Going off of a shock from the previous learning, we are introduced to one of the smartest men on the planet, Chris Langan. Where a normal person has an IQ of around 100, and a "genius" has one of around 140, Langan has one of 195. It's expected that someone like this would be very renown around the world, but, surprisingly, throughout his entire life, he hasn't had any of the success that his IQ would suggest. However, on the other hand, Robert Oppenheimer, the head of the Manhattan Project, was also very educated. The difference is that he had things go his way throughout his entire life, leading up to worldwide fame that can be contributed to his intelligence. Conversely, Langan's intelligence appears to have not contributed to anything, with him ending up with a lower than average life. These men were the "outliers" of their time and people, with their IQ setting them apart from anyone else, which should seemingly change their lives for the better. If so, then what did Oppenheimer have that Langan doesn't?
Well, this was a step up from last time. If Canadian hockey players' skill and success are reliant on their birthdays is interesting, finding out that one of the smartest people in the world isn't seen as anyone special in the public eye should be quite surprising. While the reason why may seem very simplistic on the surface, it becomes quite complex when observing his situation. Gladwell describes how despite his hard work and natural talent for academics, his and many others' success is largely dependent on the financial situation of their families. Of course, as history students or even people who watch the news, it's no surprise that people in worse living situations won't have nearly as many opportunities as those in better ones. However, Langan's history is analyzed quite deeply, creating a strong connection between his early life and level of success. Langan was raised in a very poor household, with having to move from house to house frequently and having 3 other brothers, all of them having different, abusive fathers. While Langan was always inquisitive and curious, he always felt restrictive, due to jobs or the education system in his run-down city. Despite his amazing IQ, he never graduated college, quiting because of financial and practical issues. He was never able to take advantage of his intelligence. Oppenheimer was in a completely opposite situation, coming from an educated and successful mother and father, and living in an area that was beneficiary to his education. According to Gladwell, the separative factor between the two is the family's financial situation, where the wealthier families allow their children to go to more extracurricular activities, which teaches them social skills, and it allows the parents to communicate with them, cultivating comfortable speaking skills with elders. On the other hand, less wealthy families can't afford the activities, since more work is required. This prevents those same opportunities for social growth from those children, creating someone more withdrawn from elders. Buying anything, or using money for education purposes, is not mentioned at all. So with this, while things like IQ is genetic intelligence, social skills is instead gathered knowledge. This explains Langan's situation, as even with his IQ of 195, he never got the social skills to make it in the real world, to the point where he felt uncomfortable to tell his Calculus teacher that the class was being taught badly. This prevented a situation where he could've continued college, which involved a simple change in schedule, and could've changed his future. This is seen as the complete opposite of Oppenheimer, whose family wealth gave him the social skills to be charismatic and successful later on. To me, this made me reflect on what kind of person I was throughout the entirety of school. Even though I've been pretty successful with tests and academics, my social life is lacking compared to many of the friends I know. I wonder, and even worry at times, if my hard work will be for nothing, and if my social skills will hold me back from being anything truly worthwhile, as it did for Langan. I have certainly grown as a social person in the last year or so, but so has everyone else. With the competitive nature of high school, perhaps I've been too late to make a beneficial change for myself. I don't like stressing about those things, but they stay in the back of my head.
Really sorry for the very long post. I find this certain anti-success story to be something that really stuck out to me, since the main idea and message goes into my fears for the future. There was also so much background info that needed to be shared to truly appreciate what Gladwell had to say. Overall, this week, I had trouble with reading this section of the book. While the pages weren't longer or any harder to read, the work required from other classes made reading during the week very impractical. I ended up reading on the same day that this is being posted, but I'll work towards a weekend schedule. I would really recommend researching more about Chris Langan. Even if you're not interested in his present life, since he's not really someone of recognition, the claims behind this man academically are really something to behold. What do you think should take priority in one's life: academics, like Langan, or social appeal, like Oppenheimer? How much of these aspects about ourselves are out of our control, such as Langan's family? All of these are good to keep in mind as more about the way success is gained is analyzed through this book, and I hope that this really resonates with you, since success is something so valued. I know it did to me.