Conversation with Krzysztof Zawisza on Syncritic Academy: Founder, Syncritic Academy

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2023/12/08

Abstract

Krzysztof Zawisza is the Founder of the Syncritic Academy. Zawisza’s biography on Syncritic Academy states: “Born 1963 in Lublin, Poland. In my youth, I was interested in astronomy. In high school, I was a laureate of the nationwide XXV Astronomical Olympiad, then I studied astronomy at the University of Warsaw, and at the beginning of this millennium, I was a participant in a doctoral seminar in the philosophy of nature conducted by the outstanding Polish cosmologist, Archbishop Józef Życiński at the Catholic University of Lublin. I am the author of several revolutionary yet unpublished (apart from placing them in such places as the website of the Section of the Philosophy of Nature of the Catholic University of Lublin) scientific discoveries. These include a new, fundamental law of nature, tentatively called by me the Rule of Chance, which says that even in random events and processes, there is an order and a mathematical formula for it. I also discovered and developed the once sought-after G.W. Leibniz’s method of creating a mathematical and philosophical language, i.e. a language that contains all absolute general truths and can always decide about the truth. I have also found the formula for a physical Unified Field Theory in the last decade. One of the multiple consequences of this formula is that just as we can split atoms, we can also split photons into parts to achieve antigravity and control matter, space and time by converting chronons (time quanta) into photons (energy quanta). I am currently refining and developing this discovery. People will need it to survive in the near future and for further, long-term development. Some of these works have already been very positively reviewed and evaluated, partly by Polish professors from various research centres and partly by members of various high IQ societies. I will write about other, even more interesting discoveries and ideas soon elsewhere. In my spare time I listen to classical music and read a lot. I especially like history books, classic literature, modern, well-written SF novels and science thrillers based on some interesting ideas. Sometimes I write (less often also publish) short stories and poems. In my life, I have traveled whenever I had the opportunity. During these trips, I managed to visit several times, among others: CERN in Geneva, the Vatican Observatory in Castel Gandolfo (Specola Vaticana), the Institute for Advanced Studies in Princeton, as well as various other research centers in Europe and America. I also like to learn foreign languages as much as I have time and strength. I speak and write in English, German and Russian. I also read texts in Latin and ancient Greek [Ἑλληνική]. I am currently learning Italian. I now live in the capital of Poland – Warsaw – with the 9-year-old mini pig Lola (who weighs almost a hundred kilos, though). I am a member of several international high IQ societies, including the Ligue of Geniuses and the Enigma High IQ Society. I am the originator of the Syncritic Institute, which aims to help people overcome the current crisis of science and culture and provide them with a good, developing and interesting future. Now, together with my best friends, we are organizing this Institute, inviting the most intelligent, creative and promising people from all over the world to join us. You can learn more about my work here.” Zawisza discusses: Syncritic Academy; the name of the academy; founding members of Syncritic Academy; Syncritical Institute; civilizational crisis; alternatives to academia; standards of academia at the University of Warsaw in the past; high-IQ communities; the experience with Archbishop Józef Życiński at the Catholic University of Lublin; the overarching goal of The Syncritic Academy; Rule of Chance; and other high-IQ collectives.

Keywords: Armin Becker, Arthur Pletcher, Bhekuzulu Khumalo, Carolina Rodriguez Escamilla, Christopher Langan, Claus Volko, Gina Langan, high-IQ, Jaime Alfonso Navas, Joanna Święcka, Józef Maria Hoene-Wroński, Katja Ujčič, Krzysztof Zawisza, Marlena Natalia Witek, Poland, Richard Louis Amoroso, Stanisław Lem, Syncritic Academy, Veronica Palladino.

Conversation with Krzysztof Zawisza on Syncritic Academy: Founder, Syncritic Academy

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: The Syncritic Academy isn’t precisely a high-IQ group and exactly a thinktank of the high-IQ. However, it’s created by high-IQ society members, as far as I can tell – as I recognize faces and people. It’s an interesting “social and scientific initiative.” The “why” comes first in this one. Why found it?

