following combined statistics (counting only the clear votes where people gave one version):
ILE -2
ESE
LSI - 3
SLE
LIE
ILI - 3
LSE - 4
(also given as alternate options were EIE and SLI)
Now everyone is basically certain he is a logical type (14 out of 15), and a slight majority thinks he is extraverted (9 out of 15), rational (9 out of 15), and sensing (9 out of 15).
___________________________________________________________

AND MY VERSION IS...

First, let's work on formulating our observations from the videos and try to find some words and phrases we think would describe him well, and some that would describe him poorly.

Describe him well:
- tough
- controlled
- self-contained
- [potentially] controlling
- not easily intimidated
- physically confident
- demanding thinking style
- coherent thought processes
- highly verbally proficient
- highly confident of his own judgments
- prone to make harsh judgments
- even, matter-of-fact speaking style
- restrained smiles and laughter
- uses some crude comparisons
- prefers strong statements

DO NOT describe him well:
- meek
- mild
- emotional
- externally expressive
- fidgety
- flighty
- finicky
- easy-going
- light-hearted
- bubbly
- bursting with ideas
- tangential
- wishy-washy
- constantly on the move
- unconventional appearance
- distant
- absent-minded
- dreamy
- imaginative
- enjoys speculation
- unsure of himself physically

Note that most, but not all of these traits are closely related to socionic types and dichotomies. We are simply "flexing" our observation muscles and making sure we are able to generate accurate descriptions of the person we are studying, regardless of how we diagnose his type.

That being said, I am convinced he is an LSI.

In my opinion, Langan's most outstanding trait is his sense of controlledness of behavior and thought. He continually submits his thoughts and behavior to certain strict bounds, of which he is highly aware. This is an expression of introverted logic. Every thought is carefully and confidently expressed. There is no room for doubt or vacillation (there may be in his worldview, but it is not a part of his dominant behavior). Thoughts are clearly delineated and judgments are well thought-out and often harsh and absolute. His movements are well-controlled and contained and convey a sense of restraint and confidence. No wonder he is a convincing bar bouncer.

Langan frequently demonstrates extraverted sensing - not only via his "mobilized" physical state, but also in his speech. He makes frequent use of strong words and phrases like "I booted his ass out of the house" and "our country is led by a bunch of dunces." Such phrases and their accompanying intonation show agressiveness and a readiness to back up one's words with decisive action or force if necessary.

Here's Wikipedia's biography of Langan for additional insight.

47 comments:

Anonymous said...

first it might be unfair to divorce from the race the Sensing and Ethics orientated types..*
leaving Thinking and Intuition in the running.
(forgetting Extratim and Itratim axi)
*(a hypothesis statement would be that there outgrowth that would extreme high competence and therefore 'intelligence' in spheres)

next i would involve a second discrimination:
any Intuitive and Thinking type with a second function of Ethics or Thinking is dislodged from the race
(but my one freind who is Intuitive Ethics based has some very interesting social modeling contexts, making him very intelligent, cause his thinking sets are Theorectical World orientated.. his intelligence and those like him, would be high, except for instances where this iE_ set is divested to ethics based inteligence, which is not iq inteligence)

narrowing the race to Thinking and Intuition primary (with 2nd function intuition and thinking), i would say it is even..
as an Intuitive type, i would be inclined to say Intuitive primaries are best,
however my one cousin is a Thinking primary, __
with a best characteristic of emotional stability..
(cause i beleive attainment to 'theoretical intelligence capability' is how closely related your operative topology flows are to what you do - 'measured inteligence'...visualized in two centripital axi spinning around each other, the aim is to be quick ... and the think which plunges one toward these inclinations in the first place is necassity,...because then one is not merely satisfied with the environments emotional response to oneself)

..this said cause i beleive at one point, inteligence becomes like athletics,
if u dissapate your energy through wrong emotional outlook, you are already blunted, and if your types different,well, then u ar'ent interested

-fred..sorry ignore me, but i felt compled, this is only a first draft version of what i envision the matter to be

Rick said...

OK, but what do you think about the guy's type?

Name said...

ESFj?

Rich said...

1.Since both Ne and Ni are related to exercising the brain. Pretty much any intuitive type would be expected to have a higher IQ.

2.To some extent, but I'm not sure to what extent.

3.Not sure.

And he comes across as a SLE to me.

Anonymous said...

ILE

Anonymous said...

LSE?

Anonymous said...

I really think he's LSI. He seems really assertive, but controlled. Self-restrained. He's confident but not arrogant ( at least i don't think so). He doesn't seem to have a large emotional range, but it is just an interview after all. He's not unfriendly and not even very guarded. But controlled.

Cool man.

niffweed17 said...

I think he's LIE, but I wouldn't discount EIE. I think there's basically no doubt that he's an Ni type. With the way he talks about insight and the necessity of a universal philosophy, I think he's unquestionably an Ni type. A very Ni sentence, for example might be "Every human being is an endomorphic image of the mind of god." The way he talks about applying pressure and maintaining authority also suggests to me that he is a beta/gamma Ej type. He doesn't strike me as SLE or SEE simply because he seems to have a very peculiar vision of the world, in addition to his past. He also made some mention of the importance of his own mind and imagination.

Ultimately, I think LIE is more probable than EIE. The reason that I'm ultimately saying LIE is that he has a limited emotional range and talks extensively about the importance of "logic and mathematics." The fact that he claims to already have partially created the framework for the betterment of the world I think also points to LIE. The reason that I tend towards EIE is that he embraces a number of concepts which many LIEs in my experience have rejected as totally unrealistic, such as the ultimate rejection of democratic processes, which would make more sense in an aristocratic beta environment. Nonetheless, I would be more inclined to downplay these ideas as non-type related than, for example, his limited expression of emotion.

niffweed17 said...

Another important point which i forgot to mention is that I don't believe type has any relation to IQ, and I would strongly disagree with this guy when he says that he would measure somebody else's intelligence by evaluating their vision of the world (which seems like a clear admission of Ni).

Anonymous said...

http://socionics.us/theory/log_eth.shtml

Rich said...

http://the16types.no-ip.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9640

Yi Liu said...

He is definitely irrational. He is still open to the idea that others can be smarter than him. He has such a grand vision -- as justified by his logic and mathematics.

He wants to to replace faith by logic -- these are simply tools for him.

In Part3: "If someone walked up to me right now and claimed that he was smarter than me... I would try to find out how sophisticated a picture of reality he has evolved -- see what simultaneous things he can hold in his mind."

He seems to prefer introverted ethics over extroverted ethics -- e.g. he had so much disdain for schools, and some of the social interactions. On the other hand he shows a reasonable understanding and respect for relationships themselves.

More over, he demonstrates a certain level of contempt for extroverted intuition -- he prefers introverted intuition and the bigger picture.

So, to recap:
He is irrational
He prefers introverted ethics over extroverted ethics
He prefers introverted intuition over extroverted intuition.

This would place him as an ILI.

Further support:
He feels a need to be part of something greater -- as presented in his grand vision. This is an introverted intuition property.

His painful memories tend to relate to extroverted ethics -- his PoLR.

He (claims that he) understands how the world operates. He understands how benefit is derived. Furthermore, he doesn't seem intent on capitalizing on it. This is very much an ILI trait.

Now... being ILI myself (and not identifying particularly well with his vision)... I could easily see myself having a heated but productive argument with him ...

Anonymous said...

i would agree with Yi Liu,
hav'ent seen the vid, so i am guilty on account of that..
{don't have a great overall topological understanding so i can't say anything against the LIE line... unless i apply myself}
Yi Liu was scientific enough, and as an ILI (gamma) i definitely too tend to loathe the prospect of seeing the vids, cause my belief system too is hot property for me.

but i don't acrue inteligence with ILI absolutely, my physicist friend ILE is brilliant but only seems to come across as a rational type in working cause of the extratim axis on I__,
we match each other for knowledge areas, he exceeds me in many knowledge areas, but he has a different emotive base..so needs strenghtening of things-X which would be deterimental to me,
my cousin as a LII, matches my knowledge, but irrelavates many of my notions for need of emotional stability (_i guess, i have only lately looked at the 'programming' language)
my father was a LIE, and this also provided a programming of stability for my earlier life,..

