Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/05/17

https://in-sightpublishing.com/books/

Acknowledgements

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 1: Manahel Thabet for being the first in this series and giving a gauge on the feasibility of this project, and to Evangelos Katsioulis, Jason Betts, Marco Ripà, Paul Cooijmans, Rick Rosner; in spite of far more men in these communities, it, interview wise, started with a woman, even the Leo Jung Mensa article arose from the generosity of a woman friend, Jade.

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 2: Claus Volko, Deb Stone, Erik Haereid, Hasan Zuberi, Ivan Ivec, Kirk Kirkpatrick, Monika Orski, Rick Rosner

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 3: Andreas Gunnarsson, Anja Jaenicke, Christian Sorensen, Claus Volko, Dionysios Maroudas, Florian Schröder, Ronald K. Hoeflin, Erik Hae reid, Giuseppe Corrente, Graham Powell, Guillermo Alejandro Escárcega Pliego, HanKyung Lee, James Gordon, Kirk Kirkpatrick, Krystal Volney, Laurent Dubois, Marco Ripà, Matthew Scillitani, Mislav Predavec, Owen Cosby, Richard Sheen, Rick Farrar, Rick Rosner, Sandra Schlick, Tiberiu Sammak, Tim Roberts, Thomas Wolf, Tom Chittenden, Tonny Sellén, Tor Jørgensen.

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 4: Björn Liljeqvist, Christian Sorenson, Claus Volko, Dionysios Maroudas, Sandra Schlick, Erik Haereid, Giuseppe Corrente, Guillermo Alejandro Escárcega Pliego, HanKyung Lee, James Gordon, Justin Duplantis, Kirk Kirkpatrick, Laurent Dubois, Marco Ripà, Matthew Scillitani, Mislav Predavec, Richard Sheen, Rick Farrar, Rick G. Rosner, Thomas Wolf, Tiberiu Sammak, Tim Roberts, Tom Chittenden, Tonny Sellén, and Tor Arne Jørgensen.

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 5: Anthony Sepulveda, Christian Sorenson, Claus Volko, Dionysios Maroudas, Erik Haereid, Giuseppe Corrente, Guillermo Alejandro Escárcega Pliego, Heinrich Siemens, Hindemburg Melão Jr., Jason Robert, Julien Garrett Arpin, Justin Du plantis, Marios Sophia Prodromou, Matthew Scillitani, Mhedi Banafshei, Rick Rosner, Tiberiu Sammak, Tor Arne Jørgensen, and Veronica Palladino.

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 6: Anas El-Husseini, Andrew Watters, Anthony Sepul veda, Arturo Escorza Pedraza, Beatrice Rescazzi, Bob Williams, Byunghyun Ban (반병현), Cas per Tvede Busk, Charles Peden, Craig Shelton, Christian Sorensen, Claus Volko, Erik Haereid, Giuseppe Corrente, Justin Duplantis, Krystal Volney, Mhedi Banafshei, Paul Cooijmans, Rich ard May (“May-Tzu”/”MayTzu”/”Mayzi”), Richard Sheen, Shalom Dickson, Thor Fabian Petter sen, Tiberiu Sammak, Tim Roberts, Tor Arne Jørgensen, and Anonymous Canadian High-IQ Community Member.

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 7: Anas El Husseini, Aníbal Sánchez Numa, Anthony Sepulveda (Brown), Anja Jaenicke, Beatrice Rescazzi, Bîrlea Cristian, Bob Williams, Christian Sorensen, Clelia Albano, Eivind Olsen, Erik Haereid, Gernot Feichter, Giuseppe Corrente, Glia Society Member #479, Graham Powell, Hakan E. Kayioglu, Heinrich Siemens, Justin Duplantis,

Kishan Harrysingh, Kirk Kirkpatrick, Marios Prodromou, Mhedi Banafshei, Mohammed Karim Benazzi Jabri, Monika Orski, Richard May (“May-Tzu”/”MayTzu”/”Mayzi”), Sandra Schlick, Tiberiu Nicolas Sammak, and Tor Arne Jørgensen.

