Skip to content

An Interview with Anas El-Husseini on Background, Test Scores, and Views (Part One)


Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/08/01


Anas El-Husseini is a Member of the Glia Society. He discusses: growing up; an extended self; the family background; experience with peers and schoolmates; the purpose of intelligence tests; high intelligence discovered; geniuses; the greatest geniuses in history; a genius from a profoundly intelligent person; some work experiences and educational certifications; the more important aspects of the idea of the gifted and geniuses; some social and political views; the God concept; science; the tests taken and scores earned; the range of the scores; scores earned on alternative intelligence tests; and ethical philosophy.

Keywords: Anas El-Husseini, Glia Society, high-IQ, Lebanon, test scores, views.

An Interview with Anas El-Husseini on Background, Test Scores, and Views (Part One)[1],[2]*

*Please see the footnotes, bibliography, and citation style listing after the interview.*

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: When you were growing up, what were some of the prominent family stories being told over time?

Anas El Husseini: I was born in a big city (big relatively to the size of the country), and people in the cities here seem less interested to talk about family ancestors or carry on with family legacies. At least, that’s how it was in the last century or so. People originating from villages or small towns, on the other hand, are usually very proud and attached to their ancestral legacy, and they hang onto it even when they move to bigger cities. As a result, and despite the fact that I belong to branch of a large family, I do not know much about my direct ancestor history, except for some random memories narrated sometimes by the elders of the family.

2. Jacobsen: Have these stories helped provide a sense of an extended self or a sense of the family legacy?

El Husseini: Not family stories themselves for the reason explained before, but stories coming from classic literature (especially eastern literature) have often played a role in emphasizing moral traits and pointing out good and bad personal traits for me.

3. Jacobsen: What was the family background, e.g., geography, culture, language, and religion or lack thereof?

El Husseini: I live in Tripoli, a city located on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea, and the second  largest city in Lebanon. Lebanon is small country in the Middle East. It is famous for its richness of historical heritage, variety of climates (there is an hour or so by car between the sea and the snowy mountains), and diversity of religious and non-religious beliefs. Where I live, the climate is moderate to hot, the official spoken language is the Arabic language (although most people can speak or understand a bit of French or English), and about 90% of the city inhabitants are Muslims, the rest being mostly Christians. Neighboring towns and cities have different distributions of Muslims and Christians (the 2 major religions in Lebanon), if we disregard the different sects that derive from each religion and exist in this country as well.

4. Jacobsen: How was the experience with peers and schoolmates as a child and an adolescent?

El Husseini: In the years of childhood and adolescence, I had many friends but only so few (and sometimes none) close friends or real friends. Although I considered my relationship was good with most my schoolmates, I was surprised to find out later that my good sentiments towards the others were sometimes not reciprocated. One fellow student once told me that he did not like me because I am the favorite student to the teachers. Others would swap their friendships with me and a rival schoolmate depending on whoever they’re currently allied with and is more useful to them.

5. Jacobsen: What is the purpose of intelligence tests to you?

El Husseini: They were initially mental challenges, which I often used to seek out since I was young in the form of puzzles and games first. Later on, they became a gateway to find highly intelligent people and enter a world private to them.

6. Jacobsen: When was high intelligence discovered for you?

El Husseini: When I was 10 years old, I was enrolled in a summer school specialized for students with high grades. We had been submitted to a test of unknown nature to me at the time, and we were asked to answer as much questions as we can. I knew later it was an I.Q. test (I don’t currently remember any of the questions so I don’t know the test name). I was the second top scorer then, but they informed me that my score is relatively higher than the top scorer since I was 4 years older than him.

7. Jacobsen: When you think of the ways in which the geniuses of have either been mocked, vilified, and condemned if not killed, or praised, flattered, platformed, and revered, what seems like the reason for the extreme reactions to and treatment of geniuses? Many alive today seem camera shy – many, not all.

El Husseini: Most geniuses seem to be introverts, which explains why they are camera shy, but that’s the minor reason. Geniuses often don’t blend well in their surroundings. They can be misunderstood, too fast for the others, have “weird” likings/dislikings, etc. On the other hand, the outside world (other people) in the eyes of the genius is often illogical and contradictory. This creates a wall of isolation, and the more the genius tries to apply his logic outside the more this wall thickens, and conflicts sure come after. We see a lot of geniuses recognized only after deaths, because during their lifetimes, they were either ignored or fought by those carry envy or ignorance.