..so Yi Liu, in many of the same words u used to describe ILI inteligence and tendencies, can u describe a LIE, LII and ILE intelligence program...
i am really interested to know

-Fred

thehotelambush said...

As I said on the16types, my typing is LSI. (FYI, I decided on it before reading any of what other people said.)

Regarding type & IQ, there is probably some correlation. All the LIIs I know do well on standardized testing, and intuitives in general tend to do better.

However, the correlation is hardly absolute. My ESE sister is very intelligent (she got 24/25 on a recent standardized test--to her knowledge, better than anyone she knows), and probably much more intelligent than her ILI twin brother.

Genetics seems more likely to correlate well with intelligence, and type does much less, in my experience.

Yi Liu said...

First of all, I wasn't really arguing that ILI's are smarter -- I was just arguing that the person in the film was an ILI.

(On the side, I want to further comment that his current job as a bouncer seems to demonstrate preference of extroverted sensing over introverted sensing -- yet another independent gamma property)

As for intelligence, for the sake of arguement (tentatively without really believing it myself). I think that in north america, the ILI and SLI populations probably have a lower proportion (with respect to the population) of averagely intelligent people. Here is my argument:

1. ILI and SLI are characterized by their extroverted ethics PoLR.
2. In an extroverted ethics society like the U.S. or Canada, extroverted ethics is a must in order to function reasonably well in society.
3. If you are of only mediocre intelligence with a extroverted ethics PoLR, then you'd experience pressure to "switch" when you are young and malleable.
4. ILI and SLI probably have much higher variance in their intelligence

Yi Liu said...

As for my understanding of LIE, ILE, LII, with respect to LIE, I don't really have anything meaningful to add in the context of this argument...

But -- I will comment (again tentatively) that, following my logic above, in north america, introverted logic is probably the least important element... and I so would expect SEE and IEE (those with introverted sensing PoLR) to have a more pleasant time here, relatively speaking.

Anonymous said...

what if:
the only reason a ILI would appear intelligent ('bling-bling' if u know what i mean...i don't mean real intelligence), is becoz they have to master themselves as people, before that intelligence appears 'visible'
__this cause of the PoLR switch pressure which is high__
other types like the ESE sister appear intelligent from early on, cause there natural metabolic type matches to mechanised/standardized intelligence types..
whereas a typical ILI only does this later, and this 'intelligence' is the story of there own life and mastery..
they then become systems analysists
because they have analysed there own system.
(i was never the best in school, but i kept hungry, and way after others quit out of boredom and lack of direction, i continue___ ?ring a bell)

-Fred

Anonymous said...

if we look at the ILE,
there PoLR is introverted ethics,
there distain for belonging to something internally sensed such as an ideal or organization
(..obviously PoLR extraverted ethics for ILI, is said to point to society..as put by Yi Lui above)

leads them to accumulate working mechanisms of 'movement' (i.e. scientific laws,processes) faster then anyone else, to outmatch everyone and bring there own new 'place' /alpha related function.

so that motive force is the power of there 'intelligence' (bling-bling) celebrity,
whereas for the ILI, the celebrity part is a story of self

-Fred

Anonymous said...

therefore i seem to infer,
that intelligence is nothing

it is just that an ILI would have to push that much harder to be 'intelligent'
and a ILE would have to be aware of there mechanism to accumulate 'intelligence' that much better.

it is a society of dis-equilibrium
and war
it is a statement of law which i see relates to intelligence.
obviously a ILI typical fight is one of scaring for the person themself,
whereas other types are more closely matched to 'performance intelligence' and less societal pressure.

what u guys think of my law statement refering to the topology of society?
-Fred

Anonymous said...

if i just related PoLR to quadra values (alpha - newness, gamma - societal and revisionary)

actual i related ILE & ILI PoLR to there quadra assigned values.

...my question is
what brings the other 3 per quadra into that same quadra strand

..certainly not the PoLR
the SEE is a societal specilist, albiet burned,
but this is from 1st and 2nd function blocks, not the 4th PoLR

__what are your thoughts?
any words on what makes quadra values?

-Fred

Anonymous said...

SORRY, realized i was a bit of track,
i looked at Ricks posting on 'Simplifying Reality Through the Weak Functions'
and realized much of what i said about the PoLR was subjectively specific,
but it still seems asif a PoLR related value still plunges one in a Quadra value statement (for ILI and ILE).
both Rick and Augusta (ILE), still manage to stay in the same Quadra value assignment of 'newness and seeking newness' which is Alpha related
-Fred

Anonymous said...

if real intelligence is regarded as how closely u are related to the situation
lets give a Hitler vs Tom Cruise scenario
i assume ESE vs EIE respectively.

Hitler was definitely more inteligent, as his _S_ related more closely to his E__. He could move from his influencing of people and politicians too his sphere of overall military strategist
(unrelated/historic - obviously we know his paranoia and blind-sides destroyed him later, but this is a 'work model')

Tom Cruises _I_ is more divorced from his E__.
making him less intelligent for dynamic situations.(vs static where he excels like acting which is static)
amen
so intelligence is a performance related thing
-Fred (i will quit now, sorry, or a may not stop)

Yi Liu said...

(First of all, to clear up my previous typo -- I meant to say that SEE/IEE have introverted logic PoLR, as opposed to introverted sensing PoLR)


I am not convinced that we can just pull up any two people and compare them -- there is too much to say, so it is all very subjective. It is probably a lot easier if we talk about specific people with specific films.

As explained on the main part of Rick's website, Functions 1,2,5,6 are preferred over 3,4,7,8. This what makes a quadra what it is. An ILI and ILE have similar competency levels for their information elements, but the emphasis are quite different.

A side note about you, Fred -- assuming that you typed up your comments very quickly and that they reflect your natural thought progression, I want to comment that introverted intuitiion is branded into it. I do that a lot too. You have lots of visions -- but all the justifications and details are left to the reader, which could be hard to follow sometimes . . . (Not necessarily a bad thing in general -- just bad in this kind of discussion)

niffweed17 said...

it's very hard not to laugh at this inane discussion.

Yi Liu said...

niffweed17:

I feel that we don't mean the same things when we read the same words. I think you are thinking in meyer briggs terms as opposed to socionics terms.

(fyi, if you cutted and pasted our discussion into the right order, it would probably make a lot more sense; we are irrational, so we like to do multiple things simultaneously. If you still genuinely have a hard time at least even appreciating anything -- maybe it is because you are a socioincs-rational person :D)

Also, you mentioned that he evidently worships introverted intuition. I agree, and I further claim that he demonstrates so much strength there that it would be his leading function. Why do you disagree? And (assuming that I understand you correctly) why do you think that your own world vision has anything to do with his type?

Anyways, to personally comment on the other question about "what I'd expect the type of the smartest person to be"...

In north america, we prefer action over ideas, and we prefer extroversion over introversion. Furthermore, we love extroverted ethics.
Then... In socionic terms, society would be one of EIE and ESE.

Hence, an intelligent EIE/ESE's high "basic intelligence", then adjusted for society's "preference factor" will probably send that person into the elite.

Rick said...

I'm sure niffweed17 thinks in socionics terms -- he's an active participant at the16types forum.

It is indeed hard to follow Fred's reasoning, and he is making some assumptions that don't make sense -- basically just "thinking out loud." As far as I remember, he is ILI.

I disagree that North American (specifically, U.S. and Canadian) culture values ethics over logic. Everywhere in the world Americans are known as businesslike people who love to organize new processes, create new organizations and structures, and develop money-making systems. At the same time, they have a more formal and distant interaction style than many more emotional nations (Russians, Italians, Spaniards, French, Latinos, etc.). Americans may "love" emotional behavior and displays at certain moments, but this doesn't seem to be the primary common language of Americans.

Anonymous said...

hey Rick,
in your main website,
there is this article from Gulenko, where he defines the 4 quadras for preference and life vision.

i was just wondering, ..how do 4 different personality types come out as expressing a similar life vision (..fitting them into a quadra)..?
-Fred

Anonymous said...

the afore mentioned answer will give a 'activity stage' for intelligence.
i don't want it to seem asif we are deviating from the topic,
so let us systematically begin there...
? - how do 4 personalities fit into a quadra?
-Fred

Anonymous said...

as somebody above said ...
two twins, and the ILI brother is not very intelligent.
and i thought this is classic:
cause we can say that ILI intelligence only becomes active at a later stage,...
that is unless conventional tests where changed to measure 'idea hopping'..as i demonstrated for a ILI
-Fred

Rick said...