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 8: Anthony Sepulveda, Anja Jaenicke, Antjuan Finch, Benoit Desjardins, Bishoy Goubran, Bob Williams, Charles Peden, Chris Cole, Christopher Harding, Christian Sorensen, Daniel Shea, Dong Geon Lee, Eivind Olsen, Entemake Aman (阿曼), Erik Haereid, Gareth Rees, Gary Whitehall, Glenn Alden, Jiwhan (Jason) Park, Luca Fiorani,

Masaaki Yamauchi, Masaaki Yamauchi, Matthew Scillitani, Michael Isom, Olav Hoel Dørum, Paul Cooijmans, Richard May, Rick Rosner, Rickard Sagirbay, Shalom Dickson, Sudarshan Murthy, Svein Olav Glesaaen Nyberg, Tim Roberts, and Tor Arne Jørgensen.

For Some Smart People: Views and Lives 9: Anthony Sepulveda (Brown), Antjuan Finch, Benoit Desjardins, Bob Williams, Christopher Angus, Clelia Albano, Craig Shelton, Daniel Hilton, Donald Wayne Stoner, Dong Geon Lee, Dr. Benoit Desjardins, Eivind Olsen, Erik Haereid, Gareth Rees, Hiroshi Murasaki, LaRae Bakerink, Luca Fiorani, Michael Baker, Paul Cooijmans, Ricardo Rosselló Nevares, Richard May (“May-Tzu”/”MayTzu”/”Mayzi”), Rick Rosner, Simon Olling Rebsdorf, Sudarshan Murthy, Tor Arne Jørgensen, and Uwe Michael Neumann.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Foreword by Professor Benoit Desjardins, MD, PhD

“Some Smart People: Views and Lives 9” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen’s ninth compendium of in terviews with exceptionally gifted individuals. These people are not all Ivy League professors, like myself. In fact, few of them are. Often, extremely gifted individuals clash with traditional education systems, pursuing non-conventional paths in life.

In this volume, Scott engages with 22 extraordinary individuals, exploring their lives, interests, and passions, and uncovering the unique journeys that led them to where they are today. With a keen eye for detail and a talent for deep conversation, Scott masterfully curates a wide-ranging collection of voices — from eminent academics and former governors to a master chef whose reflections on food are as insightful as his thoughts on life.

Each conversation dives into the profound and the personal, touching on topics that range from the existential to the empirical, the spiritual to the scientific. Scott’s work is a testament to the power of thoughtful dialogue, weaving together a rich tapestry of intellect, passion, and experi

ence. Through these conversations, readers are invited to ponder life’s biggest questions — on meaning, intelligence, and the pursuit of truth. It is this blend of philosophical depth and practical wisdom that gives the book its distinct character.

This collection is a celebration of intellectual curiosity and the human spirit. It challenges readers to think deeply, question relentlessly, and engage with the world in a nuanced and thoughtful way. As you turn each page, you won’t remain a passive observer but become an active participant in a dialogue that spans across diverse realms of thought and experience.

Scott has crafted a work that is not only intellectually stimulating but also deeply human. It offers readers the chance to engage with some of the brightest minds of our time and explore the rich landscapes of ideas they inhabit. Each interview is a window into the participant’s soul, providing insights into their life experiences, philosophical perspectives, and intellectual pursuits.

Embark on this journey of conversation and contemplation — it promises to broaden your horizons and ignite your own quest for understanding.

— Benoit Desjardins, MD, PhD, FAHA, FACR, FNASCI, CEH, CISSP

Foreword by Bishoy Goubran, M.D.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen’s engagement with the high IQ community is a testament to his unique blend of intellect, curiosity, and a discerning sense of humor. Over the years, in our exchanges, Scott and I often found ourselves deconstructing the concept of genius — not just as an abstract ideal, but as a lived experience fraught with quirks, contradictions, and occasional absurdities.

We would question its value, laugh at its idiosyncrasies, and delve into the peculiarities that often define those labeled as extraordinary. These dialogues were more than mere banter; they were a shared exploration of the fragile line between brilliance and the very human vulnerabilities that often lie beneath.

For me, these conversations were also a mirror reflecting the dissonance between external perceptions of genius and the inner landscape of self-doubt and complexity that I often quietly navigate. Scott possesses a rare ability to articulate this tension, revealing that the minds often hailed as the brightest are also marked by uncertainty, nuance, and a deeply human sense of imperfection.

His work goes beyond capturing intelligence; it uncovers the full spectrum of the genius experience, marked by humor, introspection, and the private battles that shape even the most remarkable lives. In his interviews, Scott reveals that genius is not a singular attribute but a complex, multifaceted journey that is as much about the mind as it is about the heart.

Foreword by Mohammed Karim Benazzi Jabri

[Traducción al inglés desde el original en español.]

To begin, I am very grateful to Scott Jacobsen for giving me the opportunity to participate in one of these conversations, where various aspects of the lives of people with high IQs are analyzed, ranging from the personal to the spiritual and religious beliefs of this selective group. Often, these individuals share many common characteristics, with their strengths and weaknesses frequently coming together in societies and communities with a common interest that goes beyond their passion for high-range intelligence tests. Some also excel in standardized tests and participate in forums created by these associations of gifted individuals, where they share their ideas, opinions, reflections, and other contributions to the intellectual community, aiming to promote knowledge and intelligence.

Knowing Scott Jacobsen, he has a distinctive style characterized by his meticulous and detailed questioning. He carefully chooses his questions, covering a wide range of topics, from the personal to the experiences and achievements of the individuals he interviews. These qualities are reflected in each of his interviews with the most prominent members of high-IQ societies and communities.

Thanks to high-range tests, I discovered myself within that fascinating and unique world that measures human intelligence in a peculiar and distinct way compared to traditional tests. In some ways, these tests, along with conventional ones, have helped me better understand myself and clarify many doubts I had about my own intelligence — doubts that often negatively impacted my self-esteem. I constantly questioned myself in this regard and had a false perspective of myself and my intelligence. In truth, I suffered from imposter syndrome. I didn’t consider myself intelligent or brilliant enough, underestimated myself, and had low self-esteem. This was further exacerbated by the depression and anxiety disorder I suffer from.

I have been battling this disorder for several valuable years of my life, having lived with it for more than 40 years, from the age of 20 to my current age of 45. I have endured difficult moments throughout my life due to various circumstances, including living with a disorder that has significantly limited my life in every sense and brought with it a great deal of suffering. Currently, I remain under pharmacological treatment with psychotropic medications, and I have occasionally received psychological support from psychologists and psychiatrists who have worked together to help me better manage my situation and keep fighting for my dreams despite adversity.

Returning to the topic of high-range tests and based on my personal experience, I believe that, on the one hand, the results of these tests closely correlate with and approximate the results obtained through standard tests like the WAIS. They correlate particularly well with tests that measure the g factor of intelligence, such as the Cattell test or Raven’s matrices, among others. In tests I have taken under the guidance of experienced psychologists and experts in giftedness, I have achieved results similar ones. From a psychometric perspective, the main difference between high-range tests and standardized tests administered by psychologists — or better yet, neuropsychologists — is that the latter involve a comprehensive evaluation of the tested individual. These tests do not merely focus on measuring a specific IQ but also analyze other fundamental aspects to arrive at a more accurate diagnosis. These aspects include examining the psychological profile, neurodivergence, sensory hypersensitivity, and more to determine whether a person has high intellectual abilities. This comprehensive approach makes them more precise, as they also measure factors absent in high-range tests, such as high processing speed and both short- and long-term memory.

On the other hand, high-range tests have the advantage of not requiring a set time for completion. This, to some extent, eliminates the stress factor during their execution, allowing the tested individual to reach their full potential, particularly in those who are susceptible to stress or suffer from mental disorders. From this perspective, high-range tests offer a certain level of reliability. Additionally, they are characterized by being much more complex, requiring a high degree of reasoning and divergent thinking in many cases. Most of these tests demand a minimum of 10 hours or more to complete.

In my case, high-range tests were ideal for estimating and approximating my real IQ. This is because I am particularly susceptible to stress due to my condition. Moreover, the psychotropic medications I must take daily affect my processing speed, making it different from that of someone without a mental illness. The stress generated by conventional tests works against you, especially when combined with the side effects of psychotropic drugs, which alter some cognitive processes to a certain extent. As a result, the outcomes will not be the same in often underestimate your true IQ and can create confusion, especially when conducted by psychologists with limited experience, leading to erroneous diagnoses. This is where high-range tests have a relative advantage over conventional tests. However, the scientific community still does not recognize these types of tests as valid psychometric tools for measuring intelligence in many cases. There is significant controversy surrounding this specific topic. Some consider these tests merely a pastime or hobby that fail to analyze several fundamental factors necessary for a comprehensive study of intelligence in its entirety for a specific individual, making their results less reliable from the perspective of many psychologists.

In general, high-range tests focus primarily on measuring the g factor of intelligence, neglecting other components that form part of human intelligence. Moreover, the norms for these tests are often established by authors who lack sufficient training, preparation, or knowledge in the field

of psychology — or, when they do possess such knowledge, it is sometimes insufficient. The norms they establish are often disproportionate, as many of these tests measure IQ levels above 160, unlike standard tests.

In conclusion, I find this volume very interesting as it provides a comprehensive analysis of various aspects of the lives of individuals who share high IQs, with their strengths and weaknesses. Scott Jacobsen demonstrates great skill in formulating his questions, and for me, it has been a pleasure to be a small piece contributing to and being part of this volume.

—

[Spanish original.]

Para empezar agradezco mucho a scott jacobson por brindarme la oportunidad de participar en una de estas conversación en el que se analizan varios aspectos de la vida de las personas con alto cociente intelectual que van desde lo personal hasta las creencias espirituales y religiosas de este grupo selectivo de personas que en muchas veces comparten muchas características en común con sus fortalezas y sus debilidades que se agrupan muchas veces en sociedades y co munidades con un interés común que va más allá de la afición que tienen a las pruebas de inteligencia de alto rango, otros tienen además calificaciones de pruebas estandarizadas sino de partic ipar también en foros creadas por estas asociaciones de personas superdotadas que expresan sus ideas, opiniones, reflexiones y otras aportaciones a la comunidad intelectual con el fin de fomen tar el conocimiento y la inteligencia.

Conociendo a scott jacobson tiene una forma peculiar que le caracteriza por hacer preguntas de una forma meticulosa y detallada, elige bien sus preguntas abarcando temas de diversas índole que van desde lo personal pasando por las experiencias y logros conseguidos que quedan refleja das en cada una de sus entrevistas con los miembros más destacados de las sociedades y comuni dades de alto cociente intelectual

Gracias a las pruebas de alto rango yo me fue descubriendo en ese mundo fascinante y particular que tiene una forma peculiar y distinta de medir la inteligencia humana en comparación con las pruebas tradicionales, en cierto modo me ha ayudado junto a las pruebas convencionales a conocerme mejor a mí mismo y aclarar muchas dudas que tenía respecto a mi propia inteligencia cosa que repercutía negativamente muchas veces en mi autoestima ya que siempre cuestionaba a mí mismo al respecto, siempre he tenido una falsa perspectiva sobre mí mismo y mi propia intel igencia propiamente dicho el síndrome del impostor, no me consideraba lo bastante inteligente o brillante me infra estimaba tenia baja autoestima y esto fue agravado cada vez más por la depresión junto al trastorno de ansiedad que padezco, llevo luchando contra este trastorno varios y valiosos años de mi vida, he convivido con la enfermedad más de 40 años desde la edad de 20 años hasta ahora que tengo 45 años, he vivido momentos difíciles a lo largo de toda mi vida por varias circunstancias entre ellas el padecer un trastorno que ha limitado bastante mi vida en todos los sentidos acompañado de mucho sufrimiento detrás, actualmente sigo bajo tratamiento farma cológico con psicótropos y a veces he tenido un soporte psicológico por parte de psicólogos además de psiquiatras que en conjunto me auto ayudaban a llevar mejor mi situación y seguir ad elante luchando por mis sueños y en contra tiempo, volviendo al tema de las pruebas de alto rango y basados en mi propia experiencia personal. Desde mi punto de vista creo que por un lado los resultados de los test de alto rango se correlacionan de una manera estrecha y se aproximan bastante a los resultados obtenidos mediante las pruebas estándar como el WAIS y sobre todo se correlacionan mejor con las pruebas que calculan el factor g de la inteligencia como el test de cattel o matrices de raven s…ect ya que en las pruebas que hice por psicólogos experimentados y expertos en altas capacidades he obtenido resultados parecidos, desde el punto de vista psico métrico, lo que diferencia las pruebas de alto rango y las pruebas estandarizadas hechas por psicólogos o mejor neuropsicologos es que en que estas últimas hay un estudio global de la per sona testada porque no se limitan solamente al hecho de medir un ci determinado sino analizan también otros aspectos fundamentales para llegar a un diagnostico mas certero como estudiar el perfil psicológico, la neurodivirgencia, la hipersensibilidad sensorial…ect para llegar a la con clusión de si una persona determinada tiene altas capacidades intelectuales o no lo que les con fiere un carácter mas preciso aparte de la medida de otros factores de los que carecen las pruebas de alto rango como la alta velocidad de procesamiento de la informacion y la memoria tanto a coto como a largo plazo, por otro lado las pruebas de alto rango tienen la ventaja de que no se precisan de un tiempo determinado para realizarlas lo que en cierta medida elimina el factor es trés durante la realización de las mismas de manera que se puede alcanzar el mayor potencial que posee la persona testada sobre todo en personas suceptibles al estres o que sufren algún que otro transtorno mental los que les confiere cierta fiabilidad desde este punto de vista además se caracterizan por ser pruebas mucho mas complejas requieren un alto grado de razonamiente y un pensamiento divergente en muchas ocasiones, la mayoría requieren un minimo de 10 horas omas para realizarlas, en mi caso eran ideales para una estimación y una aproximación a mi ci real ya que yo soy suceptible al factor estrés y generado por mi propio trastorno aparte de que los psi cofármacos que tengo que tomar a diario mi velocidad de procesamiento no es la misma que cu ando evaluas a una persona que no padezca algún tipo de enfermedad mental en la que el estrés generado en las pruebas convencionales corre en tu contra y al estar bajo presión sumándolo a los efectos segundarios de los psicofármacos que alteran en cierta medida algunos procesos cog nitivos, los resultados no serán los mismos en muchas veces infraestiman tu verdadero ci y llega a crear confusiones sobre todo si están realizadas por psicólogos que carecen de mucha experi encia pueden llegar a llegar a diagnosticos erroneos ahí esta relativamente la ventaja de las pruebas de alto grado sobre los test convencionales, pero actualmente la comunidad científica todavía no reconoce este tipo de tests como un instrumento psicométrico valido para medir la in teligencia en muchas ocasiones, hay mucha controversia al respecto a este tema en concreto, ot ros lo consideran solamente un pasa tiempo o un hobie que carecen de analizar varios fac tores funamentales para un estudio tan completo de la inteligencia en su conjunto de alguna per sona en concreto los que las hacen medidas no tan fiables desde el punto de vista de varios psi cologos ya que en general son pruebas que se centran sobre todo en la medición del factor g de la inteligencia obiando otras medidas de otros componentes de la que forman la inteligencia hu mana aparte que sus normas están hechas por autores muchas veces que carecen de una for mación , preparación o conocimientos si los hay a veces insuficientes en el campo de la psi cología además las normas que establecen son un poco desorbitados ya que en muchas pruebas miden un ci por encima de los 160 a diferencia de las pruebas estándares.

En definitiva, encuentro el volumen muy interesante, analiza de forma global varios aspectos de la vida de personas que tienen en común su alto cociente intelectual con sus más y sus menos, mucha destreza por parte de Scott Jacobson en la formulación de sus preguntas y para mí ha sido un placer ser una pieza más para complementar y formar parte de este volumen.

Last updated May  3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices.  In Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.