In-Sight Publishing

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/07/01

Abstract

Karen Hines is the writer and director of All the Little Animals I Have Eaten. She discusses: background; All The Little Animals I Have Eaten; pieces brought together in this individual narrative to pass the Bechdel Test; a conversation between Margaret Atwood and Michelle Goldberg; one of the nightmares from the restaurant serving time; a second nightmare; and something to hope people not take away as a message from this play.

Keywords: All the Little Animals I Have Eaten, Bechdel Test, director, Karen Hines, Margaret Atwood, Michelle Goldberg, writer.

An Interview with Karen Hines on “All the Little Animals I Have Eaten”[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Of course, your background is more public as you are a reasonably prominent playwright. But for those who would like this in your own words, what is some background leading into being a playwright around more critical social commentary issues?

Karen Hines: I started off as a child actor. My first performing job was a pay that my great step-grandfather and “common law,” [Laughing] as he called himself, produced with his then independent theatre company. So, I got a taste for this. It was an adaptation of [did not get this]. I got a taste for independent theatre and left-leaning work. Then I began doing sketch comedy, improv, when I was in my late teens. Then in my early 20s, I became a member of the Second City comedy company. They present satire and parodies. They’re doing critiques of contemporary culture. I would say that I really got a sense of possibilities in that kind of work. I sculpted my studies around that kind of work. So, I studied clown and bouffon, but only so that I could further define what I was doing as a satirist, as a baby satirist. I studied lots of different things. I was originally a performer, then a performer-writer, then performer-writer-director as time went on. I got a taste for it. My parents are scientists and atheists. I suppose that I was brought up in a family that questioned. I have this grandmother who was an author. My great step-grandfather and common law was very experimental in the world of theatre. All of those influenced.

2. Jacobsen: With regards to the current production, All The Little Animals I Have Eaten, what was the starting point when some of the ideas were coming to the front of mind for you?

Hines: It began as something quite different than what it has become. It began as a exercise. I was interested in the Bechdel Test or the Bechdel-Wallace Test. I was interested in this kind of experiment in writing a bunch of disparate scenes that pass the test and what kind of feeling that might create in a room, having scenes that all pass the test. The play really began to evolve almost as soon as I started doing readings of it, or presenting pieces for grant applications or whatever, because the world began to change quickly. I guess, the earliest pieces that I wrote were in 2014. At that time, the Bechdel Test was  pretty unknown to a lot of people. It was a new territory and needed to explain this to people. Very soon after that, we had the MeToo movement and Donald Trump was elected into office. The world changed, and changed, and changed again. The Bechdel-Wallace Test seemed quaint by comparison. It was no longer weighty enough to hold the centre of a full-length play. Then I just began improvising. As a writer, you are trying to respond instinctively to what I was seeing in the world and not necessarily writing about those things. I do not write about the MeToo movement or abut Donald Trump. But as a writer, I was writing in a way that was responding to the world that we were in. The scenes are mostly about professionals and all-female, which makes sense when you remember this started as a playful examination or meditation including the Bechdel Test. But the world surrounding this condominium seemed much darker, much more inclusive of the changes. Everything feels a lot scarier since I began to write this play 6 years ago.

3. Jacobsen: When we look at some of the political contexts, it is quite a startling thing to see. It could be Hungary with Orban to Xi Jinping getting rid of term limits. There is a large contingent of political examples of strongmanism akin to Trump and almost to who Trump has almost given an excuse for and emboldened. There seems to be a trend in some feminist literature and writing in Canada to not necessarily write directly about those political and social occurrences. Rather, it is more portraying this more in a fictional setting, so Margaret Atwood is very famous for this, as we both know. Taking puzzle pieces of the real world in history, misogyny and so on, and then making a big puzzle out of it, then calling this The Handmaid’s Tale, and so on, were there pieces brought together in this individual narrative to pass the Bechdel Test, and then further weaved together?

Hines: Yes, initially, I had no idea how they were going to knit together. As I was working, I realized most of the scenes were set in a restaurant or a café, or a bistro. The ones that were not were very easy to change. That was probably partly because I was talking about conversations between women and overhearing conversations between people. Of course, there is no greater way to overhear conversations than to be a server.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Hines: I had been a server in my late teens and early twenties. I thought, “I don’t know what it is like to be 20-something now. I know 20-year-olds. I do not know what it is like to be a server.” That server character is sort of what ties things together now. Then I realized that I had to focus this further [Laughing] because people’s ideas around feminism are so fractured.

Jacobsen: Sure.

Hines: There’s no way to write a play set in a condominium and pretend to cover all version of females.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Hines: I decided that I would really focus it on an all-female condo with real estate being sold. I decided to really focus down on aspects of consumer culture, market driven feminism, capitalism, neo-liberalism, etc., and through a very distinctively female lens.

4. Jacobsen: I recall a conversation between Margaret Atwood and Michelle Goldberg off-the-top. Michelle Goldberg mentioned “feminism.” Margaret Atwood retorted, ‘We have to be careful about that term because it means about 50 different things now.’

Hines: Yes.

Jacobsen: When you mention the ‘fracturing’ of it, that’s what comes to mind. It is the idea that there are these various branches that fall under that rubric of feminism, but they are, as you note, “market driven feminism.” There’s a whole bunch of others. They are more or less allied, but they have different areas of emphasis. So, when you’re coming to this play presenting mostly or all women voices, but not the complete of women’s voices, of course, what is the idea of feminism that you’re bringing to mind here or hoping to bring to mind in the audience?

Hines: I am, certainly, going to piss some people off.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Hines: [Laughing] a lot of the women depicted in this play are not “good” women. They are women for whom individual gain is very important and getting ahead. They talk about accelerated feminism. What that means is very different from person to person, it is the tender server who walks among them and must decide whether she will accept or resist what she is seeing around her. Although, she wants her own place. She wants to succeed. She is confronted with people who are ostensibly succeeding. But [Laughing] the type of feminism that they are exuding is the all-for-me feminism [Laughing]. They are very much into the trappings of contemporary market driven feminism. They might want the leisure and things often marketed to women. These are often what they talk about. They are not lacking in poetry or intelligence. They just want what they want. I would say, “They are market driven feminists” [Laughing].

Jacobsen: When I hear that, the ideas that come to mind are a more comprehensive view or range of feminisms, or believing in different forms of feminism that are more or less allied with one another, but behaving in ways that are not necessarily feminist or reasonably accurate to that standard that many would accept – and what that shows is humanizing of women in that manner. I think Chris Rock had a saying. When black people in the United States can fail the way white people can fail, and bounce back the white people can, if they are hardworking enough and persistent enough, then that’s the more robust sign of equality.