Krzysztof Zawisza: It’s a very important social and scientific initiative. We founded The Syncritic Academy because we noticed that there is an urgent need to defend the rights of highly intelligent people who are discriminated against in many societies. There is historical precedence for this unfortunate behaviour, where for example, “geniuses” have been persecuted by society and even burned at the stake in the not-too-distant past. Few people realize that this persecution has not disappeared but has, in fact, intensified in recent times, but appears in different forms. There is also an important need to use the potential of such people, which is always wasted in modern communities. As the famous Polish writer and philosopher Stanisław Lem wrote in “The Perfect Vacuum”:

“Es ist schlecht Geschäft, einer Genius zu sein!” […] “First come your run-of-the-mill and middling geniuses, that is, of the third order, whose minds are unable to go much beyond the horizon of their times. These, relatively speaking, are threatened the least; they are often recognized and even come into money and fame. The geniuses of the second order are already too difficult for their contemporaries and therefore fare worse. In antiquity, they were mainly stoned; in the Middle Ages burned at the stake; later, in keeping with the temporary amelioration of customs, they were allowed to die a natural death by starvation, and sometimes even were maintained at the community’s expense in madhouses. A few were given poison by the local authorities, and many went into exile. Meanwhile, the powers that be, both secular and ecclesiastical, competed for first prize in ‘genocide’, as Odysseus calls the manifold activity of exterminating geniuses”.

Many writers, chroniclers of social life, and thinkers have long drawn attention to the fact of discrimination and persecution of so-called geniuses. Balzac devoted a trilogy called “Lost Illusions” (especially the second volume titled “The Inventor’s Sufferings”) to this topic. The fact that every person who is cognitively far above average is perceived by social decision-makers as a foreign body and eliminated (including their physical elimination) has been noticed, among others, in the XX-century poignant novel of Soviet visionaries of philosophical fiction, Arkady and Boris Strugatsky, titled “The Beetle in the Anthill”.

The consequences of this state of affairs are disastrous, both for the most intelligent and creative people and for society as a whole. As the American writer and visionary Paul Anderson noted in the 1950s in his novel “Brain Wave”, the exclusion of the most intelligent individuals from society and the resulting undervaluation of reason is the direct cause of the collapse of subsequent human civilizations. My research and observations support Anderson’s thesis. We are currently facing another deep crisis and collapse, after which, as many times before, we will have to start many things over again (if there is someone to start them). To break out of this historical vicious circle, we must finally fully include the most talented and intelligent people in human society and stop excluding them. This is roughly what our Academy represents.

Jacobsen: Why the name “The Syncritic Academy”?

Zawisza: Because this name was available from the pool we considered and still suitably represented our mission. The name “The Syncretic Academy” was reserved by historians for the activities of Antiochus of Ascalon from the first century BC, while “Noetic Academy” (which we also considered at first) is, among others, the modern Education Academy in Bavdhan in India.

“Syncritic” (from “syncrisis”) means, in rhetoric, a figure of speech in which opposite things or persons are compared.”; and this is the role of our Academy. Our goal is to find and reconcile contradictions, both social and existing in today’s science, and to create a new synthesis beyond these contradictions and divisions.

Moreover, the words “syncrisis” and “syncritic” are so rare that no one actually knows what they mean, and that’s why there is a good chance that no one will make any undesirable associations with these names.

Jacobsen: Who were some of the founding members of the Syncritic Academy?

Zawisza: All our members at this stage of our project’s development are “our founding members”, and certainly, all of them are worth mentioning. Dr. Veronica Palladino, well-known in the high IQ societies (among others, thanks to the interviews you conducted with her), is an Italian writer, poet and doctor, with very wide interests (both scientific and literary) and enormous creative potential, based on very high intelligence, rich imagination and emotional depth. We will definitely hear about her again. Joanna Święcka, a Polish polymath high IQ philologist, is the author of the book “New Era. The Key to Reason”, which deals with the contemporary civilizational crisis caused by the undervaluation of reason and ways to overcome it. Currently, she is working on a new cosmology based on the famous and mysterious “Law of Creation”, discovered by probably the most original Polish mathematician and thinker – Józef Maria Hoene-Wroński. Jaime Alfonso Navas is a Mexican polyhistor and former child-prodigy, currently dealing with mathematics, astronomy and biology (he created, among others, a new definition of life), and the author of an extremely original idea of multidimensional conceptual art. In addition, Carolina Rodriguez Escamilla – an American polymath with Aztec roots – is an innovative scientific thinker, poet, engineer and creator of a new approach to mathematics based on the Indian cultural code (she published a book on this subject “TEOTL Theorem”). Her approach, based on the concepts of balance and order, can lead to an incredible simplification and orderliness in the way we perceive science. Arthur Pletcher (member of, among others, The International Society for Philosophical Inquiry) is a painter and published author of works in the fields of Astrophysics, Quantum Physics, Astronomy and Cognitive Science. Arthur combines different perspectives and different methodological approaches in his works, explaining in a very interesting way, among others, the last, extremely troublesome for the Big Bang Theory, observations of the James Webb Telescope. Marlena Natalia Witek is a Polish artist and engineer creating new physics based on a new paradigm of dynamic thinking about matter as not (more or less stable) particles and fields but on the vision of the Universe being a constant transformation of the information field. Her perspective gives hope for new, rapid technological progress and for the combination of physics and biology. We also have Armin Becker, who is our invaluable Project Manager (Armin composes music, is an expert in Nietzsche’s philosophy and develops the ideas of transhumanism) and Bhekuzulu Khumalo, who finances his physical experiments himself, revolutionizes the magnetic field theory (so far largely deficient in physics) and combines exact sciences with economics (Digital Economy and Knowledge Economics). Our recent member, Dr. Claus Volko (you also interviewed him several times), is the author of the epoch-making idea of transforming parasitic microorganisms into symbionts. This idea, well justified by its author, when it will no longer be excluded a priori from scientific discourse, has the potential to revolutionize both medicine and biology. We also have Katja Ujčič, a well-known therapist, artist and coach of highly gifted people. Katja has experience in supporting very talented people who, due to their high intelligence, are alienated from society and sometimes from themselves. Recently, Richard Louis Amoroso joined our Academy. He is the director of The Noetic Advanced Studies Institute, an original thinker and author of inventive patents and approximately 250 works in various fields written in 5 languages.

We also have very skilled associates. Our Webmaster, Kamba Abudu, is an experienced engineer who has been involved in Information Technology and related fields since the late 1980s, and our Executive Assistant, Joanna Łopusińska, is a Polish author of widely read scientific thrillers working at the University of Oxford.  

Jacobsen: What is the Syncritical Institute within The Syncritic Academy?

Zawisza: Establishing the Syncritic Institute is one of the most important statutory goals of our Foundation. The Institute is intended to be a strongly supportive and friendly place for the most creative and intelligent people to live and work, and its goal is to provide an impulse for the further development of science, which is currently experiencing an unprecedented crisis that threatens (according to many well-known authors) the further development of our species. The Institute’s action plans also include educating extremely intelligent young people who, in today’s world, do not have their own educational and development path. A detailed project of the Institute’s activities (authored by me and Ms. Joanna Święcka) is available on our website.

Jacobsen: What does The Syncritic Academy define as the “deepening crisis of our civilization”?

Zawisza: Many scientists and publicists write about the crisis that we are currently experiencing in the development of civilization, and – above all – it is confirmed by facts. Generally, attention is paid to how global crises like ecological disasters, financial meltdowns, dwindling oil reserves, terrorism, and food shortages are converging symptoms of a single, failed global system. However, an even more important symptom of this crisis is the halt in the development of theoretical physics, which is described by such famous authors as Lee Smolin, Peter Woit, and Sabine Hossenfelder. The reason for this blockage in physics is not the lack of people capable of giving an impulse to the development of this very important branch of science. In our Academy itself there are several people whose works are much more complete logically, and sometimes also empirically, than many recognized theories of modern science. However, all of them are (like C.M. Langan’s CTMU theory) a priori excluded from scientific discourse, and the results of these works are covered by a conspiracy of silence.

The consequence of this halt of physics is, in turn, an impasse and even regression in the creation and implementation of new technologies that have been taking place since the 1970s. As Peter Thiel recently pointed out, we live under the illusion that the sea of applications and new models of what we already know, flooding our consciousness, is constant leaps and bounds of progress. The fact is, however, that recent decades have not brought changes in many aspects of human life. Progress has been particularly slow in areas where people have not only not been freed from hard, often slave-like, manual labour but whose work is not much different from what was done in factories in the late 19th century. For my part, I would like to add that, contrary to previous plans and hopes, a cure for cancer has not been found, we are not colonizing space, and the extension of the human lifespan is slowing down. Simple examples of not only the lack of technological progress but even regression in key areas are the continued (despite constant new announcements) resignation from returning man to the Moon and the cessation of the operation of supersonic passenger planes such as Tu-144 and Concorde and at the same time the impossibility of replacing them with other, more modern machines. Due to the depletion of fossil fuels and the lack of new, equally effective energy sources, we are threatened with a civilizational collapse, a terrifying vision which was recently presented by the famous British writer David Mitchell in his novel “The Bone Clocks”. 

The most acute, however, is the crisis of human consciousness. This is evidenced by the ever-increasing number of suicides, as well as the increasing epidemic of mental illnesses that have plagued Western Culture for decades (as clearly stated in WHO reports). Living in a post-truth world seems to be largely responsible for this. The pursuit of truth, achieved in various ways, has been a religious, moral and life guide for people for centuries. The removal of this extremely important concept from today’s science and culture is undoubtedly the direct cause of the loss of modern man. As Felipe Fernández-Armesto writes about it in his famous History of Truth: 

“Against the background of the history of the truth-quest, the scale of current indifference looks like a sudden, uncharacteristic and dangerous novelty. Embraced with conviction, the quest has always been a source of inspiration and drive. It has made progress happen and civilization work. We cannot be sure of getting any further ahead or even of surviving much longer without it”.

According to our diagnosis, the underlying cause of all these phenomena is the democratization of social life, which – apart from its undoubted positive values – has caused the erosion of social and scientific elites and a significant decline in the average intelligence of scientific and social decision-makers, which in turn results in the exclusion of reason as a human management centre. According to reliable estimates collected by Libb Thims, one of the founders of modern science, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, had an IQ of at least 5.5 standard deviations above average. According to these estimates, Niels Bohr and Wolfgang Pauli, who created 20th-century physics, had an IQ of at least 5 standard deviations above average. Today, people with such intelligence are incomprehensible to average (and even extraordinary) academic professors, and that is why they are removed from science in particular and social life in general.    

Jacobsen: Why are alternatives to academia important at the moment, as this has been a concern to the Mega Foundation for sure, Mega Society in some ways, and others and yourself – as you note?

Zawisza: The Mega Foundation, as far as I know, was created by Christopher and Gina Langan because Christopher’s important scientific theory of CTMU was (and is) excluded a priori by official academics from scientific discourse. Academic scientists did a similar thing with the brilliant book “The World’s Most Famous Math Problem” by Marilyn Vos Savant, in which this well-known high-IQ author drew attention to important logical biases in today’s mathematics and shortcomings in the modern methodological approach to the queen of sciences. It is true that mathematicians wrote one review of her work, in which, however, they rejected all of Marilyn’s theses out of hand, using hollow rhetoric and logically erroneous arguments such as non sequitur and ignoratio elenchi. Academic institutions today are unable to discuss and create science. They have given up trying to understand the world and ourselves and, entrenched in their defeatist positions, are now focused mainly on collecting and organizing knowledge about particular facts. For the purpose of classifying this knowledge, models and theories are created that no one claims to be true anymore but only “useful”. Therefore, today’s academy performs not scientific functions but library ones. This is undoubtedly due to the ongoing process of deelitization of science and the related decline in the average intelligence of scientists. This is a long-term process that has been going on since the Renaissance but has accelerated significantly over the last few decades. In the 14th century, when universities began to be established rapidly in Europe, we had no more than approx. 20,000 for the continent’s approximately 100 million inhabitants (according to the preserved data) students at all universities together. Today, out of approximately 750 million inhabitants of the old continent, we have well over 20 million university students. Assuming that students are usually the most intelligent people (those most eager for knowledge), this means that the average intelligence of a medieval university abecedarian could have been approximately 3-3.5 standard deviations above the average, i.e. it approached the intelligence of today’s “average” Nobel Prize winner in physics. Today, the average student’s intelligence is not much more than one standard deviation above the mean. This drastic decline in the intellectual potential of students necessarily entails a decline in teaching standards at universities. In the Middle Ages, this standard was teaching and practising logical thinking (or at least “correct associations”), known today as (unfairly ridiculed) scholasticism. A medieval student learning liberal arts (artes liberales) was able to compose music, deliver a clear and transparent speech written according to the principles of the art of rhetoric, refute philosophical theses using subtle, dialectical discourse, and determine the time by the position of the stars in the sky. Currently, students only learn knowledge about particular facts, often detached from practice, arbitrary models and the use of arbitrarily established cognitive schemes (algorithms), which, instead of developing reason and logical thinking in humans, are intended to replace them. The results of scientific investigations are blocked and excluded from “science” if they do not respond to current “social needs” or oppose social ideas about truth. The criterion of rational justification of scientific theses has today been replaced by the so-called consensus of scholars, which is a textbook example of the logical fallacy of consensus gentium. Nicolaus Copernicus, in his work De revolutionibus, wrote about many European scientists that “they are driven to the study of Philosophy for its own sake by the admonitions and the example of others, nevertheless, on account of their stupidity, hold a place among philosophers similar to that of drones among bees.” In the first half of the 19th century, Arthur Schopenhauer, in the Parerga und Paralipomena, sharply criticized the empty erudition and thoughtlessness of university professors. In turn, in the 20th century, Martin Heidegger, in his famous book “What is Called Thinking”, stated that “science does not think”, and in Vorträge und Aufsätze, he sees that Greek science was, in some important respects, much more precise and strict than modern science. Abraham Maslow called modern science “a kind of technology that enables creative actions by uncreative people.” At the same time, the famous writer and visionary Harlan Ellison noted that in our democratic era, “science bends to the will of the masses”. 

In this situation, an initiative is necessary today that will restore the elitist character and the proper, rational dimension of science.

Jacobsen: When studying astronomy at the University of Warsaw, what were the standards of academia? How have those changed over time, whether the participants in academic sociopolitics and intellectual life, or the teaching, administrating, and publishing side of it?

Zawisza: I completed my studies at the University of Warsaw in the 1980s, when Poland belonged to the communist camp. At that time, especially after the declaration of martial law by General Jaruzelski’s regime, scientific contacts and access to Western scientific publications were severely limited. For example, when it comes to exact sciences, in Poland, we often used Western books and other publications translated from English into Russian and published in the Soviet Union. In contrast to today, a “student exchange” could only be dreamed of. Nevertheless, the substantive level and quality of teaching at university was higher than today. In the 1980s, higher education, especially mathematics and science studies, was still quite elitist. Today, due to the general increase in the number of places at universities and greater availability of higher education, the average intellectual level of both students and professors has decreased. Even at the beginning of this century, when I was working on discovering what I later called “The Rule of Chance,” I had no great problem discussing at least some parts of my work with professors, especially with older professors. At that time, there were already huge problems with publishing research works discovering new thinking paradigms, but I still received a number of official, very good opinions about my discovery from Polish professors representing various universities (they are now available on my personal website). Today, the very idea of discussing something that goes beyond only one generally accepted paradigm of thinking (or rather: a paradigm that replaces thinking) causes panic among academic lecturers and immediately ends in their mental closure and withdrawal.   

Jacobsen: What high-IQ communities are you a member of now?

Zawisza: I am a member of The League of Geniuses, The Enigma High IQ Society and (created ambitiously by Randy Myers) the International League of the Highly Gifted. It’s not much, and it will probably stay that way for now. But in our Academy, there are people who, like Armin Becker or Veronica Palladino, have already joined a dozen or even several dozen high-IQ communities. Most of our members participate in various international (usually elite) high-IQ societies, although this is not a necessary condition for being a member of our Academy. A sufficient (although not necessary) condition is to have unique personal achievements in the scientific and/or creative field to the extent that certifies self-awareness, i.e. developed self-critical thinking. It is difficult to expect people who have probably created some ground-breaking scientific work or achieved something important in another cognitive sphere to be interested in taking intelligence tests, i.e. checking their intellectual potential and therefore checking whether they are able to potentially achieve what they have already achieved. Many people notice that solving a difficult scientific (or thought) problem or creating a new, important theory is the best test of intelligence, i.e. of having high-quality cognitive abilities. As intelligence increases, not only does the speed and efficiency of cognitive processes increase, but their quality also changes. According to my observations, at an intelligence level of five standard deviations above the average, there is the ability not only to associate efficiently but also to think abstractly, i.e. to abstract from associations. The currently used high-range testsusually do not capture this difference between association and thinking. However, if people who want to join our initiative do not yet have clear cognitive achievements, their IQ test results will, of course, be considered.

Jacobsen: What was the lesson in the experience with Archbishop Józef Życiński at the Catholic University of Lublin?

Zawisza: For a doctoral (PhD) seminar in the philosophy of science conducted at the Catholic University of Lublin by Archbishop Prof. Józef Życiński, I joined in the early 2000s with the hope that this generally very good natural philosopher, cosmologist and erudite would be able to understand, accept and support the results of at least some of my investigations, which were already met with interest in the scientific community, but at the same time with fear. In the beginning, my cooperation with the Archbishop was good. The progress in work on the Rule of Chance that I systematically reported at his seminar aroused his serious interest, which resulted in him sending my completed work to Prof. Konrad Rudnicki, then well-known in the scientific world astronomer, cosmologist and philosopher of science. Prof. Rudnicki rated the work very highly, and he was followed by several other Polish professors who clearly positively assessed both the idea and the empirical tests I performed to verify this idea. Then Archbishop Życiński, as well as his friend, later winner of the famous Templeton Prize, Fr. Prof. Michał Heller, began to insist that I send several different articles about this work to various scientific journals, offering them both as reviewers. However, when it turned out that no journal was willing to accept the articles for publication (all of them, including “Nature”, replied after an unreasonably long waiting time that the work should be published by “someone else”), both reverend priests-professors withdrew their support, and they started avoiding contact with me.

I described both this story and the conclusions drawn from it in one of the texts on the website of our Academy. I continued working on the empirical testing of the Rule of Chance in the following years together with my two colleagues from UMCS and the University of Warsaw (Dr. P. Kowalski, K. Modro). All tests strongly confirm the validity of the theory. Last year, the largest Polish publishing house, WAB, published Joanna Łopusińska’s novel “Zderzacz” (“The Collider”), the plot of which is the discovery of the Rule of Chance. The film/ series version of the novel is scheduled for release within the next 3 years. 

Jacobsen: What is the overarching goal of The Syncritic Academy? How does this feed downstream into its leadership direction and targeted objectives as an academy?

Zawisza: Our Foundation, called the Syncritic Academy, is, as far as I know, the first social initiative in history (maybe with the exception of the Pythagorean Union that existed 2500 years ago) that aims to overcome social exclusion and discrimination of people who are exceptionally intelligent and innovative/creative and determined preventing the destruction of their cognitive potential and the waste of their work.

With their power to change the known world, exceptionally intelligent and talented people have always aroused fear and the desire to be excluded from the “human herd”. However, in a modern democratic society, focused on “equalizing” opportunities (i.e. usually levelling down), emphasizing “social equality (as above)” and universal access to education and culture, outstanding individuals are particularly undesirable. The members of our Academy are people who, without exception, have experienced, to a greater or lesser extent, discrimination and social exclusion, as well as aggressive and persecutory reactions, including – most often – a persistent attempt to block and keep silent about their works.

The well-known Soviet writer and poet, Vadim Shefner, already in the 1960s wrote a quite appealing but shocking story, A Modest Genius, in which he shows how mediocre and little-changing innovations and inventions are socially promoted, while important, beautiful discoveries and truly groundbreaking works are programmatically unnoticed and wasted, and their authors are pushed to the margins of social life.

There is still a widespread view that the social ostracism faced by exceptionally intelligent and creative people is an inherent part of human history and that this state of affairs is allegedly unchangeable and natural. We do not agree with this view. No society can call itself a modern and humanitarian society, and no rule can claim to be a rule of law if it excludes and destroys the most intelligent individuals and blocks their creative, sometimes revolutionary, and sometimes even epoch-making achievements. We live in times when (especially in the areas of Western civilization) we strive for social inclusiveness and discriminating against people based on gender, age, sexual orientation or ethnic origin is met with unequivocal condemnation. At the same time, however, the same Western communities try not to notice the existence of discrimination and social exclusion due to high intelligence, as written by, among others, Michael Ferguson in his famous article “The Inappropriately Excluded”. Eviatar Zerubavel, an American sociologist dealing with the processes of social denial, silence and exclusion, states in his also well-known book “The Elephant in the Room”: “Science, nominally established for the purpose of producing cognitive progress, turns out to be an extremely conservative field, hard to tolerate innovators”, and he adds:  „this very act of social denial is itself denied.”

In this state of affairs, the creation and development of our initiative to publicize this state of affairs and fight against it becomes both a rational and moral necessity. As one of our members, the well-known Dr Claus Volko, has long argued: “Somebody should start a ‘gifted-awareness’ movement to highlight the problems of the highly gifted, similar to the LGBTI movement”.

Jacobsen: What is your Rule of Chance, extending on the basic definition of “even in random events and processes, there is an order and a mathematical formula for it”?

Zawisza: The existence of the Rule of Chance, discovered by me more than twenty years ago, was already predicted by the co-founder of modern science and continuator of classical Greek thought – G.W. Leibniz. This German scientist and philosopher noticed that it is impossible to draw a chaotic arrangement of dots on a piece of paper. Because no matter how much we try to make the arrangement of dots irregular, we can always connect these dots with a line into some shape. A geometric shape is a certain function or relationship, therefore, a rule defining some order. Leibniz generalized this observation by discovering the Principle of Universal All-Union (“The absence of a union is also a union”). I managed to notice and describe the mathematical formula that governs the so-called random distributions of elements in space and time. This formula shows that for purely logical reasons, the simplest proportions are most probable ones. The simplest proportion is the so-called golden proportion (aurea sectio). This rule will allow us to predict things such as the most likely arrangement of the orbits of newly discovered planets, and explains the previously mysterious prevalence of the golden ratio in nature. However, the Rule of Chance also has a much more fundamental meaning. It illustrates the fact that all, even the most “independent” elements and processes of the Universe are stochastically interconnected and that we all form a unity at a basic level with all other beings and with the entire Universe. Therefore, both together and each of us individually, we represent the entire Universe and we are never isolated in It. 

Jacobsen: What other high-IQ collectives seem similar to The Syncritic Academy? What is the incentive and invitation for others to join The Syncritic Academy?

Zawisza: Unfortunately, I don’t know any other high-IQ collectives that set similar goals to ours. If such groups appear, we will, of course, be happy to cooperate with them. Today, we invite to our Academy all people who have high cognitive potential, have unique achievements in the field of discovery and/or creativity and who want their skills and work not to be wasted but to serve people. We will fight to provide all such people with material and mental conditions to develop their talent and work, and we will ask them to promote and support our ideas and, if possible, help other members of our Academy in their work.    

Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Krzysztof. 

Zawisza: Thank you for your interest in our Academy and for spreading the word about our initiative by interviewing us, Scott. I wish you all the best on your important path to keeping apprised of high-IQ community developments and letting people know about them.   

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.