Fred, here is that link:
http://www.socionics.us/works/gulenko_quadras.shtml

Rick said...

VOTE COUNT
We have 8 votes here:
ILE
ESE
LSI - 2
SLE
LIE
ILI - 2

Visitors are fairly certain he is a logical type (7 out of 8) and split 50-50 regarding rational/irrational, extratim/introtim, and sensing/intuition

Yi Liu said...

While I agree with Rick's assessment, I just want to remind us that the man has shown up for an interview after being labeled the "smartest person on earth" or whatever. Hence, maybe he thinks he is expected to act a little less absent-minded.

I was constantly under the impression that he was trying to provoke arguments and offer alternative explanations. Given how "out there" his explanation is, I would still prefer to think that he is trying to stir up interesting discussion as opposed to actually propagating his beliefs...

Also, the strong introverted intuition still hasn't been accounted for... maybe I got the wrong idea due to the video editting...

Anonymous said...

read the wiki,
my final word on intelligence..
it is just exercise, and constantly setting between one's dominant faculties.
even the roman emperor Markus Aurelius...made a psychology of compacting refining and exercising ones dominant faculties (albiet for which personality, i do not know)
-Fred

Anonymous said...

oh, the guy cannot be typed as definitely belonging to a quadra, or personality type,..as i as a amateur have been inclined to do.
i think the common mistake is that one equates 'movement in psychological dynamics / intelligence' too easily with oneself.

i think Gulenkos quadra article was more global in perspective, all that differentiates a quadra is 'focus'...not intelligence, or potential intelligence.

the tendency amongst ILI to feel themselves more distant from society is an aberance.
looking at the personality type votes on Ricks site, ILE are definitely not prominent...probably satisfied with there pursuits,
also IEE and intro Thinking (LIE) is prominent,
meaning introverted Concept types are in little knowledge of what and when they 'exercise'
-Fred

Anonymous said...

I see I've missed the boat on voting, but I get a very strong impression he's an ILI.

One thing that has a strong impact on his behavior that got little mention was his abusive upbringing. I'd bet he probably wouldn't be a bouncer if he was used to receiving soft discipline along with lots of love while growing up.

The major points I was going to make regarding his introverted intuition have already been made for the most part, so I won't repeat them. There were a few things he mentioned that I (an ILI) believe/d at least to some degree. One was his view on eugenics. Although I believe in theory that it's a good move logically, at least to counterbalance the deterioration of our species due to medical advancements which allow the unfit to survive and propagate, to force the population into sterility would be a disastrous move. Short-term ethical concerns and the reactions to them don't seem to even touch his mind here. It seems as though he's abandoned extraverted ethics altogether, that it's not only weak, but nearly non-existent. Sacrificed in favour of nearly complete extraverted logic without interference.

There's another piece of evidence favouring the possibility of him being ILI in Part 2 starting at 4:20

This post is long enough, so I'll end it here.

Rick said...

I think focusing on people's philosophy too much when typing them (i.e. what type characteristics does the philosophy have) can lead to some mistakes. First of all, not everyone with a well-developed philosophy is intuitive by any means.

As a person, Langan is tough, with-it, and controlled. This are not characteristics that ILIs project.

Not only has he been a bar-bouncer, but all his jobs have been physical in nature. Now he runs a ranch in Missouri.

>> There's another piece of evidence favouring the possibility of him being ILI in Part 2 starting at 4:20 .

I see what you're saying here. But note that while he claims his "mind is elsewhere" and he is close to comprehending how everything fits together, when something physical comes up, he forgets what he was thinking about. This sounds more like elusive thoughts based in weak functions than persistent, full-blooded thoughts based in one's strong functions.

Now, looking at his worldview, I would add that it is elitist and somewhat aggressive. Politicians are "dunces." Academia is restrictive and self-serving. Decision-making powers should be transferred to a high IQ society. As you say,

>> Short-term ethical concerns and the reactions to them don't seem to even touch his mind here.

This seems to be true of him everywhere -- both in his worldview and in his spontaneous behavior and statements. But this is introverted ethics -- not extraverted ethics -- that is being devalued. ILIs are much more careful about whether their statements might hurt other people's feelings and tone down their language to avoid offense (after all, how can they be totally sure they are right about anything in this world?). By contrast, Langan is sure he is right about everything and makes no effort to tone down his language.

Yi Liu said...

I have been convinced...
I agree that he is LSI.

Personally, it was insightful for me to realize that the nature of his personal philosophy cannot be weighed too heavily in typing ...

Anonymous said...

>>> ILIs are much more careful about whether their statements might hurt other people's feelings and tone down their language to avoid offense <<<

i don't think the evolution of an ILI is such that u can state that so directly
there primary concern is not other peoples emotions.
rather it is that they don't see there 'primary streams/primary function/thoughts' coinciding with other peoples processing,
hence the tendency.

ILI's as not knowing 'what they think or know' -
i would not say that, rather it is a lack of desire to be 'forth-rightly' systemized..
but if career or pressure pushes one,
that one can reach a state where they want to systemize__
why one gets scientists, or many other men who would want to dominate a sphere.... say politics

like the guy who wrote Samson Blinded..
also, check the House Series out,
that guy is seriously ILI or IEI
-Fred

--but Rick, i would stick to your arguement that Lang__ is not ILI, probably as u said 'introverted thinking'

yet Motivation and Systemization should not be precluded as non-existent in the ILI system... it just comes in another way

heathp said...

Here is what I wrote briefly on typing an individual-- You should not be observing an individual's thinking style, but rather the information he displays in his speech, body language, appearance, etc. You have to seperate the artist from his work. That said, Langan conveys a tough, dispassionate, and reserved but domineering attitude(it's essiential to ignore his superintelligence- it is not a factor in typing him). These are basic attributes and similar attributes should be sought in typing an individual. Think of reading a novel and a character's introduction into the story; the author will oftentimes make a note this new character's physical bearing, and give small details of his GENERAL behaviour(i.e. Strong-willed, determined, military bearing, etc) prior to introducing the character's purpose in the story. Socionics typists essientially use these small introductory notes to type a person, and in general, they are the most universal and applicable. When typing someone, look at the obvious characterists. Socionics is not a deep philosophical study of a person and his innermost motives.

also
fred- The ideas and processes you are prescribing to the ILI are of such minority that it would make the criteria of being ILI impossible. You have to understand the human population is made up of these 16 types and with over 6 billion people there is a huge distribution of every type. Therefore, you absolutely cannot use type to predict/explain specific details(such as thinking style) and pecularities of a person's behaviour. It will not give even the slightest correlation. But what you can observe, and what you will probably find in almost every LSI is a tough, authoritative attitude. With an ILI, you will almost always find a detached personality. The list goes on.

-heathp

Anonymous said...

thanx heathp
point taken
-Fred
what u say is right,...there is probably a different thought style topology
i understand the need to be 'superficial' to a point ... to look at 'expression characteristics'
__but still i beleive there is great utility in going deeper, in seeing a quadra as an organism..
i will probably have to learn how to swirm around less obviously now.

just it is on a level infuriating,
in this culture, if u are not tough u have nothing
it is okay to say that 'this is tough'...it's natural to them,
but is it then natural for another to be nothing at all?
--to me, my 'person' cannot let go of the edge between Power and Specific psychology
-i am still helpless in that respect, atleast it's better than being stupid where i can't cognise your words
Thanx heathp!

Anonymous said...

Very interesting video! This exercise really helps one see how to view typology function-by-function, especially in regard to weakness. For the smartest person, it's interesting what an impression of weakness there is.

First, it seems that on the basis of a few bad experiences, he has concluded that academia is corrupt and irrelevant. He doesn't seem to have the sort of "emotional intelligence" that would give him perspective in this area; nor does he seem to have the people skills or inclination to actually open up opportunities for himself. This suggests weak Fi and Fe.

The apparent lack of considering opportunities that would still allow him time to think but possibly work better for him also suggests weak Ne, although he must use some Ne in considering different possible ways that his theory could go.

His lack of consideration of how-to/strategic considerations suggests weak Te. For example, it doesn't seem that he has considered that putting his eugenics program in place wouldn't be a cinch; it seems he would just want to force it down people's throats.

As to Ni, I agree with Niffweed that it's strong; he's well able to use his imagination. In fact, due to his upbringing, he has trained himself to live in the dual worlds of Se and Ni simultaneously.

So, there's a picture of an unusual SLI. Kinda scary, too...

Rick said...

>> So, there's a picture of an unusual SLI.

Do you not think he's an LSI, or is this a typo?

Anonymous said...

Did you actually observe the guys face while watching the videos? I thinks he's a guy on the brink of breaking down, of bursting into tears. This has narcissistic affect all over it, of the cerebral type (not the somatic type). Which points to INTj or ENTp, if you want to think stereotype. Add to that the mystic view of God and the universe, and I think he must be INTj. Not that I beleive in Socionics stereo-typing, but this is as close as it gets. I'd rather explain his personality from a psychopathological perspective.

Rick said...

>> Did you actually observe the guys face while watching the videos?

Of course. I observed everything. Why the derogatory tone?

>> I thinks he's a guy on the brink of breaking down, of bursting into tears. This has narcissistic affect all over it, of the cerebral type (not the somatic type).

I didn't notice any signs that he was on the brink of a breakdown or near tears. He certainly didn't let any emotional weakness show (which again points to logic). Also, I didn't notice any unusual affect and certainly anything that I would call psychopathological. The guy seems to be living a normal life, is married to another intellectual, and runs a farm and retreat in Missouri for high-IQ people. I don't see any reasons to assume this man is not psychologically healthy.

>> Which points to INTj or ENTp, if you want to think stereotype.

I don't see the stereotype you're referring to. An LII bar bouncer and bodybuilder who likes to play policeman?

Anonymous said...

He is ENTJ.

Langan makes many all-encompassing statements about his life and uses language which references various stages of his life that brought him to his current state, pointing to Ni. He also displays instances of extroverted logic and uses strict boundaries to with which to quantify his behavior (for example, he considers himself a "genius", but only by the standard textbook definition of genius- classic Te).

Ryan K said...

He is not a sensor. Definitely an ILI 'genius.' I am only going by character here. Easily put, I know people like him in real life. Real life INTPs who are quite intelligent and have the same mind so to speak. He's not at all obsessive like a J and is very clearly an N if you regard his theoretical knowledge and insight to the future. He doesn't live in the moment. At his job he is constantly thinking, ignoring the obvious. Logical, yes. Does not mean he isn't ethical, though he so obviously insisting logic's dominance over ethics. If you watch the last clip, his ILI is so apparent, because these questions were written by him and operated the discussion beforehand. Te is apparent, but not as apparent as Ni: Tremendous insight on the future and confidence as displayed by it. Introversion is the easiest to realize by the way he speaks and by his gestures. He is very polite too, which is a sign of an intelligent INTP or an IF. He is too much of a fit for the rational NT category to be any kind of IF. He longs for almost humble servants of his knowledge, with respect so much that Se could easily define, explaining ILI duality. When asked what he would do to fix our problems, he acted a bit surprised by tendency, because the core subject of the question, not the answer, easily fits into the Fi diagram, which is simply unspoken to the ILI.

-Ryan

MWE said...

I find it very difficult to believe he is Te > Ti. In my opinion, the fact that he has constructed his own comprehensive world view in isolation, and extrapolates the best direction for the human race from that, strongly reeks of Ti. Additionally, Ti is very prominent in the systems he's interested in (mathematics, philosophy) and the way his CTMU paper presents his ideas bottom-up (it's full of "models", "frameworks" and "systems"). Sure, Te individuals are good at these types of things too - but he clearly spends all the time he can on these Ti-related pursuits.

I find it more difficult to judge whether he is sensory or intuitive due to the extensive video editing, but his statement that he enjoys "imposing authority" seems to point towards the former (and, at least, certainly away from Ni). One would imagine an LIE, ILI or LII in a similar situation (hates academia, needs a job with plenty of thinking time) would choose a desk job in a library rather than bouncing or construction.

So, I agree: LSI.