Hines: Right.

Jacobsen: I think this instance of portraying women as human beings, as all sorts of the nobilities, the foibles, and the forgetfulness, the aging, the bad eyesight, the Machiavellianism to get ahead. All of these things. I think what you’re portraying is not the idea of feminism, but, maybe, a more honest representation of what feminism means as humanizing women as complete beings.

Hines: Yes and no, I go pretty hard on them. It is this server’s story, but it is a server’s nightmare. I don’t know if you have ever worked in a restaurant.

Jacobsen: I am working in one right now [Laughing] [Ed. This is before the SARS-CoV-2/Coronavirus/COVID-19 global pandemic, as declared by the World Health Organisation, leading to the shutting down of the restaurant, hopefully temporarily, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada at the moment, which comes from the national emergency declarations of the Federal Liberal Government of the Rt. Hon. Justin Trudeau.]

Hines: I still have nightmares from my server years. I do recall nights as a server that were among the most stressful nights of my life. It is really tough when you are young and, obviously, if you are working in a decent restaurant; then, it is the best money. What it can take out of you is a lot, I focused on the darker aspects of that, the harder aspects of that. So, that it is, first of all, comedic, because if everyone is super nice to each other, then it is not funny. I instinctively went for the jugular on a type of woman or feminist. But it is a focus on a type of woman that is very human. But you should know that these are sort of surreal characters. They are not meant to represent all women or the darker side of women, but women in a place where the real estate is over $1,000 a square foot. They had to get there sometimes by not being the nicest people in the world. It is focused on this place. This place is imaginary. We talked about Margaret Atwood. It is not quite as extreme as The Handmaid’s Tale. It is its own strange place. Meanwhile, the condo that it is set in is called La Ferme. It is French for “The Farm.” It features live animals and living plants that ostensibly being raised and grown to eat. So, it has a beautiful aspect to it. The vegetation is gorgeous. Also, set against these problematic women are two women who share conversations with each other, which go back to the Bechdel Test, they are really beautiful conversations and fun conversations. Also, they are not about feminism or about men. In the case of this play, they are not about babies and families. They are about the world. I would say that those women are, if anything, the women people, hopefully, focus on the foreground against the background of these heinous women [Laughing].

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Hines: Because these women are kind of counterculture. They are finding their way through this job. They are going to school. All of that. They are resisting. So, we have two extremes of women. The ones there are more of; they are the heinous variety with self-serving, greedy, money focused, materialistic, and so on, at the expense of others type women. Then there are these two women who really are interested in the world, in their future, in the future of what is outside of the confines of La Ferme.

5. Jacobsen: If I may ask, was one of the nightmares from the restaurant serving time in your 20s incorporated into the play? And if so, what?

Hines: Yes! [Laughing] even when I was still serving, and after, I used to have a dream that my section as in 4 different locations. For a while, that dream was in some restaurant building that I was actually working in, but the dream morphed. Sometimes, it was in a forest. My section was in a forest. I couldn’t see the tables, I think, maybe, that is how subconsciously the vegetation has become part of the scenography of the play. I also used to dream that my section was on several different subway platforms. I would have to jump on the subway to check on my other three sections. So, this server has, on this night, a section spread out over 4 distinct areas. Her fellow server has not shown up. She is on her own. She is dealing with tables all over the place. And she can’t see them all.

6. Jacobsen: Is there a second nightmare?

Hines: I would say that that nightmare of not being able to see my tables because of trees and, sometimes, subway platforms was the nightmare that kept happening over the years. I am trying to think. I think the nightmares, too, include, usually, the stress coming from the tables. The pressured situation with customers who are not necessarily all that kind, which is very common. I think that a lot of servers will tell you that they might get jobs in better restaurants, but, often, the clientele becomes more demanding and more unpleasant as you move to finer dining.

7. Jacobsen: So, my last question, then, would be: I can’t ask you, ‘What is the meaning of the title?’ That’s for people to figure out themselves. I am not going to ask you, ‘What should people take away from the story?’ Because that could be a million things. What I am going to ask you is the reverse of the last question, what do you hope people not take away as a message from this play?

Hines: Oh! I hope that they don’t think that I am telling them to be vegan.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Hines: [Laughing] I mean, one, I think it is a great thing to be. But it is not about that. It is not about Me Too or about Trump, as I said. It is about the word. Yes, it has, to me, a relationship to animals. But it is not as simple or straightforward as, “You should stop eating meat.”

8. Jacobsen: Thank you for the lovely conversation today, Karen.

Hines: Thank you very much, I really enjoyed the questions.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Writer and Director.

[2] Individual Publication Date: July 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/hines; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/07/01

Abstract

Julien Garrett Arpin is a Member of the World Genius Directory. He discusses: family background; the World Genius Directory; its positives and negatives; the Bible Belt background; Software Development and Network Engineering; differentiates Canadian society from American society; the award; the parenting style; the most honest moment in life; giftedness noted earlier in life; some of the intelligence tests taken; real IQ, authentic IQ, or true IQ; experience with peers and teachers in adolescence; the state of trust in the school faculties; a relevant gap in intelligence levels for sufficient communication with self-selected peers, friend groups, and mentors; the transition to university education; mundane, even trivial aspects of personal life; ADHD; some of the more exciting, novel, exhilarating, etc. parts of life; a chip on the shoulder and the narcissism in men; healthier, balanced sensibilities amongst the gifted; if a gifted person feels zero responsibility to utilize their gifts; a lifelong dream to some lifework or overarching life project; other organizations, groups, and resources; character traits; people internationally; Canadian personalities; some of the most creative people; the most cognitive horsepower in history; the Ashkenazim; the highest ethical standards and actual practices (word and deed) now; ethical duds; freethought; and revelation-based thinking failing or succeeding at this point.

Keywords: ADHD, Ashkenazim, giftedness, IQ, Julien Garrett Arpin, World Genius Directory.

An Interview with Julien Garrett Arpin on Canada, America, Intelligence, ADHD, and Impressive Figures (Part One)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Starting from some of the family backgrounds, what is it, e.g., culture, language, religion or none, geography, work, and educational attainments?

Julien Garrett Arpin: I was born in the northwestern corner of the state of Arkansas to English-speaking parents of humble beginnings in late August of 1995. My lineage is mainly French. Although my area falls within the Bible Belt of the US, my family was never particularly religious. I currently work as a software developer near Toronto, Canada, after finishing a 3-year program in Software Development and Network Engineering near here. It was during this 3-year period that I received the World Genius Directory’s 2017 Genius of the Year Award – America.