8. Jacobsen: Who seem like the greatest geniuses in history to you?

El Husseini: There are so many whom I consider great geniuses in history. Leonardo Da Vinci is one of them for reasons too obvious to explain. Another genius is probably one of the less known to the readers of those lines, Ibn Taymiyyah. He lived in the 13th-14th century A.D., and was a Muslim scholar who, aside from his vast knowledge in all contemporary religions, was also a logician, a philosopher, a judge, a linguistic, a prolific writer, and many other things. He was well ahead of his time and one can hardly find a type of science that Ibn Taymiyyah had not had his share of knowledge from. He was imprisoned more than once because of his teachings and writings that were not to the likings to his contemporary scholars. Some of his rivals who were close to the ruler then, so they conspired against him which led to his imprisonment. He died in his prison, but the whole city accompanied his funeral to the graveyard, except for three people who were the cause of his incarceration.

9. Jacobsen: What differentiates a genius from a profoundly intelligent person?

El Husseini: I am not an expert in the high intelligence terminology, but I find no unified definition for the term “Genius”. There are definitions that are very loose, and others with so much constraints that they exclude people who could be considered geniuses. I consider that the genius traits depicted in Paul Cooijmans articles about the Genius are very accurate and comprehensive, although I do not agree with him on some of them. I do not consider the ethical traits are required for one to be considered a genius. Unethical and evil geniuses can exist, and there are geniuses who turned from unethical to ethical during their lifetimes, and that’s found both in history and in the present time. A genius is born genius, but his ethical compass may not be always fixed at birth. One of the major influences on the ethical compass of a genius is ironically one of the traits that are remarked in geniuses: the strong ego. A strong ego can result sometimes in envy, arrogance and even a denial of the truth. Any of those traits can the downfall of personal ethics. That being said, another way to distinguish a genius from a profoundly intelligent is the effect of his/her works on the outside world. An intelligent person will soon cease to exist after his death, but a genius will be immortalized by the sparkling traces that he/she left behind.

10. Jacobsen: What have been some work experiences and educational certifications for you?

El Husseini: My educational certifications include some in the fields of programming, networking, linguistics, calligraphy and other stuff. My work experiences consist of teaching, developing computer and mobile software, and various IT skills.

11. Jacobsen: What are some of the more important aspects of the idea of the gifted and geniuses? Those myths that pervade the cultures of the world. What are those myths? What truths dispel them?

El Husseini: People often confuse the notation of genius with that of a successful man. A genius may not be always able to convince others with his ways or thinkings, let alone reach a financial success out of them. On the other hand, the success achieved by persons whom people call “geniuses”, are often built on the sweat of others, or on the results of unethical conducts. Moreover, some of those so-called geniuses may have just bought the credit of the work with their money. A genius needs not to spend money or manipulate the public to prove his worth. So real geniuses, usually lacking the tools to spread their works or ideas without opposition, can be neglected till after their deaths. However, seldom you will find a genius, even if strongly opposed or mocked, that was neglected by history, or whose effects did not reveal their true worth even after a while.

12. Jacobsen: What are some social and political views for you? Why hold them?

El Husseini: I consider that most political parties are very much like business corporations. They care most about their gains, and any other claims by them is just a step to gain more trust to achieve their aforementioned main goal. This is true even in a democratic ruling with a large population or with a small population that has much diversity (my country belonging to the latter type). There are examples of smaller more homogeneous populations were democracy proves suitable and the elected ruler was able fulfill his role justly without having hidden agendas or putting some egoistical goals  first. I find the democratic ruling not always suitable for every country because it always assumes all are people are equal. It is correct that all people are, and should be, treated equal regarding their rights. But to make the opinions of the intelligent and the idiot, the educated and the ignorant, the expert and the layman, etc all the same in formulating the laws and the lifestyles of a whole country seem very bizarre, especially when there are powerful and rich parties that can bias the opinions of common people towards them (not necessarily by bribing), and it will still appear as a democracy. Most people consider the equality of votes as a common required right, although they do not consider expert’s and non-expert’s opinions equal on other more trivial matters. For that reason, I consider that a more just ruling system is a one where the ruler is elected by the elite of his population.

13. Jacobsen: Any thoughts on the God concept or gods idea and philosophy, theology, and religion?

El Husseini: Personally, I have followed several lines of logic, and they all led me to the one and same conclusion. Here is one of them. If we follow the origin of species, the origin of nature, and the origin of the universe, whether we assume the creation of three were interdependent or otherwise, we are bound to arrive to few origins: the origin matter, the first movement, and the origin law of physics. The origin matter exists because we know that the universe is finite and is changing with time, so it must have an origin at some point of time that differs in shape and characteristics. The moving universe we observe today is a result of an initial push, because a static object cannot generate movement on its own, thus the first movement must have existed. The origin law of physics are the most basic laws of movement, electricity, magnetism, etc from which all other secondary natural laws derived later, such as laws of chemistry and of biology. For those three origins to exist, they either existed on their own, or an external party has caused them to exist. Void, quiet, and chaos can exist on their own, because they’re the representation of nothingness. Their opposites cannot exist on their own, otherwise they will be eternal, but since they are both finite in space (as the size of universe) and in time (every part of the universe has a definite starting and ending times, a definite duration of existence, a definite period of movement or change, etc), that makes it impossible for those origins to be infinite and eternal. The other option requires an external entity to create those origins. This entity must possess the qualities that the origins are lacking: infinity (opposed to limitation in space), eternity (opposed to limitation in time) and will (opposed to chaos); otherwise this entity will be another origin incapable on its own. This entity, or the origin of origins, is what is commonly called as God or gods. If the existence of a God entity is established by logic, everything beyond it, and everything dependent on it, is much easier to deduce. Take as an example the question of one God or multiple ones. If there are two or more gods: either they’re all equal or one is stronger than the rest. If there is stronger one, he will overpower or nullify the rest, and only one will remain. If they’re equal, their wills are bound to contradict at some point since they are independent entities, which will threaten the whole existence of a creation like the universe, or create opposite rules or phenomenons at the same time. From the overall stability of the universe (it didn’t cease to exist at some point then re-existed), and from the consistency within its natural rules, we can safely eliminate the possibility of equal gods as well, which leaves the remaining possibility of one God.

This was my line of logic about the origins and God. It extends far than that to reach the topic of religions, but going on with it will make the answer much too long, so I will leave the rest for another occasion perhaps.

14. Jacobsen: How much does science play into the worldview for you?

El Husseini: Science, with its different categories (such as physics, chemistry, biology, etc), is the representation of the laws of universe as they really are and as we observe them. As time passes, our inventory of the knowledge of those laws grows up. It happens sometimes that our knowledge of science diminishes due to destroying of science records (by wars or by parties against the science or its people) or nonexistence of historical records about an era or some phenomenons in it (for example, we still don’t know for sure how the pyramids were built). Science is independent from affections, sentiments and political views (or any other views for that matter), and must be always treated as such. For instance, claiming that genres are different than sexes is unscientific, since sexuality is biologically tied to sexual organs, sexual glands and sexual chromosomes. Claiming a state that contradicts with the biological state is contradicting biology and therefore contradicting science itself.

15. Jacobsen: What have been some of the tests taken and scores earned (with standard deviations) for you?

El Husseini: Aside from the unknown I.Q. test I took when I was 10 years old, I took the Stanford-Binet test, in addition to unsupervised high I.Q. tests written by people from high I.Q. societies. Out of those, I took several of Paul Cooijmans tests (all use I.Q. points at S.D. 15), such as the Test of Beheaded Man (I.Q. 143), Reason Behind Multiple Choice (I.Q. 136), Isis (I.Q. 154), Bonsai (I.Q. 148), PAGAN (I.Q. 165), Sargasso (I.Q. 143), and others. I also took ENSDT test authored by Marco Ripa, and other tests by various authors.

16. Jacobsen: What is the range of the scores for you? The scores earned on alternative intelligence tests tend to produce a wide smattering of data points rather than clusters, typically.

El Husseini: My scores on Paul Cooijmans tests varied, if I remember correctly, between 130 and 165 (S.D. 15). I think I generally scored better on tests that have more logical questions, and less on tests that have more spatial questions, which may explain the wide range between my lowest and highest scores.

17. Jacobsen: What ethical philosophy makes some sense, even the most workable sense to you?

El Husseini: Ethical philosophies that focus on justice, truth, honesty, doing good to others (or doing to others what you want to be done to you), and avoiding harming or cheating others, are generally what makes sense to me.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, Glia Society.

[2] Individual Publication Date: August 1, 2020:; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020:


In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at


© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: