There are a bunch of adjectives I would use to describe Asimov, and egotistical is so far down the list I'd get bored listing them before I got to it. It seems likely to be a realistic and honest self-assessment, on the basis of the breadth, depth, and foresight, of Asimov's written work. If you're Usain Bolt, is it egotistical to say, "I'm probably the fastest runner in the world?" Why is intellect so much different? Sure, there's no precise measure of intelligence...but, someone with great intellectual achievement gets to, at the very least, lay claim to great intellect.

It would be easily dismissed if said by someone much less accomplished. In this case, I just take it as a frank statement of belief.

Regardless, I think it's safe to say Minsky was a great intellect, of a caliber not often seen.

I don't think bolt could say that. He'll be in the very top (for certain kinds of metrics), but to say #1? That presumes you know your rank compared to 8B+ people.

I would have preferred Asimov to say something like "Sagan and minsky are the brightest minds I've encountered in my life." And if you think Asimov is super smart, then you'll respect Sagan and Minsky that much more. And you'll respect Asimov too for not being so egotistical. It doesn't even matter if it's actually true or not.

Minsky, in my experience, demonstrated humility when talking with or listening to him. For that I gain admiration beyond the talent.

It's a quotation, taken out of context, without any additional side channel information. Might be a good idea to not form a strong opinion of a very smart man from this.

Especially given that Asimov said he stopped understanding Calculus when he got stuck on the Quotient Rule (i.e., couldn't be bothered to learn the proof)

Have you read much of what Asimov wrote about himself?

You are not Isaac Asimov. Therefore you cannot know his mind. So maybe he wasn't boasting at all.

Isaac Asimov wasn't any of the people he wasn't talking about either, so maybe he should've kept it shut about their minds, too.

But that wouldn't make good banter.

If that's true, then he needs to work on his language because it's easily interpreted that way. Either that or the GP needs to expand the quote.

Sure, but he was incredibly smart.

Being a writer doesn't say anything about his intellect, you didn't know the man so he could likely be being completely honest.