2. Jacobsen: For those who do not know, what is the World Genius Directory?

Arpin: It’s the current Who’s Who of the High-IQ World. The World Genius Directory was founded by a Dr Jason Betts, a member of Mensa Australia’s Administrative Committee. The WGD became an official member of the World Intelligence Network in August of 2012. The WGD’s motto is genius pro mundo, which is Latin for ‘genius for the world’. It serves as a central point of organization in the high-IQ community as a means of bringing gifted adults together in ways that are good for the world. To help achieve this, the World Genius Directory holds annual elections for the Genius of the Year Awards. The winners are selected to serve as representatives for the gifted community. There are three GOTY Awards given each year; one to a member in the Americas, one to a member in Europe, and one to a member in Asia. Some of the smartest people on the planet are in the World Genius Directory.

3. Jacobsen: What are its positives and negatives?

Arpin: There are more positives than negatives where the WGD is concerned. The members are respectful. Determining which tests are of sufficient quality for consideration by the WGD poses the challenge. Dr Betts handles this well by investigating and cataloguing many IQ tests and IQ societies from across the web. Those resources are available from the WGD website. Like many members of the WGD, Dr Betts designs and offers a selection of surprisingly accurate IQ tests, especially when taken together. The site serves as a reference point for anyone looking for IQ tests. Listed members of the WGD get access to a Facebook page that is always lively. I’ve met amazing people through the WGD. I see some of them on TV, others breaking world records. The WGD also serves as a resource for companies or organizations seeking giftedness or IQ talent. The WGD has faced controversy for its connection to psychic research. The website’s URL is http://psiq.org/. I don’t mind. Research shows that intellectual and intuitive abilities go hand-in-hand. In total, the negatives consist of room to champion pseudoscience while the positives consist of all the social benefits offered to the world and gifted community by such a Directory.

4. Jacobsen: With the Bible Belt background, is a religion in some manner connected to family general views on the world now?

Arpin: My family remains decidedly unreligious but open. The prevailing monotheism such as the religion of the Bible promotes the patriarchal value structure that is integral to the traditional American family, so these factors impact parts of everyone’s lives within the society. Science is the best religion. Politics is a tumultuous one. These things all culminate into something strange in the Bible Belt, where people don’t believe that climate change or COVID-19 are real. These conservative values buoy the Christian faith and become part of it to many. The regular salvos of religious propaganda eventually fostered a tendency for me to recognize signs of cultishness. I support and appreciate the utility of virtue. I understand that our concept of virtuousness has roots in theology. Religion is an effective means of instantiating virtuousness but isn’t necessarily or always the best way. The psychology underlying religious acceptance has changed how I see the human condition and desire for connection and safety. The journey from mythology to science is the positive disintegration of human sociality.

5. Jacobsen: Why pursue Software Development and Network Engineering?

Arpin: I loved video games and computers but knew very little about them. My electrical experience made me interested in electronics. Computer programming sounded enticing. I also had some ideas for software projects that I could only pursue after learning how to code. One is an advanced SMS platform that brings computing power to text-messaging, thereby optimizing customer retention with smarter SMS ad campaigns. The platform also makes it possible for the general public to access the internet over SMS. The platform and business model earned 2nd place in a pitch competition. Beyond learning to write software for those ideas, the networking element put a body to the brain of code. All in all, the choice to pursue software was a decision I never knew I always knew I would make.

6. Jacobsen: What differentiates Canadian society from American society?

Arpin: Canadians are a few points higher in terms of Latitude and IQ. One-third of a standard deviation, according to recent instalments of the WAIS. Canadians outscore Americans so consistently that they use a separate norm here. I live in Toronto, one of the most diverse cities in the world. The change is refreshing. It’s a far cry from my Arkansan hometown where the majority of citizens were born in the Western Hemisphere and had little cultural dissemination. Canadians are a good bit more polite than Americans, and only slightly more polite than southern hospitality. Canadian friendships don’t seem to run as deeply, however. Many Canadians are great acquaintances, but neither enemies nor friends. It stands to reason that this lack of emotional investment in groupthink is the price for Canadian diversity in business.

7. Jacobsen: What does the award mean to you?

Arpin: Direction. It doesn’t make me feel like a genius, but a representative of the gifted community. The plaque reminds me of how I can make an impact with my limited time here. A symbol of the trust others place in me, my dedication to the gifted community. The gifted community gives me that sense of belonging and morale.

8. Jacobsen: What was the parenting style towards you?

Arpin: My parents were laissez-faire in their parenting style. They believed that they could only influence me so much as an individual and that I would, ultimately, be the one making my own decisions in life. And so, the best they could hope to do was to teach me the fundamental principles that they had learned. They were supportive of my accomplishments and encouraged me to become a self-sustained adult, above all else. They taught me to balance compassion and logic and to think for myself. My parents were always honest with me and motivated me to do well in life.

9. Jacobsen: What was the most honest moment in life from them for you?

Arpin: Well, the truth hurts, so their most honest moment was probably a bitter wake-up call. Life is challenging at times, even for our parents. Their most honest moment was the one in which they revealed themselves as flawed, and told me for the first time that they would never be perfect. Their honesty opened my eyes so that I could begin the process of overcoming my childish naivety. The desire for the easy way out, to place complete faith in an archetypal parental figure in hopes of validating the inner experience is the force that leads to blind trust in authority and dogmatism. The ugliest moments are usually the best learning opportunities.

10. Jacobsen: Was giftedness noted earlier in life, or not? How was this nurtured, or not?

Arpin: Certain signs were present from early on. An aunt tells me that when I was extremely young, just a baby in the cradle, she came to see what I looked like for the first time, and made a joke that I looked like Yoda in all my fleshy, newly born appearance. Her words seemed to ring true as everyone in the room began to laugh, but then they all stopped laughing and looked at me in shock when they realized that I was crying because they were all laughing at me. She said that I somehow understood that they were all making fun of me, and I wouldn’t look at her for a while. The fact that she recognized that and acted accordingly was pretty nurturing. My parents are unsure when I learned how to read and write. I had the reading comprehension of a sophomore-level university student in third grade. I won a competition in the library for guessing the number of jelly-beans in an extra-large pickle jar that year. At about the same time, my class was administering timed multiplication tests consisting of 80 to 100 problems that students were to complete in under 2 minutes. To encourage effort, the school promised every student that received perfect scores on all timed tests ice cream at the end of the semester. I was the only student to eat ice cream when the time came. It felt horrible. In fourth grade, I won a district spelling bee against junior high schoolers. My parents also divorced when I was in fourth grade. I moved to a new school district in fifth grade and was placed in a gifted program there in sixth grade. The gifted program was incredible for me. It put me with kids that seemed to understand me, and I forged friendships there that hold to this day.

