John Forbes Nash
Absent or broken pic
Absent or broken pic
My reasoning as to why he is an INTJ is that he took a very "sportly" approach to his career. He was a narcissistic elitist, who tackled the hardest problems for the sake of them being socially accepted as hard. He was also actively hunting the Fields Medal as a goal to reach. Most INTP mathematicians seem to be content to just live in their abstract realm and discover various ideas, without caring too much about being better than others. He was also at least as much a narcissistic elitist as he was schizotypical.
The problem is that he wasn't considered as actually having schizophrenia until much later, and his early life at most corresponds to some sort of schizotypy (which is extremely highly correlated to INTP type). But forget correlation and let's look at how he actually behaved. In his early life, he always wanted to do things his own way, constantly daydreamed, relieved boredom with pranks, had a very irresponsible attitude to his own science experiments, was described by a fellow student as "always full of mathematical ideas" (Ne), and said his "most vivid memory" was Nash's game playing and creation. So saying that his game theory contributions just "came out of nowhere" doesn't seem right, and even if it came with no exposition, that is not a sign of Ne over Ni just because Newton did that similarly. Newton is typed as INTJ for other reasons.
Don't know what his type is but that argument for INTP just look like symptoms and effects of schizophrenia. Well dunno really. I see similarity with Newton in the way he presented his work - out of no where without much exposition.
Would some INTJ voter explain their vote? My knowledge of Nash is limited to A Beautiful Mind which I doubt is 100% accurate, so I can't weigh in.
In terms of functions, the biggest disparity I see that would be useful for typing is comparing Ne with Te, and he clearly had tons more Ne, which is a pretty solid way to tell apart INTPs from INTJs when they seem to be strong in both Ti and Ni.
Please someone, read this and explain how he is INTJ: http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/Biographies/Nash.html
Well this is what I was talking about (from his early life): "Both John Nash's history with schizophrenia and intellectual brilliance began at a young age. According to Nasar (2001), Nash was "a singular little boy, solitary and introverted" (p. 4). He was socially avoidant, academically above average, yet under achieving. His parents forced him to participate in social activities although he neither enjoyed nor perpetuated the continuance of such involvement. He developed bizarre behaviors such as grass eating, animal torture, and inappropriate chemical experiments, and his teachers report consistent daydreaming and an inability to follow directions."
I'm happy that my comment was able to inspire another INTJ vote, still with no explanation why. I did use Google Translate for the French part of this page and didn't see any strong arguments, so I tried reading a little of his famous paper and while an INTJ would certainly be capable of such a thing, it seems more like a focus that would be of interest to an INTP. Also, when you read this page, I can't help but think he was naturally a stereotypical INTP: http://psychological-musings.blogspot.com/2011/06/case-study-john-forbes-nash-jr.html
Why is he INTJ rather than INTP?
Même si je ne connais que le dilemme du prisonnier, je trouve sa théorie des jeux fascinante... Je ne pense pas qu'elle soit forcément toute-puissante en économie (en fait je m'en fous pas mal), mais c'est sa résonance dans tous les domaines de la vie que je trouve folle. <br>Et puis la vie de ce mec est totalement dingue. Il est devenu fou, a vécu dans un asile psychiatrique et en est revenu. Je like.
Mandelbrot prouve que l'économie et la finance suivent des critères scalables, que l'hypothèse de normalité est donc à rejeter. Il enseigne que la loi des grand nombres ne mène pas systématiquement à une Gaussienne. Ce n'est pas un raccourci puisque cela détruit les hypothèses sur lesquelles se base Nash pour l'application de ses théories en économie...
Ah oui ils sont d'utilité. Tiens Kerviel a fait joujou avec :-)
Fin, je me précise : on peut étudier Nash quand on regarde sous l'angle des sciences mathématiques, c'est pas faux dans la cohérence interne. Mais de là à l'appliquer en économie... ça tient pas une seule seconde, il reprend déjà les erreurs d'Adam Smith...
Ben, si tu likes Mandelbrot je vois pas ce que je peux dire de plus... Mandelbrot explose Nash quoi...
Basé sur des hypothèses anthropologiques fausses.
La fameuse théorie des jeux... Il y avait une matière entièrement consacrée à ça en économie.