Skip to content

Conversation with Antjuan Finch on Separation from Family, Christianity, Autism Spectrum, Leonardo Da Vinci, Jacob Barnett, CAI, and PDIT: Member, CIVIQ Society (2)


Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2021/03/15


Antjuan Finch is the Author of After Genius: On Creativity and Its ConsequencesThe 3 Sides of Man, and Applied Theory. He created the Creative Attitudes Inventory (CAT) and the Public Domain Intelligence Test (PDIT). He discusses: separated from the larger family; a “heroic attitude”; the involvement in the Christian traditions and churches in Indianapolis; the autism spectrum; formal studies; experimental online tests at; Jacob Barnett; geniuses go unrecognized; Leonardo da Vinci; the recent accomplishments; Creative Attitudes Inventory (V.1); Aberrant Salience (Unusual Thinking), Conscientiousness (discipline), and Polymathic Interests; statistics coming back for the test; Public Domain Intelligence Test (PDIT); updates on the statistical findings; strongest points in intelligence; and a universe with a self-testing function.

Keywords: Antjuan Finch, Charles Darwin, Christianity, CIVIQ Society, Creative Attitudes Inventory, intelligence, IQ, Jacob Barnett, Leonardo Da Vinci, Public Domain Intelligence Test.

Conversation with Antjuan Finch on Separation from Family, Christianity, Autism Spectrum, Leonardo Da Vinci, Jacob Barnett, CAI, and PDIT: Member, CIVIQ Society (2)

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

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Why were you mother, brothers, and you separated from the larger family?

Antjuan Finch[1],[2]*: Largely, because my larger was to a sizable degree involved with drugs, crime, and other things that are best to keep away from children. Although, not everyone in my larger family was associated with these things.

Jacobsen: What is this sense of a “heroic attitude” for you?

Finch: I have the disposition to want to solve big problems, help people, or, save the world, in some sense. I think that these are heroic qualities.  

Jacobsen: How were your brothers perceiving the involvement in the Christian traditions and churches in Indianapolis?

Finch: Both of my full siblings have somewhat of a disdain for organized religions, at the moment. Although my older brother has still maintained some very spiritual beliefs and practices, I believe. The churches that we went to as kids had extremely long services, with no breaks and very intense, moralistic tirades. The situations really weren’t ideal for restless kids. 

Jacobsen: When were you placed on the autism spectrum?

Finch: I remember that my mom, when I was young, sometimes made comments about me being on the autism spectrum, but I don’t think that I was formally diagnosed as being so. I think that, in some ways, my intelligence might mask my autistic traits, and even allow me to compensate for them, in certain situations, which may make me less likely to receive a diagnosis, given that such a diagnosis requires significant impairments in functioning. For an example of how my intelligence may mask my autistic traits, the stilted and overly formal way of communicating that is common among autists, when combined with a wide vocabulary, and clear reasoning ability, may cause someone to appear as sophisticated instead of socially maldeveloped. 

Jacobsen: Out of “creative writing, psychometrics, astrophysics, and evolutionary biology,” what were the more interesting part of those individuated formal studies?

Finch: For creative writing, I was exposed to a lot of incredible literature that I likely never would have read otherwise. For evolutionary biology, it was interesting to see how much the field had developed over time; my autodidactic study in evolutionary theory, for the most, before then, had only involved works that Charles Darwin had written. 

Jacobsen: With further experimental online tests at, did you find a community of other higher-scorers to converse and share stories?

Finch: Not really. While I ended up joining several high IQ societies, I never found gained much of a sense of community from any of them, and was hardly active in them.

Jacobsen: Where is Jacob Barnett now?

Finch: I’m not sure, he seems to have somewhat secluded from the public spotlight in recent years.

Jacobsen: Why do most geniuses go unrecognized, while, simultaneously, living in likely “squalor”? Any thoughts on the potential loss to humanity as a result?

Finch: I think that, in some ways, it may take a bit of genius to recognize one before they’ve been widely regarded as such. But to be more specific, obsessively producing extremely advanced work, creative or otherwise, can easily cause one to miss opportunities to develop the marketable skills and desirable traits which may be useful for becoming well known, and doing things other than what may be needed to just produce more and more creative work — but that may be a somewhat extreme example. Wealth has also historically been concentrated in very few hands, with much more people living in relatively impoverished states than otherwise. Given these notions, it can be inferred that prospective geniuses have been more likely to be born in, and stay in poverty than otherwise. Although, it does appear that, on occasion, a genius might become magnificently rich. 

Jacobsen: Why consider Leonardo da Vinci as the greatest genius in history? What was happening with this left-handed Italian gay man?

Finch: Before I answer your question, I must say that Leonardo da Vinci, in all likelihood, was asexual. I can’t imagine that even a gay man would make these statements: “Intellectual passion drives out sensuality,” and “The act of procreation and anything that has any relation to it is so disgusting that human beings would soon die out if there were no pretty faces and sensuous dispositions.” I further address the likelihood of Leonardo being asexual and schizoid in my paper, On the Schizoid Personality, from my Applied Theory compilation. 

But on Leonardo’s genius: besides his obvious, impressive, polymathic output, which I view as an unmistakable sign of high, general creative ability, he also produced a lot of remarkable work with, by today’s standards, remarkably little resources, and, in all likelihood, poor nutrition. Moreover, given the advances in every field of human interest since Leonardo’s time, alongside the ungodly increase in the accessibility of information that has happened in recent years, one might expect for even average Americans to be matching Leonardo’s creative output, easily. And yet, he’s still impressive. 

Jacobsen: What are some of the recent accomplishments where more desirable jobs may be available to you?