11. Jacobsen: What have been some of the intelligence tests taken by you? What have been some of the scores, and what were their standard deviations? What would be the relative cognitive rarity for you?

Arpin: I have taken many cognitive ability tests of many different types. I generally refer to my IQ as 154 with 15-point standard deviations, which would put me at a relative rarity of about one person in every 6,284. I scored 154 on the Wonderlic Personnel Test, and 154 on the entrance test to the International Society for Philosophical Enquiry. However, my scores have reached as high as the 170s. I scored 5.06 sigmas above the sample mean (IQ 175) on the MITRE/Educational Testing Services Inductive Reasoning Battery for a High Ability Population, Figure Series, Form 1. I also scored 170 on the test RADIUS by Hans Sjoberg. I scored at the 99.99th percentile of the population on a quiz of social psychological skills from Yale University without a formal background in psychology, which means I have a sense for social patterns. Research indicates that those abilities correlate with general intelligence. I also achieved ceiling scores on multiple intelligence tests from the Psychometrics Centre at Cambridge University. I scored 145+ on IQ tests from various universities including the Hagen Matrices Tests from Hagen University, ICAR 60 from Northwestern University, and the MV2G from SRH University of Applied Science Heidelberg. I have a few more niche scores, as well. On Hawk-Eye, a test of visual processing speed by Dr Micheal Merzenich, PhD, I scored at the ceiling of the test with a visual processing speed below 76 milliseconds. I scored at the 100th percentile on the Verbal Memory Test from Human Benchmark after memorizing around 220 words. I correctly guessed 14 randomly generated coin-flips in a row during a proctored Binary Intuition Test for the group Trishula, a member society of Elysian Fields. The source of randomness for that test was the TRNG or True Random Number Generator at random.org based on atmospheric white noise.

12. Jacobsen: What seems like the real IQ, authentic IQ, or true IQ, for you?

Arpin: 154. Exact IQ scores are somewhat fallacious. Even if I somehow extracted a perfect measure of my IQ to the hundredth of a point, it would fluctuate within seconds. Overall, my IQ scores cluster near the 145-160 range. I consider my IQ to be 154.

13. Jacobsen: How was your experience with peers and teachers in adolescence?

Arpin: My experience with peers and teachers was somewhat challenging during that period of my life. In high school, I often ate lunch alone after selling food to other kids more cheaply than the school was offering it. Some of my old friends, many from the gifted program, would pass by and say hello, so I always knew that I had a few close friends. But I always perceived a disconnect from the general student body. I quit the gifted program in 8th grade because the program instructor had recently transferred from teaching students much younger than I was. Also, my woodshop teacher was punishing me for my time spent in the gifted program instead of his class. My peers had a nasty track record where I was concerned. Once, in high school, I was the only person with an answer to a question during a test review. The teacher was out of the room, and someone openly asked the classroom what the answer to that question was. I thought I could help, so I shared my thoughts, but then nearly every member of the class turned around in their seats and called me an idiot for having that answer! And my answer was right! Fairly perplexing. The next day, the teacher managed to overlook me while taking attendance even though I was there. It didn’t make me feel respected or recognized. It reminded me of my teachers in middle school that would get fed up with my questions. Early into high school, someone from the school football team began belittling me in front of the class. I knew that my peers would have continued the downward spiral and made my life hell if left unchecked. So, I used my knowledge of social patterns to rally a group of students behind me, and we caught the bully between classes. It worked out in my favour. That campaign earned me new friends and peace of mind until graduation. From then on, I had very little faith in school faculty. I would ask questions and receive empty answers. Soon, I stopped participating in some classes entirely. The teachers weren’t sure what to do with me as my standardized test scores were the highest in the courses that I wasn’t attending. At age 14, I discovered an art form that garnered some recognition in my neighbourhood and school: lyricism. I developed skills in lyricism to secure a place in the social hierarchy, and as a means of personal expression. My peers became more accepting of me after I began writing rhymes. I never understood that giftedness was the reason that I felt disconnected from them.

14. Jacobsen: What is the state of trust in the school faculties now?

Arpin: I think that academia is finally recognizing its issues, so I have hope for the not-so-distant future. According to many sources, the intellectual quality of academic institutions began to plummet in 2014. Some never-before-seen wave of cognitive and ethical famine struck American universities in the form of cancel culture and girls-only safe spaces. Suddenly professors could do things they’ve always done and get dogpiled by triggered students. As legislative restrictions increased, the university gates became less selective. So every year, less qualified students enter less enriching learning environments under the halfhearted tutelage of increasingly defensive professors. For many students, the lack of that nourishing environment is reason alone not to waste money on bus tickets to class. It becomes more economic to simply skip class, teach themselves everything they need to know from YouTube and only set foot on campus for midterms and final exams. Academia has withstood heavy blows in light of recent trends, but it will redeem itself soon enough.

15. Jacobsen: What seems like a relevant gap in intelligence levels for sufficient communication with self-selected peers, friend groups, and mentors?

Arpin: It is subjective, but maybe I can represent my thoughts in an objectively meaningful way. It seems that intelligence differences over 1.5 standard deviations in size present challenges to communication. In my personal opinion, a common interest extends this communication range to 3 sigmas, with each additional shared interest extending it by about half as much as the previous iteration. A rough example could go as follows. Imagine an average adult having a conversation with an equally average child. Unless the child is almost an adult, there probably won’t be much fulfiling conversation taking place. Their brains and internal languages are too different. But now imagine that the adult and child have a common interest, like a sport. What if the adult is the kid’s football coach? Suddenly, the two of them can see eye to eye in many ways, speaking in external terms, as men united by a common goal. So, I would answer your question in terms of magnitudes of intelligence differences and personal similarities.

16. Jacobsen: How was the transition to university education?

Arpin: It would be an understatement to say that I was looking forward to the me-time following high school graduation. After finishing 12th grade, I took some time off. I became an electrician for a year. After that, I worked a few odd jobs in charitable organizations until I decided to attend college to become a software developer. Three years had passed since my high school graduation, and I was happy to have taken the opportunity to mature and decide what I wanted in life. I picked software development because I knew nothing about it, and I wanted to pursue something challenging. Met with course material I found stimulating, I began to rediscover my giftedness during college. The college experience was transformational for me. My classmates in college were friendlier to communicate with than in high school. Finishing my exams in a few minutes never made me feel guilty in college! My college professors still didn’t always understand my questions or give good enough answers, but it was much better than high school.

17. Jacobsen: What have been some rather mundane, even trivial aspects of personal life for you

Arpin: The taste of toothpaste has always bothered me, but I grin through it for my coworkers. The orderliness of chores has the air of artistic expression rather than a functional requirement. Having never particularly enjoyed colouring or drawing, I find little satisfaction in arbitrary house-chores. Ceaseless swapping of spatial position is a cheap distraction from what matters. In my opinion, the form should always follow the function. Things like doing the dishes seem like nothing more than time-consuming meditative practices. I can merely purchase plastic dinnerware or purchase food items that don’t require many dishes. Consider the fact that using a drinking glass is obsolete compared to drinking from water fountains. You create cross-contamination every time you drink water that has touched the inside of a glass. More suitable to cut out the middle-man and drink the water as it falls from the faucet. These sorts of daily processes that could be optimized or reduced are my bane. I have ADHD and find the tedium of paperwork insufferable. I need to clear out my email inbox, for that matter.

18. Jacobsen: When was ADHD diagnosed? This is common for boys and men, far more than girls and women.

Arpin: In 12th grade. Retrospectively, it probably would have helped to be diagnosed sooner. Giftedness and ADHD can conceal one another. Oh well, I’m just happy that I found out about it before I graduated from high school.

19. Jacobsen: What have been some of the more exciting, novel, exhilarating, etc. parts of life for you?

Arpin: The intensity of my personal experience leaves me in awe of the beauty of existence. Our universe hangs in perfect harmony. Even a simple juxtaposition of sticks can teach us about balance and identity, and these learnings excite me. I’m a hyperphantasic HSP. I have a vivid mind’s eye, a mental space where I can imagine and experience. This characteristic helps me anticipate and prepare for the road ahead. Impactful music can invoke rapture within me. I actively pursue euphoric moments. I find fringe research that probes the limitations of knowledge to be among the most fulfilling uses of time. Nothing electrifies my being like learning something that forces me to rethink everything I think I know, and the frontiers of science tend to do that. I enjoy researching things like natural science, consciousness, reality, number theory, identity, and everything in between. The mystical experience has highlighted my time on Earth.

20. Jacobsen: Some gifted individuals develop a chip on their shoulder based on particular senses of entitlement in life because of their innate gifts and, therefore, the internalized idea of natural rights, deserved status, and place in society because of the gifts, even unique talents or character qualities, of them. Some may develop a lifelong chip on their shoulder towards well-established academic institutions, to the workaday world, to socialization, to the intimacy of any form, or to building a mature legacy to pass down in progeny or productions. Men are more probable to develop narcissism than women. I observe this in some sub-demographics of the male gifted population. Why is this the case, in both cases of a chip on the shoulder and the narcissism in men?

Arpin: The answer is simple, though perhaps less cheerful than you might hope. The reason this happens as a natural process is because it is the natural order. The gifted have always been persecuted, bullied, burned as witches, or shoved into lockers. Admitting that a superior capability exists without understanding the nature of its advantage will raise the alarms of most people. The less intelligent members of any group that relies on intelligence to wage war and survive will feel threatened by their more intelligent contemporaries. Even after the intelligent one does everything they can to help society, this will be the case. Oh, a clever inventor invented a streetlight to bring light to a dark world? No thanks, it will be called the devil’s candle, and they might meet the same fate as Galileo. Things seemingly changed on the surface level after the gifted community provided technology to the world in the form of computers and internet access. Gifted individuals are exploited for their abilities, treated as expensive assets, just to be deserted, denied, and detested by their brothers. I was seven the first time I saw Bill Gates called the antichrist on a Windows PC. Bill Gates could give away billions of dollars and reconstruct his entire life mission to reduce poverty and death in the third world. He would be blamed for their deaths. He could even warn us of upcoming pandemics, and the world would blame him once it arrived. Time to fetch the pitch-forks. Western culture rewards narcissism with social affluence and romantic opportunities. To be frighteningly smart and nice appears threatening and obsequious. As such, a chip on the shoulder in the gifted male is rarely a result of unfounded narcissism. These responses are war strategies and often necessary. Studies indicate that most school shooters in America are gifted students. Is it narcissism that leads these students to seek revenge? Not necessarily. So why wouldn’t the gifted individual be interested in passing on their good works and strengths to future generations? Well, the reality is your progeny and productions are the capital that will ultimately be criminalized by our selfish and destructive military-industrial complex built to subsidize the farthest reaches of the world to underpin the development of our society. Given this, there should be little question about why many abnormally intelligent individuals develop a chip on their shoulder towards society. Many choose not to contribute out of self-defence. Narcissism often gets misdiagnosed in gifted individuals.

21. Jacobsen: Following from the previous question, how can we help develop healthier, balanced sensibilities amongst the gifted who may be on a negative life trajectory due to internal factors rather than some of the external factors some may observe with Bill Sidis and others?

Arpin: Gifted children develop asynchronously, or at different rates than other children in certain areas. That’s why gifted education programs are so essential for them. Human beings are social animals that require connection to thrive. Without peer groups, gifted individuals often miss out on the reciprocation they need to develop to their fullest potential. Forcing a child to attend a school they find mediocre, threatening, or uncaring isn’t healthy for them. Their developmental trajectories must be accepted and nurtured. Academic institutions have to increase the attention they give gifted education. Lack of knowledge on behalf of educators is no excuse. Ignorance of giftedness from parents is no excuse, either. Parents should always be held accountable for nurturing their children with special needs, and gifted children are considered by many to be a special needs group. All families of gifted children should be familiar with Dabrowski’s Overexcitabilties. For those that may not know, Polish psychologist Kazimierz Dabrowski developed a theory called the Theory of Positive Disintegration that was adopted by the gifted community after its tenets seemed applicable to the group. It posits that only through facing struggles and surviving can we encounter the circumstances that teach us what it means to be better than we are. The five overexcitabilities of the gifted are intellectual, imaginational, emotional, sensual, and psychomotor. Most gifted children have at least one of the OEs, and many have more than one. These overexcitabilities alter or intensify the experiences of intellectually gifted children in ways that are qualitatively different from the norm. Unrecognized, these overexcitabilities can lead to misunderstanding, misbehaviour, and misdiagnosis. We neglect the gifted child every time we downplay their experience or minimize how they feel, and so we must learn to be more accepting of their sensitivities. Teach the gifted child what it means to be gifted. Never leave the child room to wonder why they feel so different from their classmates lest they blame themselves. Show them that capability brings responsibility and what responsibility means. Let them gravitate to their natural domains so that they can identify their strengths and then apply them to other areas. Give them the freedom to express their capabilities and insights, and you will see incredible things. Help them find meaning whenever they ask you for it. Unite them with others like them so that they can connect and grow within a peer group. The world will challenge the gifted child, that much is certain. We must protect the gifted children. We must teach them strength, patience, and compassion. It’s our responsibility to lead by example as we build environments that cultivate these ideals. That means being willing to move the gifted children into a more advanced or appropriate classroom if that’s what it takes to keep them engaged and on track.

22. Jacobsen: What if a gifted person feels zero responsibility to utilize their gifts?

Arpin: Responsibility is a human experience. You cannot survive without being responsible enough to acquire sustenance. With that in mind, what could cause such a hangup where one would choose to stop eating? An unutilized gift isn’t necessarily a wasted chance just like movement for movement’s sake doesn’t necessarily get you anywhere. Maybe such an individual grew to detest their gift after it caused trouble for them. So, they stopped contributing that side of themselves and let it sink into ambivalence. Perhaps they refuse to be exploited in that particular way but are happy to help in others. Or maybe they are depressed, in which case, there are more pertinent problems than their questionable inclinations, like making sure they have a reason to go on living. The question isn’t really about which utilities someone should feel most inclined to use, or when, but what they hope to use them on. Is this a rejection of the self for the sake of others, or of others for the self? Are these choices involuntary reflexes or conscious boycotts? The reflex requires external help in the form of empathy and time to help the gifted individual heal from the trauma that caused them to deny their gifts. Voluntary rejection doesn’t need any external justification or assistance. A human being is free to abstain from that which disturbs it. These individuals will likely seek some other means of chemical fulfilment since their active minds won’t have responsibility-powered reward chemicals in ready supply. Acting responsibly, especially with others to create a sense of group belonging, is hard-wired into the human psyche as a source of happiness.

23. Jacobsen: Have you had a lifelong dream to some lifework or overarching life project?

Arpin: My goal is and has been to facilitate a dynamic through which I can enhance society through the nurturance and enrichment of the gifted population. The WGD has made this possible, but there is still much to be done. We are in a position to provide resources that every family with internet access can use to identify and nurture giftedness in their own homes and communities. These gifted children will be the ones to invent the solutions to the pollution and environmental toxins left behind by the military-industrial complex. I’m grateful to work with organizations such as the World Genius Directory, Elysian Fields, and leaders in the field of giftedness from all around the world to accomplish this.

24. Jacobsen: What other organizations, groups, and resources exist to provide some backing and support, and community, for the gifted young – and the general gifted population?

Arpin: There are many IQ societies designed for various levels of giftedness. Some of the classic names include Mensa, Intertel, the International Society for Philosophical Enquiry, the Triple Nine Society, the Prometheus Society, and the Mega Society. Mensa has special interest groups that focus on gifted kids. For families, other organizations include the National Association for Gifted Children (www.nagc.org), Supporting Emotional Needs of the Gifted (www.sengifted.org), Educations for the Gifted Organization (www.edgo.ca), and Hoagie’s Gifted Education Page (www.hoagiesgifted.org).

25. Jacobsen: What character traits in people impress you?

Arpin: Awareness, honesty, compassion, empathy, originality, ingenuity, intelligence, diligence, courage, patience, wisdom, charisma, and consistency are rather impressive to me. All of the strengths listed in the VIA Strengths Finder. Willingness to question one’s own beliefs is priceless.

26. Jacobsen: What people internationally impress you?

Arpin: Lately, I’ve been thinking about the Nigerians. Despite incredible odds, they continue to strive for excellence and to improve conditions for their nation and people. Nigerians are the best-educated national group in the United States. Of all Nigerians in the US, nearly 20% hold Master’s degrees. A stark contrast to the almost 30% of Nigerians that are currently considered illiterate in their country. Nigeria is still working to improve educational conditions after declaring independence from Great Britain in 1960. It’s been a steady march. Nigeria recently eradicated polio from their country with the help of the Gates Foundation. And that wasn’t long after overcoming the Ebola outbreak. Nigeria now has the largest economy in Africa. The country has a spin on Hollywood called Nollywood, which is the third-largest film industry in the world and pumps out four dozen movies each week. The Nigerian work ethic and sense of culture culminate into something inspirational. Nigerians lead by example and leave a hopeful mark in the world.

27. Jacobsen: What Canadian personalities impress you?

Arpin:  I have a lot of respect for Jordan Peterson from the University of Toronto and Patricia Susan Jackson or P. Susan Jackson from the Daimon Institute for the Highly Gifted. They both raise awareness of giftedness to help the current generation improve circumstances for the upcoming generations. I’d be willing to bet they’re both gifted themselves, too. Peterson is a professor of Psychology that gained a lot of attention for his refusal to adhere to shifting political tides in academia. Peterson’s willingness to discuss the realities of IQ has opened millions of eyes to the situation of intellectual giftedness and intellectual disability. P. Susan Jackson is a psychotherapist and advocate for gifted youth. She founded the Daimon Institute for the Highly Gifted as a clinic for psychotherapy and research of exceptionally gifted children. She also travels and speaks to schools and associations on how to recognize and foster giftedness. These individuals go the distance and fight for what they believe. I’m happy to see them succeed because they also fight for what I believe.

28. Jacobsen: Who are some of the most creative people that you have known?

Arpin: As a software developer working in the labs of the leading banks in Canada, I meet programmers that blow my mind with what they can create. Be it some graphical design, animation for a webpage, an algorithm for a database, or a new puzzle game for your smartphone, they can do it. Software engineers are more creative than people think. They’re creative enough to create ways to keep creating.

29. Jacobsen: Who are the people whom you consider to have the most cognitive horsepower in history?

Arpin: By statistical and historical standards, the Ashkenazi Jews seem to have the most cognitive horsepower of any ethnic group. In terms of singular individuals, mathematical thinkers such as Newton, Einstein, Euler, Gödel, von Neumann, and others come to mind. In terms of nations, I would give the United States and China credit for amassing the most cognitive horsepower to achieve their goals.

30. Jacobsen: Why the Ashkenazim? Is this on verbal intelligence, on general intelligence, or both?

Arpin: I was referring to their above-average general IQ scores, which are strongly influenced by their verbal and mathematical prowess. If the average IQ is 100, the average Ashkenazi IQ is around 112. That means the average Ashkenazi Jew will score higher on intelligence tests than 81% of the population. These findings are well known. Verbal intelligence has a kind of cumulative effect whose advantage shifts with circumstances and grows more refined over time. The Ashkenazi Jews are perhaps the embodiment of intellectual persecution, where much antisemitism was born from jealousy of Jewish success in commerce and politics. With verbal intelligence being their forte, the Ashkenazi Jews are skilled at naming things. It’s almost like some God created them to name all the living things on Earth. But all jokes aside, they seem to be leading the proverbial pack.

31. Jacobsen: Who are the people whom you consider to have the highest ethical standards and actual practices (word and deed) now?

Arpin: The most ethical individuals are those that kindle the flames of critical thought and compassion in others. Those that challenge their own biases and readily admit their mistakes in hopes of becoming wiser are usually the ones with the responsibility to make the hard decisions. The network effect of the modern world gives each idea the potential to become a revolutionary ideology. Given our increasing population size, societal complexity, and technological interconnectivity, the wise teacher is more than a pillar of society but a foundation for the future. I could name mainstream intellectuals, provocateurs, and thinkers known for challenging the status quo. These thinkers are rising in popularity because their ethical value is becoming increasingly self-evident. Reaching a sufficient level of influence will lead ethical individuals to divert focus away from their initial strategies to give back to the community. Examples of this include billionaires-turned-philanthropists like Bill Gates and Jack Ma. Those of the highest ethical substance make sacrifices for the greater good after putting in the work to make sure they have something worth offering.

32. Jacobsen: Who are ethical duds – all show, no substance?

Arpin: Emotionally Volatile, Ideological Leftists. These people claim to value individuality and difference of opinion, yet would stone us to death at the mention of mere scientific facts. That is a paramount ethical failure. These false prophets belong in mental hospitals. Emotionally Volatile, Ideological Leftists are so incompetent that they can’t even bring themselves to complete a Google search as a means of checking whether the next statue on the anti-racism disassembly line is of an abolitionist or a civil rights activist. This left is hysterical, bloodthirsty, illogical, and hell-bent on revenge for the horrors of life. The truth is that I’m politically left-leaning, yet I find myself inching ever so slightly to the right with every newsreel of a violent mob fighting the fool’s fight. I like to say that I left the left for the right only to right the right, for the left. We have to fix these problems ourselves. Sadly, some are too far gone to open their ears to the fact that there are truths on all sides. But alas, patience is golden.

33. Jacobsen: When you reflect on the types of philosophies out there, whether supernaturalistic and revelation-based philosophies found in various religions and theologies, naturalistic in the freethinker and natural philosophies or some variations of spirituality-by-practice without formalization in a religious codification or operation within the considerations of modern empiricism?

Arpin: That depends on what problems you hope to solve. The utility of a school of thought exists in its ability to solve distinct problems. The epistemology of freethought is the inherent mechanism by which human beings can adapt to change by overcoming and learning from challenges. But there is a price. Freethought encourages individualism, and being a lone individual in any arena can pose a risk. As such, the legacy of freethought is the expansion of science through trial-and-error, and then social forces propagate the results throughout the larger collective. This process only works when the virtues and proponents of freethought are encouraged and protected on a societal level. Inversely, spirituality-by-practice serves an effective means of training a population to work in unison. The process is Pavlovian. An army united under morale strikes with many times the force. In many senses, it doesn’t matter what lies they believe so long as they strike hard enough. Synchronized movement enhances group cooperation, and so many religions and corporations require their practitioners to engage in coordinated rituals as a team-building exercise. Revelation-based philosophies are the result of spirituality-by-practice attempting to grapple with change without losing sight of some leading tenet of morale. Freethought is the most objective and appropriate philosophical framework for current circumstances.

34. Jacobsen: What else follows from freethought?

Arpin: Logical models of the all. Freethought is an infinitely expanding process where each answer brings questions. Where does it end? At the boundary of perception and logic. When the understanding of reality becomes so nuanced that there is nothing new to ask, then dogma and revelation-based thinking will rise to preserve the status quo until more questions present themselves. The continuous output of freethought is the sciences, but stagnating sciences rot and turn to dogmatic beliefs.

35. Jacobsen: Is revelation-based thinking failing or succeeding at this point?

Arpin: Succeeding. It’s becoming more common in the public forum as scientific knowledge becomes a beacon of class privilege, turning the people against science. Supernaturalistic beliefs are cheap, and the only thing many fanatics can afford. So, as time progresses, revelation-based thinking breeds revolutionaries that seek to dismantle the boards of freethinking rationalism on their spurious eureka moments. I’ll call them revelationaries. The world is growing narcissistic, more emotional, and less intelligent due in large part to social forces like social media. These echo chambers feed confirmation bias in ways we’ve never seen. Combine this with an age of misinformation where you can find a supporting study for any claim. What you get are the roiling makings of an ideological Crock-Pot. Now, empowered by false narratives and lazy research, household revelationaries are losing patience with the rationalist narrative. At worst, they consider lengthy justifications and proofs as time-consuming trivialities or outright attacks against them. Such accusations aren’t the product of logic and reason, those fair instruments of discourse and debate, but dogma and hysteria. At best, they develop new pseudosciences that they hope to imbue with some sense of economic value that they can profit off. Those without the psychospiritual resources to stand steadfast against the torrent of falsehoods will fall to the confusing storm. There will always be the people that turn to their irrational revelations for the answers. Flat-Earthers. Climate change deniers. IQ deniers. All symptoms of a grander process as integral to human nature as cognitive dissonance. So, yes, revelation-based thinking is on the upsurge in the form of science denialism.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, World Genius Directory.

[2] Individual Publication Date: July 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/arpin-one; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/07/01

Abstract

Mhedi Banafshei is a Member of the World Genius Directory. He discusses: family background; the emphasis on the political nature; religion in Iran and in the UK; values of “education, secularism, and ambition”; a sense of an extended self or a sense of the family legacy; sociology; religion; professional lives of brothers; the juxtaposition of religiosity and secularism for mom and dad; particular denomination of religion; the long-term future of religion in the 21^st century; the experience with peers and schoolmates as a child and an adolescent; an agreeable disposition; homosexuality; purpose of intelligence tests; high intelligence; peers who were around the same intellectual level; the ways in which the geniuses of have either been mocked, vilified, and condemned if not killed, or praised, flattered, platformed, and revered; the greatest geniuses in history; great living geniuses; the profoundly gifted; differentiation of a genius from a profoundly intelligent person; talent gone to the garbage heap; some work experiences and educational certifications; business adventure; some of the more important aspects of the idea of the gifted and geniuses; some social and political views; more on social and political perspectives; the God concept or gods idea and philosophy, theology, and religion; science; tests taken and scores earned (with standard deviations); and ethical philosophy.

Keywords: background, geniuses, IQ, Islam, Mhedi Banafshei, religion, Shia Islam.

