Conversation with Anthony Sepulveda (Brown) on Intellectual Function and Personality, Formal Mental Illness, Narcissism, Motivation, AtlantIQ-UNICEF, Jeffrey Ford, Societal Renewal, and a Holy Grail of the High-IQ Communities: Member, World Genius Directory (6)

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/10/22

Abstract

Anthony Sepulveda scored 174 (S.D.15) on Cosmic and is a member of the World Genius Directory. He discusses: poor social standing; poor economic standing; depression; other health risks; narcissism; highly intelligent couch potatoes; novel situations in which contexts may be non-commutative; professions valuing intelligence in their employees; Mensa a practical option for reasonably intelligent people; AtlantIQ’s efforts important for pragmatic use of intelligent people; Jeffrey Ford; societies renew themselves; the “very poor condition” of the high-IQ community; identifying the disadvantaged; spatial problems; and a possible Holy Grail of the high-IQ world.

Keywords: Anthony Sepulveda (Brown), AtlantIQ, intellect, Jeffrey Ford, mental illness, motivation, narcissism, society, UNICEF.

Conversation with Anthony Sepulveda (Brown) on Intellectual Function and Personality, Formal Mental Illness, Narcissism, Motivation, AtlantIQ-UNICEF, Jeffrey Ford, Societal Renewal, and a Holy Grail of the High-IQ Communities: Member, World Genius Directory (6)

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

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: While not having the space for a book, necessarily, off the bat, let’s parse the average intelligence question more particularly in the lines delineated, the factors of poor social and economic standing, depression, and other health risks. If we’re looking at poor social standing, what happens in this case of average intellectual function on personality, where interpersonal and prestige stature are not great?

Anthony Sepulveda (Brown)[1],[2]*: The ability to solve a problem can instill a sense of confidence that will last throughout one’s life. It can make anything seem possible if you only make the correct sequence of moves.

Jacobsen: If we’re looking at poor economic standing, what happens in this case of average intellectual function on personality, where income and net wealth is affected?

Sepulveda (Brown): If you’re unable to resolve problems in your life, a general lack of motivation will prevent you from progressing far towards goals. If your goal is to improve your economic status, you need to truly understand your situation and know how to cultivate the tools and resources necessary to gain the funds and skills you need to do so.

Jacobsen: If we’re looking at depression, what happens in this case of average intellectual function on personality, where feeling bad for months or years at a time becomes a formal mental illness?

Sepulveda (Brown): Depression is the result of having a problem that you cannot resolve or accept enough to move on from. By gaining further insight into the nature of that problem you may be able to move forward enough to get through it. But this can be very hard. Increasingly so as time goes by. Human nature is essentially a number of habits we develop over time. And we often tend to pursue options that continue the trend of our lives. Obvious examples are those who grew up in an unhealthy household and grow up to consistently pursue similar relationships because they feel uncomfortable or unworthy around anything better. It kills me to know that no matter how obvious a solution will be, such people will always make the wrong choice.

Jacobsen: If we’re looking at other health risks, what happens in this case of average intellectual function on personality, where inability to self-care leads to generalized increased risk to negative health outcomes?

Sepulveda (Brown): I’m not sure how much of an impact general intelligence has on one’s health. While it can help motivate one’s desire to avoid certain hazards, I’ve encountered people of all levels that either prioritize or avoid exercise and proper nutrition. It seems more likely that one’s health is a tool used to achieve other goals such as boosting your ego, getting attention from others, pursuing careers such as modeling or athletics, feeling superior to those who live unhealthy lives (such as how vegans tend to chastise those who eat meat) or simply to live longer for personal reasons.

Jacobsen: How does narcissism connect to high intelligence and then lead to worse mental health outcomes?

Sepulveda (Brown): Receiving validation for a belief that you’re better than others (intellectually, in this case) will naturally reenforce or promote a narcissistic personality. If such beliefs are founded upon faulty data from a flawed or invalid IQ test, an individual will likely form an equally invalid opinion of themselves or inspire them to pursue paths they aren’t prepared for

Jacobsen: Even if we take the analysis of “actions, interactions and reactions of the objects (nonliving material) and subjects (living material) in an area,” and if we take individuals capable of a greater grasp of the aforementioned “in an area,” what of the factors of motivation to drive action on the analysis? We all know highly intelligent couch potatoes.

Sepulveda (Brown): This is a very interesting problem when analyzing the impact of personality on intelligence. Clearly, one’s patience, attention span, motivation, etc. will have an impact on their ability to solve a specific problem (especially on untimed tests). But there doesn’t seem to be any socially valid method with which to objectively determine and compensate for a person’s personality on an IQ test. Even if we were to set a time for a person to complete a valid test where the time allowed to work on it is based on their level of stress and/or other physiological inhibitions, there’d be no way to prevent people from unfairly compensating (via drugs or mental preparation (i.e. the Practice Effect)).

Jacobsen: What about novel situations in which contexts may be non-commutative?

Sepulveda (Brown): Such situations are very rare and almost any attempt to resolve a problem under such conditions will result in failure. Clear communication is always necessary, especially when two or more people are involved.

Jacobsen: To “professions [that] value intelligence in their employees,” what ones come to mind? Maybe, the uncommon ones rather than ones, typically, stipulated including pure mathematician or theoretical physicist.

Sepulveda (Brown): IT companies like Google use riddles and logic problems during their interview process to determine whether or not a candidate is truly capable of performing the tasks required of them.

Jacobsen: What makes Mensa a practical option for reasonably intelligent people?

Sepulveda (Brown): Mensa has a lot to offer. They consistently publish a variety of new articles for members to enjoy and offer group meetings and lectures that anyone can attend. For me personally, I’ve greatly enjoyed the conversations held at such meetings. I’ve met a few people that I could connect with to form lasting friendships with and attending the lectures inspires me to create presentations of my own.

Jacobsen: What makes AtlantIQ’s efforts important for pragmatic use of intelligent people? Any thoughts on their UNICEF project?

Sepulveda (Brown): I’m aware that they support UNICEF, but I don’t believe that they hold any particular place within the company itself. As for their efforts, I appreciate how often they emphasize the belief that changing the world for the better takes practical effort. To this end, they often hold contests that require members to find solutions to a variety of world problems (education, renewable energy, environmental stability, etc.). Which is a lot more effort towards a much more noble pursuit than almost every other IQ Society performs. I have the utmost respect for Beatrice Rescazzi and those that work with her.

Jacobsen: What makes a person like Jeffrey Ford tick and work to advance concrete actionables for utilization of – what seems like – a real trait in intelligence for positive benefit in reasonable timelines?

Sepulveda (Brown): I wish I knew. I tried contacting him directly to get some insight, but he wasn’t available. So I’m not aware of whether or not he’s had similar internal debates himself. If he has, he clearly believes that even a temporary effect is worth the effort.

Jacobsen: How could these societies renew themselves and not “waste each other’s time”?

Sepulveda (Brown): By requiring higher standards of proof of personal ability, they’ll create an aura of prestige that some may take more seriously. It would also help if they had a purpose beyond simply existing such as a unanimous desire to solve a specific problem.

Jacobsen: What are some of the other factors filtering into the “very poor condition” of the high-IQ community as it lie prostrate in worship of the aforementioned golden calf of false pursuits?

Sepulveda (Brown): The sad fact is that most people seem to join simply to feel good about themselves for joining. They never had any real drive to do anything practical with their gifts and the community as a whole stagnated into its current condition.

Jacobsen: How could tests such as Cattell’s help identify disadvantaged kids? For example, kids in poor countries such as India with innate abilities and talent while lacking resources, or in highly underserved rural communities or reserves of Native Americans in America or Aboriginals in Canada, or Aborigines in Australia or the Maori in New Zealand – the last largest remnant of European colonial history outside of the ongoing Israel-Palestine issue.

Sepulveda (Brown): I suppose it could be used to identify specific kids if there were an incentive like free schooling. But there are several problems – 1. Cattell’s test is clearly designed to be taken by American or European people. The pictures in it correlate with objects that have a specific design primarily found in those areas (such as the shape of a chimney or stove). So while it is the fairest test I’m aware of, it isn’t useful on a global scale.

2. Say we were to successfully identify gifted children in those areas. We’d have to send them miles away from their home, friends and, likely, family in order to bestow anything of value to them. Those areas simply don’t have the facilities necessary to cultivate their gifts to their highest potential and installing one there would take a lot of effort for very little reward. So, unless the relatively minor impact made on such communities as a whole is worth it (as seen in the efforts of non-profit organizations), the whole venture seems like a waste of time.

3. Say we were to successfully find gifted children in those areas and do everything we can to develop their abilities. What then? It seems to me that they’re very unlikely to go back to their original community. Between the choice of family and community vs opportunity, especially if they were extricated as children, one side is gonna be a lot more appealing. So, if the results of our effort is simply the removal of the best people from the poorest communities, all we’ve done is further impoverish those areas.

It’s a difficult problem. The only option I see that would provide the most benefit is to offer those communities the information necessary for them to benefit as a whole.

Jacobsen: Are spatial problems, in a manner of speaking, simply speaking highly general because of being base-level visual logic problems? No words, no numbers, no concepts, no knowledge, no high-level prior experience, immediate sensory perception with a huge hunk of brain tissue devoted to the visual system with the occipital lobe and then internal, non-verbal logical reasoning on the problems presented, as such, with minimal room for false interpretation to the simplest, i.e., correct, solution for the visual presentation to fit, logically.

Sepulveda (Brown): Yes. Which leads to an interesting topic to consider – If there are a finite number of valid problems that can be used to measure intelligence, that would imply that there’s a set limit to how intelligent anyone can be. That’s why I believe that no one is all that much more capable than anyone else. The biggest differences between any two people are their experiences and the motivation those experiences inspired.

Jacobsen: I have speculated in a similar manner in other interviews on a possible Holy Grail of the high-IQ world and, in more general terms, the professional psychometric community within the concept or possibility, if general intelligence and fluid intelligence are taken seriously, of a non-verbal 6-sigma test with the same funding, renormings, sample sizes, and psychological construct reliability and validity of the WAIS, the SB(IS), Cattell’s, or the RAPM. Any thoughts on this possibility? We have a long history of underusing the talent of girls and women, which has been improving for a century. Now, we see an increasing consistency of underused gifted and talented youth, and people, in general with some factors found in income inequality.

Sepulveda (Brown): Of course. I’ve spent a lot of time pondering the subject over the past couple years, mulling over various problems and weighing the pros and cons of their use. It led to the development of my own test X’s and O’s. And I’d like to make more in the future. But I don’t see much point in the effort if no one takes them. I’ve had my test up on James Dorsey’s website for over a year now and haven’t had any submissions yet. Which is a shame. I put a lot of effort into that project.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, World Genius Directory.

[2] Individual Publication Date: October 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sepulveda-6; Full Issue Publication Date: January 1, 2021: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.

License

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 www.in-sightpublishing.com.

Copyright

© 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.