Finch: Most notably, simply being admitted to Harvard seems to confer a lot of market desirability. Some people have also found my recent test creations and website designs impressive enough to offer me paid work.

Jacobsen: Your Creative Attitudes Inventory (V.1) is a test of 55 questions taking a total of fewer than 15 minutes to complete. You posit three traits comprising creative thinking in Aberrant Salience (Unusual Thinking), Conscientiousness (discipline), and Polymathic Interests. Why develop the test?

Finch: I developed the Creative Attitudes Inventory because the creative ability assessment that I created contained tasks that, due to my lack of programming skills, I’m currently unable to administer online, at least in a manner that I think will provide reliable and meaningful data for me to analyze. The subtests of the Creative Attitudes Inventory were actually originally selected to assess the divergent and convergent validity of the tasks in my non-self-report assessment of creativity. 

Jacobsen: Why posit Aberrant Salience (Unusual Thinking), Conscientiousness (discipline), and Polymathic Interests as the core traits for measurement?

Finch: Unusual thinking and Conscientiousness are two of the three facets of my model of creativity. As for why they are included in my model: discipline and proneness for unusual thought are definitive markers of high, general creative ability, as without conscientiousness one would not have the work ethic needed to produce anything of value, or make the most of whatever creative ideas or talents that they do have, and without a high capacity for unusual thought, one could not even think up many novel ideas, to begin with. For more on the justification for the facets in my model of creativity, readers should read my short essay, Preconditions for Genius, from my short book, After Genius.

The third facet of my model, being g, intelligence, or pattern recognition, seems to be poorly testable through self-report questionnaires, so it was not included in the set of questionnaires that would eventually be called the Creative Attitudes Inventory. 

The novel Polymathic Interests Inventory was included, mainly, because I wanted to see if there was evidence that unusual thinking proneness was positively associated with interests in a wide array of scientific and artistic fields, as well as if conscientiousness moderated the relationship between having an interest in many fields, and the belief that one has actually innovated in some of those fields. The theory here was that much discipline and thoroughness may be needed to convert ideas into innovations, as well as to believe that one has done so, despite their not there not yet being much widespread acceptance that they have. 

Jacobsen: What are some of statistics coming back for the test so far?

Finch: Due to some issues with the program that hosts the test, I removed the Creative Attitudes Inventory from my website shortly after posting it, so not enough data was collected on it to produce any meaningful statistics. Although, I recently did an experiment with Shelley Carson on a creativity class at Harvard using the Creativity Attitudes Inventory and other measures of divergent thinking and creative achievement. This experiment also included the Unusual Thinking task that was part of my non-self-report assessment of creativity. I’ll receive the data that was collected from this experiment soon, and will post a report on those statistics shortly after.

Jacobsen: For the Public Domain Intelligence Test (PDIT) measuring Crystallized Intelligence (Gc) and Fluid Intelligence (Gf), what was the inspiration for it? As anyone can see, the basis for the test is derived from the old SATs considered valid for admission to the International High IQ Society of the late Nathan Haselbauer (suicide) and the Triple Nine Society.

Finch: The Public Domain Intelligence Test was developed because I was unable to find a test of general intelligence that was free, quick, openly accessible, and well-validated, both conceptually and psychometrically. The structure of the test was designed to resemble the second form of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scales of Intelligence (WASI-2). The sentence completion items for the Verbal, Crystallized Intelligence section of the test were selected because they were openly accessible, short in form, and that there is considerable evidence validating the psychometric properties of pre-2005 Verbal SAT forms, as well as considerable evidence suggesting that sentence completion items may provide integrative measures of crystallized intelligence. The matrix reasoning item set for the Nonverbal, Fluid Intelligence section were also selected because they were openly accessible, quickly doable, and was satisfactorily validated, both psychometrically, and as a potential measure of fluid intelligence.

Jacobsen: What are some of the responses to it now? Any updates on the statistical findings?

Finch: At the time of my writing this response, PDIT has received a few thousand test sessions. Moreover, the written and spoken responses that I’ve received to the test has been quite varied. Many people have told me that the test seems very hard, and some people have told me that the test seems too easy, considering the range of scores that it provides. Quite a lot of people have lied to me directly about the scores they’ve achieved on the test, and some of those people later confessed to this after they realized that I can see every test session for PDIT, and am given some identifying information about the test’s takers. Statistical findings for the test, so far, indicate that FSIQs from the test are highly correlated with WAIS-IV FSIQs, and very highly correlated with WAIS-IV GAIs. These findings also indicate that, compared to WAIS-IV FSIQs, PDIT FSIQs are not inflated. These findings also indicate that PDIT FSIQs are normally distributed, have a standard deviation of 14.85, and are significantly more correlated with PDIT Verbal and Non-verbal scores than the scores from those two sections are with each other, indicating that PDIT FSIQs load on the common factor between its two subtests, which is presumably g, or what tends to be referred to as the general intelligence factor.

Jacobsen: What do you consider your strongest points in intelligence?

Finch: Apparently I’m most skilled at coming up with analogies and elaborating on the similarities between things. Although, I believe that this ability may be more related to creativity than intelligence, but since high intelligence is required for creativity, this ability seems to have a g-loading sufficient to be included in some intelligence tests, such as the WAIS-IV. 

Jacobsen: Given the “law of non-contradiction” and the “mechanics of emergence,” and a universe with a self-testing function ‘implying self-awareness,’ ‘how might someone become one with God?’

Finch: Become more coherent (constitutionally), creative, and enlightened or insightful. 

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, CIVIQ Society.

[2] Individual Publication Date: March 15, 2021:; Full Issue Publication Date: May 1, 2021:

*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.


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: