Annals of Wasted Lives, II: The Tennis Queen

It’s been almost exactly two years since I wrote my first post in the “Annals of Wasted Lives” series; I try to wait until really solid examples come my way. That time has come.


In a press conference on March 18, Marion Bartoli, the #1 tennis player in France, claimed to have an IQ of 175.

This is quite the claim. The average person has an IQ of 100; an IQ of 132 will get you into Mensa. An IQ of 175 would be about 5 standard deviations above the mean for intelligence, putting Ms. Bartoli in the range of the 99.99997th percentile of intelligence; put another way, she would be 1 person in about 3.33 million in terms of intellectual ability.* A Yahoo! sports blog claims that an IQ of 175 would exceed the IQs of Albert Einstein and Thomas Edison. (I myself am aware of no reliable figures for the IQs of these people.)

Let’s mention one issue just to set it aside. I was trained to assess intelligence professionally as part of my doctoral training in psychology, and I am aware of no intelligence test that reliably assesses intelligence above about 150; one might wonder what test was supposedly given to Ms. Bartoli as a child.

But there is a much larger question here: If Ms. Bartoli really possesses a 1-person-in-3.33-million intellect, what is she doing playing tennis?

The world we live in is beset by major challenges: war; terrorism; climate change; poverty; famine; disease; economic upheaval; crime; illiteracy; a myriad of unsolved scientific mysteries and obstacles to technological progress, not to mention problems created by technological progress. Someone possessing an intellect like Ms. Bartoli claims to have should be working primarily on these issues, and playing killer tennis on the weekends.

Am I being judgmental here? Yessiree! Hang on, the best is yet to come.

Individuals like Ms. Bartoli seem focused on their own glory and wealth. In plain words, hers is a self-centered, selfish, even narcissistic quest. Nothing she does will make one life better except her own, and the lives of those on whom she spends money. This is a hollow life, a life of meaningless achievement and acquisition. Absolutely nothing of any greater purpose hinges on whether Ms. Bartoli wins or loses her next match.

But so what? Where do I get off, making judgments like this? Where I take off from is a principle, one that I described at some length in my first post in this series: Our lives are not our own. We owe it to the human race to make the world better than how we found it. On this basis, one has to judge Ms. Bartoli’s life as sorely wanting.

I don’t expect that this post will make one iota of difference to Ms. Bartoli, who almost certainly will never read these words. However, my hope is that my rude words will serve to make us reflect on the direction of our own lives, and the purposes that our actions serve. Because our lives really are not our own; we really do owe something to the world and humanity.

Geniuses—self-proclaimed or otherwise—who withhold their talents from addressing the world’s need are definitely not On The Mark.

[The photo of Marion Bartoli at the 2009 U.S. Open was taken on August 31 of that year by Robbie Mendelson. It was obtained through Wikimedia Commons and appears here under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic License.]

*William M. Meredith, Basic Mathematical and Statistical Tables for Psychology and Education (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967), p. 187, calculated from figures regarding z equal to ± 5.00.

Copyright 2011 Mark E. Koltko-Rivera. All Rights Reserved.

Annals of Wasted Lives, I: The Poker King

The March 30 issue of The New Yorker carries Alec Wilkinson's article profiling Chris Ferguson (pictured), the first person to win a prize of more than $1 million in a poker tournament (the 2000 World Series of Poker), and the co-founder of one of the most profitable on-line poker sites ever launched. Ferguson is unusual even among poker grandmasters for his application of John Von Neumann's mathematical game theory to poker, which has allowed Ferguson to develop an "optimal strategy" for poker. Of course, Ferguson comes from an unusual background: his mother obtained a doctorate in mathematics, as did his father, who taught game theory and theoretical probability at UCLA; Ferguson himself holds a doctorate in computer science from UCLA.

Chris Ferguson, 46 next week, is a brilliant man. To date, he has won more than $7 million playing poker, and reportedly has earned even more than that just through his on-line poker business ventures. Financially, he is wildly successful--and he is wasting his life.

In Chris Ferguson, we have a certifiable hyper-genius, called "one of the more brilliant and creative young men that I've known in my career at U.C.L.A." by his doctoral thesis adviser. (That adviser knows brilliance when he sees it; he is Leonard Kleinrock, whose lab helped develop the Internet.) But to what is Ferguson applying this brilliance? He's playing cards.

We live in a world that faces problems, nasty problems, horrifying problems, human-species-extinction-scale problems. A short list: global terrorism, the threat of bioweapons and suitcase nukes in private hands, famine, weird weather (likely caused by global warming), worst-ever inequities between economic classes, religious extremism that foments suicide attacks and warfare, lack of intercultural understanding, illiteracy, innumeracy, the resurgence of antibiotic-resistant infections, lack of affordable healthcare, a global economy sliding towards a New Depression, kids dying from dysentery and other preventable diseases, by the thousands, daily--hey, asteroids from space. And what's this guy doing? Playing cards.

Yes, I can imagine what some readers are thinking: "If this is a way to waste your life--count me in!" However, before you sign up yourself or your kids for Poker Camp this summer, let me point out a few things.

Our lives are not our own. Every reputable philosophical, spiritual, or religious position holds that people have a responsibility to give back, to do something for the world with their talents. Ferguson--who has sometimes signed autographs as 'Jesus' because of his looks, although reportedly he is an atheist--would do well to consider the real Jesus' parable of the servants (Bible, New Testament, Luke chapter 12), which carries the memorable phrase, "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required" (Luke 12:48). Or, if you prefer, as the Spider-Man comic put it, "with great power comes great responsibility." Abraham Maslow, one of the greatest psychologists of the 20th century--himself an atheist--found that an even higher level of motivation than self-actualization (or expressing one's own talents) is self-transcendence, that is, furthering some cause or purpose beyond one's own needs. Few people are better equipped to make a contribution to society at large than Chris Ferguson. But he's playing cards.

I have to wonder what Ferguson's stunning intellect could accomplish in the world. Game theory applies to all sorts of behavior, such as negotiations between groups; in this globalized world, where mistrustful groups face one another left and right, perhaps game theory might help to promote better outcomes in cultural encounters and ethnic conflicts. One might use game theory to better understand the way the stock market melted down recently, to promote better social stability and prosperity for all. Going way out on a limb, I wonder about the application of game theory to evolutionary theory and, in turn, to theories about the development (and thus the treatment) of infectious diseases. (Do cells negotiate amongst themselves? Do species?) I cannot come up with all the ways that Chris Ferguson might apply his prodigious intelligence to the problems of the world--but apply them he certainly might. Nah--he's playing cards.

Perhaps I misunderstand Chris Ferguson. Perhaps he spends his free time working on the mathematics of innovative cures for cancer. If so, I beg his pardon. Based on the known facts, I don't think so.

Isn't this all terribly judgmental? You bet! That's social commentary--and life: applying standards and passing judgment. Working from a reflective perspective just means that I apply standards like "our lives are not our own." The point is not to beat up on Chris Ferguson, but to encourage a more thoughtful approach to life on everyone's part.

On that basis--the idea that one ought to use one's natural gifts for the good of humanity--I'm sorry to say that Chris Ferguson is NOT On The Mark.

Reference

Wilkinson, A. (2009, March 30). What would Jesus bet? The New Yorker, pp. 30-35.