[Quintus Curtius]

I somehow stumbled on this video back in August and emailed it to a friend.

Thought other guys might enjoy this too. It's interesting to me because it's a profile of a super high IQ guy who decided to walk away from the usual work grind and pressures imposed on him by other people.

Instead, he chose to do his own thing and live life on his own terms in rural Missouri.

And in his spare time, he tries to solve the mysteries of the universe. (Now that's what I call thinking big.)

Lot of food for discussion here. His life, and his ideas. You'll see what I mean when you check out the video.

I like his calm, relaxed demeanor. The gait of a man who's at peace with himself, but still finds time to pursue his interests.

[Fortis]

It is interesting but I do wonder if he is literally a victim of his own intelligence. If he really does have an IQ of 200 he seems.......sorta......mediocre. That is not to judge the man, but like whenever someone focuses on someone's super high IQ we expect matching achievements. Instead, he's just putzing around on some land with his wife in middle age. He traded one grind for another.

That said, I do respect him for being a humble, down-to-earth guy. I imagine you could talk to him, no matter what your IQ is, and you'd probably learn something. He seems like a good guy.

I do think that if you've got a gift that powerful you CAN squander it and he might be squandering it.

[Quintus Curtius]

Fortis:

Good point.

When you have that much ability, it almost carries with it a certain duty to perfect that ability, and to produce something of value for your peers and for posterity.

I agree with this.

It doesn't look like he's lived up to his potential.

But we should remember that this view is not shared by everyone. One could make a very convincing argument that his only responsibility is to himself: that he owes no one anything, and he is simply living his life as he sees fit.

It's not an easy question to answer. You get into philosophic questions about individual imperatives vs. duties to society.

At least it's something to think about.

[monster]

Apparently he's written some super theory of super everything that he continually works on.

[Rush87]

Often times people think someone with a high IQ should seem insightful in virtually everything they say but the reality is, they've gotta learn just like the rest of us. It just takes them less time to do it.

In that regard, all he can really do is dedicate his life to a topic in the hope that one day he can provide an insight that the rest of us would otherwise be incapable of unveiling. So with that said, what more could he really be doing?

He's working on a theory daily, and he just so happens to be living a balanced life as well... In many ways, he's got a grasp of life that so many other 'geniuses' fail to ever understand.

[WhatTheFuck]

Just watched this 30 minute interview with him, thought it was interesting. Talks more about his backstory, world view, and what it's like living with super high iq. There's 3 parts

[Fortis]

I do agree that he doesn't have to do anything, but as a man, I tend to look at people in the scope of their accomplishments, especially exceptional men like this one.

What has he done aside from being born with a high IQ and putzing around?

I do think he will look back on his life in 20 years when he is in his 70s and go "wow, I really did waste this opportunity I was granted on this earth."

It makes me think of this scene from "Good Will Hunting" :

If this guy was your friend wouldn't you feel slightly resentful that he has something you'll never have but instead of scoring a great victory with it, he's just content to sit on a farm and piss away his time and energy. Fuck, he doesn't even appear to have kids, so this great intellectual lineage is actually threatened by time itself. Imagine how you'll feel when you hear about this guy's death in 20 years and the only thing he's left behind is some horses and a widow.

No great ideas, no strong, masculine, intelligent sons, just a cool story about being a drifter with an exceptionally high IQ who parlayed it into a farm with some horses and some quirky theory that no one knows about.

Seems to be a waste to me.

[komatiite]

No shock that a high IQ fella like him has punched a ticket on the TRUMP TRAIN. He is pretty active on his Facebook page for "Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe" and has some RVF friendly opinions. Here is the link.

https://m.facebook.com/groups/ctmurealit...view=group



Here is a recent Q&A from this week, I scribbled out the kids name:

[Disco_Volante]

He understands though, what good is his intelligence in a socialist feminist state? It kills incentive for men to be ambitious and contribute to society.

Where an affirmative action hire will be promoted over him, his earnings taxed more. He'd have to deal with some dumb bitch HR woman criticizing him.
With the world population exploding, I don't think some groundbreaking medical innovation from him would even be good for the world.


I think he's showing his disgust for society in his own way. He senses that it's all a ruse now.

[Travel Museums]

This guy had a documentary done on him years ago. Lucky genetically. Unlucky genetically. Got wonderful nature (brain anyway). Terrible nurture.

Had he been better looking he’d probably have had more “success” because either someone in Power would have taken more personal interest in him at a young age or he’d have been better treated by everyone all his life. No one likes the ugly kid who is smarter than them.

In a way it could be the US educational/social system that failed this man. But the system isn’t set up to deal well with someone bouncing around like that in their youth. He dropped out of college so basically had no shot at anything in academia nor professional unless he distinguished himself through publication which surprised he hasn’t done more of. Even if it was sci-fi or something.

He seems to be a good example of why raw potential often fails against hard work/unlevel playing field. He drifted around as a kid and kept doing it most of his life until he settled down with what he could afford. Basically about money. I’m sure he’d life somewhere else if he had more.

The socioeconomics of society don’t give a fuck how smart your potential brainpower is. This guy was doing mostly manual labor all his life and still is. He never figured out a way to make money in a non scam way? Strange for someone that Smart. Not caring about money is one thing. But not actually having it is another.

Also that good will hunting crap?? People don’t understand the reality of most great Men’s lives. If you look at Einstein’s life for instance you see a lot of extraordinary stuff like his uncle owned an electronics shop at the turn of the century (lucky kid). His wife did most of his novel prize research (took her name off the paper and she kept the money).

[Fortis]

I don't agree. I think he's just lazy, to be honest.

Anyone with half a brain could find themselves a way to own horses, some land and a decently feminine wife.

Fuck, my grandfather did all this shit (minus the horses, he likes cars and guns instead) and he isn't some mega genius AND he grew up in a time where he had limited rights as a black man.

This guy's not red pill.

A redpill motherfucker would go "gee, I am really fucking smart. I have a one in a billion gift! I could create REAL opportunities for my family. Fuck, if I really work at it, I might even be able to achieve such wealth and prestige that no one who descends from me will ever have to work like I did," but nah, he's content to chill with horses and and wank off to his own intelligence because why bother doing anything.

Guys have so many excuses for this guy's of drive and work ethics in the face of an incredible gift that could benefit everyone on earth immensely. At the very least, I hope he pops out a kid or two so maybe the kid can do something with those high IQ genes instead of be a faceless farmer like his father.

[Travel Museums]

It’s not all his fault. He bounced around and never fit in anywhere incl college.

I don’t knock him for not being an academic, professional, etc. That’s pretty much off limits unless you get through college.

What I do not get is that he never really tried publishing anything substantive. Like well you see I tried to have a blog but google shit me down bc... well you see I tried to have a film made but the producers..,

He just doesn’t seem to be doing anything creative. The CTMU stuff is a rabbit hole he’s created for himself to get lost in.

Even if you’re penniless (he’s not) in today’s world you can get your shit out there. He’s basically farting around.

[Speculation]

I'm squarely in the 'he doesn't owe anyone anything' camp. If he's happy and content with his life, good luck to him.

Many of the comments here are a variant of 'If I was rich like that guy, I'd ...' hater talk.

[Fortis]

(10-14-2017 12:28 AM)Travel Museums Wrote:  


He just doesn’t seem to be doing anything creative. The CTMU stuff is a rabbit hole he’s created for himself to get lost in.

Agreed, It seems like some masturbatory pursuit that's engrossing enough so that he'll never be bored but not fruitful enough for him to ever actually need to work at it.

The first rule of theories that try to explain everything is that they never actually say anything.

Like I said, seems lazy. I hesitate to say there is anything exceptional about him other than the fact that he was born with an insanely high IQ. Everything else is pretty mediocre.

Hell, even his analysis of Trump's situation is pretty mediocre. He has said nothing that "lesser" minds have not already said about our political situation in America.

Mediocrity from one such as him is baffling, but hey, it sure makes a case for the idea that your drive is open the biggest determining factor to your success in life.

Here we have a 200 IQ mediocrity.

[Genghis Khan]

(10-13-2017 10:33 PM)Fortis Wrote:  

I do agree that he doesn't have to do anything, but as a man, I tend to look at people in the scope of their accomplishments, especially exceptional men like this one.

What has he done aside from being born with a high IQ and putzing around?

I do think he will look back on his life in 20 years when he is in his 70s and go "wow, I really did waste this opportunity I was granted on this earth."

It makes me think of this scene from "Good Will Hunting" :

If this guy was your friend wouldn't you feel slightly resentful that he has something you'll never have but instead of scoring a great victory with it, he's just content to sit on a farm and piss away his time and energy. Fuck, he doesn't even appear to have kids, so this great intellectual lineage is actually threatened by time itself. Imagine how you'll feel when you hear about this guy's death in 20 years and the only thing he's left behind is some horses and a widow.

No great ideas, no strong, masculine, intelligent sons, just a cool story about being a drifter with an exceptionally high IQ who parlayed it into a farm with some horses and some quirky theory that no one knows about.

Seems to be a waste to me.

Here's perhaps something to consider: why would you expect a man with an IQ of 200 to be exceptional? Would you also expect a man with a height of 10 feet to be exceptional in life, simply because he's taller than even the tallest NBA player? Nature has optimized mankind to stay within certain bounds for each trait. An extremely high IQ is as dysgenic as extremely low IQ - as the case would be for height or other traits.

My theory is that IQ has a inverted U-shape benefit:
- low IQ is obviously a negative trait for success in life
- middling IQ (around 120) is great for professional success
- but the higher you go, the worse it gets

Ever wondered why the most successful nations seem to peter out with an average IQ of a 100. I think it's because that's what optimal.

In the 120s range, you're smart enough to succeed because the majority of mankind is dumber than you. But you're dumb enough to believe your own bullshit. Most medical doctors, lawyers, engineers, and Fortune 500 CEOs are in the 120 range. So are the vast majority of authors of self-help books that hit the NYT Best Seller list imho.

There's a good reason for it. There's about a 30 point IQ gap in communication - if you're more than 30 IQ smarter, you can easily come across as functionally crazy. This is why I highly doubt there are many Fortune 500 CEOs with IQs above 140, they'd come across as insane to most of their employees - a fatal flaw if you're supposed to lead.

Hit the 130 range, maybe 140 range and you end up on forums like RVF because you're too damn smart for your own good and for women.

A small minority of the 140+ succeed tremendously well, but they are like Travel Museum said, privileged to have intellectual opportunities. Take Einstein, Newton, Musk, Gates, and have them be born in a remote village in Africa or India and they'd do worse in life than their 100 IQ neighbor.

Note that Musk, Gates, Zuckerberg and the like only exist in the world of tech - this is because to be a good programmer, you need an IQ of at least 120 (I'd guess). So those guys can be effective leaders of a bunch of high IQ nerds. But they'd fail catastrophically if they tried running John Deere, GE, Proctor-Gamble or any other non-tech Fortune 500 company.

A healthy society is optimized for the 100s to have a good life, the 120s to have a great life and a few 140s to have an exceptional life. And that's because a healthy society is in accordance with nature.

Increase your average IQ and you get killed by dumber groups. Neanderthals were supposedly smarter than Homo Sapiens. And yet we're the ones still standing.

Europe is getting conquered by barbarians with an average IQ in the 80s.

People with higher IQ reproduce less. They always, eventually, get outbred by dumber people - leading to civilizational collapse. We've got low IQ criminal dumbasses being baby daddy to four different women, meanwhile, high IQ men are flocking to the manosphere because they're literally too smart to get laid.

Incidentally, this is why China is potentially on a suicide path with their focus on using CRISP to edit their babies' genes. Long-term it's a terrible idea because although their average IQ might rise, the lower IQ people will eventually outbreed the higher IQ people. This is assuming their average IQ actually is ~100 and they're going to try to pump it up by 10-20 points. If it's far less, say in the 80s or 90s, it may end up being beneficial. However I have the feeling they'll keep pushing it, and one day they'll push too far.

Too high of an IQ is dysgenic. There are correlations between a high IQ and autism/homosexuality/transgenderism.

An IQ of 200 certainly is an aberration of nature. And the fact that we have so few people with such high IQs should prove the dysgenic behavior of a too high IQ. The same way that the lack of success of matriarchal or equality societies has proven that men should lead women.

I can't imagine what's it like to have an IQ of 200. I find most things the average person is interested in extremely boring. I have friends who are super excited about tech startups. Personally, I find business very dull. I interviewed for McKinsey and BCG last year and after doing about 20 business case studies for practice, I was bored of them. Meanwhile, many MBAs do upwards of 60 case studies to prepare. I can't imagine doing 60 cases. An IQ of 200? Fuck, that guy would probably be bored out of his mind by the stuff we talk about.

I don't know if I explained it well. The best analogy I can come up with is: imagine you are you, but suddenly instead of interacting with human beings you're now interacting with cows. You live in a society filled with dumb cows, who are going about grazing and farting. Would you really care to succeed in this society?

That's how I imagine life must be like for a dude with an IQ of 200 - I am in no way surprised he moved to the middle of nowhere Missouri. The average human being, and by extension all of the society, must be as boring for him as living amongst cows would be for us. Heck, he probably doesn't see much difference between humans and farm animals, and might even find farm animals more pleasant as animals can't talk. And thus they can't bore him with dumb opinions.

Also unsurprised he's working on a unified theory of everything. I can imagine that only reaching a God-level understanding of reality is the one thing that would intellectually excite him. I'm not sure what guys like him would do otherwise, running a multibillionaire dollar company is probably as boring to him as teaching 1+1 to toddlers would be to us.

[Quintus Curtius]

The lessons and questions I take away from this guy's story are these:

1. Intelligence alone is no indicator of achievement in life. Genius and energy is one thing; application and discipline are something else. A man can use both, but if you have to choose one over the other, we can say that hard work and application always prevail over IQ.

2. We are all products of our environment and experience. Maybe we should not be too quick to judge this man. He may have psychological factors or personality factors that make him unsuited to a life in a laboratory, corporate office, or classroom. Not everyone is suited to a life of high intensity. Maybe he's had to come a great distance to overcome problems from childhood that we don't know about. You just can't see inside a person's mind.

On the other hand, a man needs to do something productive with his life. I don't think a timid retreat into the wilderness is becoming a man of action. Man was made to wrestle with problems, to confront obstacles, and to overcome barriers.

3. What is happiness? What is the Good Life? Does the Good life consist in attaining the glory of great deeds? Or does it consist of knowing one's limitations, and seeking a life free of pain and strife?

Can the absence of stress--i.e., the absence of pain--really be called happiness? Can this man be called a Wise Man?

These are the questions that interest me.

[CynicalContrarian]

Interesting fellow.

Can't recall where I read it, yet the idea was that the more intelligent a person is; the less inclined they are to care for tradition.
Tradition's often being of little actual purpose or of obscure if not superstitious origins.

Plus, when one can contemplate the universe. The simple & mundane is not anywhere near as fascinating.

To paraphrase & add to ol' Henry Thomas buckle :

Small minds discuss people.
Average minds discuss events.
Great minds discuss ideas.
While Supersane minds discuss realities.

[CynicalContrarian]

Another key to all this.

Intellect & wisdom are not one & the same.

[Luther]

I've read a book called 'outliers' which focused on Chris for one chapter. Basically the book is about extraordinary people and what factors actually vault a person to success. The author strongly argues that's it's nurture, and not nature, which dictates how succeful a person will be. And in Chris's case, he had a fucked up background which contributed to him being a loner. If I remember correctly the last words of the chapter were... 'and nobody makes it alone.'

Interesting book by Malcom Gladwell.

[Leonard D Neubache]

Pfft. Haters are going to be BTFO when the globalists wage war against the traditionalists and Langan arrives on scene, fresh from his science lab beneath his unassuming horse stable, adorned in his Tekkaman power suit laying waste to all wickedness in his path.

[Genghis Khan]

(10-14-2017 01:49 AM)Luther Wrote:  

I've read a book called 'outliers' which focused on Chris for one chapter. Basically the book is about extraordinary people and what factors actually vault a person to success. The author strongly argues that's it's nurture, and not nature, which dictates how succeful a person will be. And in Chris's case, he had a fucked up background which contributed to him being a loner. If I remember correctly the last words of the chapter were... 'and nobody makes it alone.'

Interesting book by Malcom Gladwell.

Malcolm Gladwell is an intellectual fraud. He's quite typical of the NYT bestselling authors who propose simple social psychology explanations that don't actually hold up when examined further.

The reason his books sell is that (again like many NYT bestsellers) he implicitly promises that ANYONE can be anything they want, as long as you have the right tools, mindset, approach, trick, etc. This dude has caused quite a bit of damage popularizing poor ideas like his 10,000 hours practice idea, when in reality it only applies to people who are already exceptionally talented, are doing a very specific task (e.g. playing an instrument or Olympic level swimming) and the 10,000 hours is deliberate practice - meaning focusing on only challenging yourself to the next level (e.g. with music, attempting a slightly harder piece than you can play). That doesn't mean that practice won't make you better, but it's not like anyone can become a rock star in his chosen field as long as they put the time into it - which is the lie Gladwell implicitly sells.

In terms of success, the biggest predictor is in fact nature - IQ is the best-correlated factor, with a correlation of 0.65.* The next best predictor is conscientiousness, which again has a strong genetic component. The correlation with conscientiousness is 0.1.

If Gladwell took these two traits into account, it would most likely explain every single one of his outliers. The nurture component only comes into place when the person already has the right traits. What do I mean?

Put someone like Gates in his childhood upbringing (with access to a computer at his elite high school) and you get Microsoft.
Put someone with an IQ below 85 in the same upbringing and you most likely get a felon.

This is why I don't like reading (auto)biographies. Or at least I don't like recommending them to the average college kid. There are some things you can learn from biographies such as the value of tenacity in the face of terrible luck (for which, QC's work may be the best in the business), but I feel too many people focus on trying to emulate the same type of result instead of the process. I wonder how many kids read Elon Musk's biography, hoping to make the next Tesla, not realizing they're 20 IQ points too dumb to ever get there.

I'm not trying to be cynical here - I just get the impression that books like Gladwell's give people way too much false hope. In the same vein of the vile Anne-Marie Slaughter, who promised countless women they could have it all. Only to finally admit that only very few women actually can. How many cat ladies did she not create?

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...ll/309020/

Without the nature component, the nurture component is useless. It's a deeply uncomfortable truth, especially in the US - where a 'you can be anything' attitude goes.

* In terms of IQ, I do believe there is an inversed-U relationship. Yes, it's strongly correlated to success, but only up to a point. Go too high (past 140 maybe) and your success starts dropping unless the perfectly right nurture component is there.

--------------------------

In terms of background, I'm ambivalent to how much effect it has. Take, for example, Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber - who reportedly had an IQ of 168, and became the youngest tenured professor at UC Berkely. In terms of background, he might have hit the lottery - good, smart parents, was able to attend Harvard at the age of 16 and a bright career in mathematics - perhaps the best-suited career for guys with such high quantitative IQs. Yet he still went off the rails, lived secluded in the forest and was bombing people.

Again, it's my hypothesis once you pass a certain IQ threshold you can't function normally in society anymore. Like living amongst cows, you'd probably lose your sanity.

[Beyond Borders]

It's a testament to how dumbed down the world is in comparison to this guy when the big focus of the video is the numerical value of his IQ and the surprising (if you've spent your life behind a TV screen) details of his background, as if the reporters are writing a gossip column for a high school newspaper...when you'd think the real story here would be that "the most intelligent man on the planet believes in intelligent design."

Certainly having a 200 IQ doesn't make his assumption correct, but I'd say his reasoning would at least merit discussion, yet the video just giggles on about the trivia instead. How original. Not their fault audiences are so shallow but it was still pretty damn ironic.

I've seen various stories on this guy over the years, and it's always the same basic coverage, and I have to say I'd probably move out in the middle of nowhere to hide too if dorky reporters were coming up to me over and over and over throughout the years to cover the same exact talking points that everybody already knows, like that I (chuckle chuckle hehe) am also a tough guy who can use his hands and spent years working as a bouncer.

You could even see his wife was bored out by the dorky smirking and giggling about their intelligence. They must bump into some truly obnoxious conversations when they are recognized in public.

Overall seems like a cool guy, though. Damn well rounded for someone that smart. You'd think he could leverage that intelligence into something more, but as others have pointed out, life's a tad more complicated than that, and the man is welcome to his own priorities as far as I'm concerned.

And let's not forget some geniuses have come to deeply regret the things society has done with their inventions, or to them for that matter, so owing something to society is not one I think I'd personally lay on the man's table.

[Fortis]

(10-14-2017 01:08 AM)Genghis Khan Wrote:  

snip

Thanks for writing this post!

I do want to say one thing, I am not being contrarian because I don't like the guy, but I just really dig these sorts of discussions, so I hope I'm not coming across as overly argumentative for no reason.

I am inclined to agree that mega high IQs are probably dysgenic, I was actually pondering this the other day. The smartest guy I know is probably the least "motivated" guy in many ways because he does not engage with reality all that much. He is a chemist. He goes to work and does pretty well for himself but everyone in his family resents him because his verbal and mathematical intelligence is off the charts but the second they mention "business" or "PHD routes" he's like "pffft."

Great point on CRISPR and I was considering this as well. I live in China and while the population is high IQ, the sad thing is that you meet some of these ridiculously bright programmer types but you're pretty much certain they're going down the path of the MGTOW/Incel because of their peculiar tendencies that might auto-select them out of the gene pool. Now, take the entire population, throw another 10-20 points on top of that and you might fuck everything up.

[Genghis Khan]

(10-14-2017 02:53 AM)Fortis Wrote:  

(10-14-2017 01:08 AM)Genghis Khan Wrote:  

snip

Thanks for writing this post!

I do want to say one thing, I am not being contrarian because I don't like the guy, but I just really dig these sorts of discussions, so I hope I'm not coming across as overly argumentative for no reason.

I am inclined to agree that mega high IQs are probably dysgenic, I was actually pondering this the other day. The smartest guy I know is probably the least "motivated" guy in many ways because he does not engage with reality all that much. He is a chemist. He goes to work and does pretty well for himself but everyone in his family resents him because his verbal and mathematical intelligence is off the charts but the second they mention "business" or "PHD routes" he's like "pffft."

Great point on CRISPR and I was considering this as well. I live in China and while the population is high IQ, the sad thing is that you meet some of these ridiculously bright programmer types but you're pretty much certain they're going down the path of the MGTOW/Incel because of their peculiar tendencies that might auto-select them out of the gene pool. Now, take the entire population, throw another 10-20 points on top of that and you might fuck everything up.

No problem dude, this is why I love RVF and keep coming back. It's one of the rare places we can have great conversations like this.

[Fortis]

(10-14-2017 02:24 AM)Genghis Khan Wrote:  

This is why I don't like reading (auto)biographies. Or at least I don't like recommending them to the average college kid. There are some things you can learn from biographies such as the value of tenacity in the face of terrible luck (for which, QC's work may be the best in the business), but I feel too many people focus on trying to emulate the same type of result instead of the process. I wonder how many kids read Elon Musk's biography, hoping to make the next Tesla, not realizing they're 20 IQ points too dumb to ever get there.

Tangential but I agree. I often find that people don't contextualize these people. Like you read about how Zuckerberg was designing video games when other kids were playing them. There are some people you should not try to emulate, especially technocrats and other people who are literally so beyond you in terms of processing speed and raw talent.

also, thanks for the reminder to snap up some QC materials.