An Interview with Mhedi Banafshei on Background, Religion, Geniuses, and Intelligence Tests (Part One)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What was family background, e.g., geography, culture, language, and religion or lack thereof?

Mhedi Banafshei: Both of my parents are native Iranians, and I’m the oldest of three brothers born in the UK. My parents, particularly my father, have always been quite strictly religious despite embracing the secularism of society. My father attained a master’s degree in sociology, which made him an interesting man of combined education and religiosity. Overall, I believe being a product of both British and traditional Iranian culture of religious conservatism has been valuable in terms of gaining a broader understanding of various human cultures and concepts. Having to sometimes deal with the contrasting elements of the aforementioned has made it easier for me to develop the ability to see the different sides of issues.

2. Jacobsen: Why the emphasis on the political nature?

Banafshei: My father was a supporter of the government of Shah and was quite displeased about the Islamic revolution as he considers the successive regime to be a force of injustice and violent oppression. In terms of the UK, he has often communicated historical anxieties in terms of feeling uncertain about his place in the country and his belief that he has struggled to get an appropriate position in his field due to institutional discrimination of ethnicity and religion.  Growing up, I remember being told that in order to avoid problems of a similar nature, I should be a leading example of correctness within all educational, social and professional structures I participate in, lest I risk being unsuccessful for being perceived as an imperfect example of some social fringe.

3. Jacobsen: What was religion in Iran and in the UK for your parents?

Banafshei: Like most Iranians, both of my parents were raised in families of Shia Islam. They have remained firmly dedicated to their religious heritage throughout their lives.

4. Jacobsen: Who do the values of “education, secularism, and ambition” mean to you?

Banafshei: My philosophy of life is that knowing things, being productive and being an ethically advanced person is likely to lead to better outcomes for myself and others. I’ve had some processes of trial and error in relation to these things which have aided me on my path to this determined position.

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

Banafshei: I guess they made sense. The role models we have when growing up are undoubtedly important, and I feel grateful to know mine have been relatively positive ones.

6. Jacobsen: Why did your father pursue a degree in sociology at the graduate level?
Banafshei: I think one important factor has been that he’s apparently a man who is predisposed to being more interested in dealing with the theoretical aspects of things. It’s something I have always found reasonably understandable as a thinker myself, even if I have very often tended to see things quite differently to him.

7. Jacobsen: What is religion to him (your dad)

Banafshei: It’s the system that gives his life meaning. Without an eternal purpose, life has no meaning, he has told me. He reminds me of his belief that without the guidance religion can provide, people are likely to fall for any ideological evil and become the victims of any pitfall of life. I guess being cognizant of the immense importance of religion for him while not being religious myself is something that has in part caused me to become inspired to learn about the range of the ideas of our species.

8. Jacobsen: What are some of the professional lives of your brothers?

Banafshei:  My youngest brother is still of school-age. My other brother is not in employment as he has special needs. As an older brother, I do my best to be a supportive figure of hopefully some value in terms of helping him face some of the challenges he has to deal with. I feel that I’ve developed good sensitivity and awareness of some of the things many people have to deal with in the course of their lives as a result of my efforts to make what has sometimes felt like a vital difference.

9. Jacobsen: What is the juxtaposition of religiosity and secularism for mom and dad, and you?

Banafshei: Their view has been that secularism requires public acceptance and private separation of opposing ideals. No system is perfect, and I believe things can, and do, generally function a little better than that. Of course, ultimately only time and further social development will reveal more clearly how a society should, or could, be arranged in terms of the seemingly opposing structures.

10. Jacobsen: What seems like the long-term future of religion in the 21^st century with the onslaughts on science with some of the persistent supernaturals and assertions of faith texts and practices?

Banafshei: Religion will decline further as scientific advances reveal more about the various natures of our existences. It will always be around as it seems to fulfil some human spiritual need, but as we develop more tools of human welfare such systems will become redundant for more people.

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

Banafshei: I think I was always a relatively agreeable kid who tried to be approachable and friendly with peers. My personal development of such has related to learning that it’s not always wrong to be relatively selective in terms of social association. If we define the term intelligent colloquially, then I can assert that I’ve often felt socially incompatible with the non-intelligent.

12. Jacobsen: Is an agreeable disposition helpful for the gifted and talented?

Banafshei: I’m not sure I could provide any general advice for the gifted in terms of this. There is a range of gifted people and different things will work for different gifted people. And of course that’s not even to suggest that the social disposition of a person is necessarily more important somehow if they happen to be gifted.

13. Jacobsen: “Contrasting,” how so, in more precise terms?

Banafshei: Homosexuality and the mild sexual imagery of media representations were often the subject of serious criticism at home. I felt uncomfortable with any normalization of such things at school as child, but as I grew up it wasn’t difficult to accept some of the contradictions of the two cultures of my developmental periods.

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

Banafshei: At first it was to simply ascertain my IQ. And since I now have some idea of that, I like to occasionally look at them for purposes of seeking enjoyable intellectual challenges.

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

Banafshei: I guess I started to think about the possibility of this when I started to attain good exam results on some secondary school tests I didn’t care about and didn’t study for. The confidence I gained from that resulted in IQ testing not too long after.

16. Jacobsen: Any peers who were around the same intellectual level for you?

Banafshei: I had one friend in secondary school who had good grades, a relatively impressive store of general knowledge, and seemed obviously of above-average intelligence. Sadly, I soon got the chance to learn that he was also arrogant, had antisocial attitudes and believed some races of people are inferior. It was then that I realized being intelligent doesn’t make you better than anyone else. Intelligence is only one aspect of an individual’s constitution, and I’m concerned with much more than just that.

17. 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.

Banafshei: The better something is understood, the less likely it is to be vilified or glorified. And in relation to this, one can never be truly praised or condemned for reflecting the conceptual systems of another back to them, which by definition is not the role the genius has to play.

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

Banafshei: I would mention Aristotle and Leonardo da Vinci. They were not only prominent historical geniuses of great contribution but also ones who had the vision to do great work in many areas of study. The true geniuses achieved what they did because they refused to be conservative in their estimations of what they could have achieved.

19. Jacobsen: Who seem like great living geniuses to you?

Banafshei: I consider the greatest geniuses to be those who can be clearly connected to the most significant changes of the world. This would currently include bill gates, warren buffet, Elias James Corey, and James Watson among others.

20. Jacobsen: What is normally considered conservative in this context to delimit the full range of possibilities of the profoundly gifted to become achievers while not geniuses?

Banafshei: Most observers of any accomplishment of note will have quite limited expectations of what is possible as a result of what they’ve seen materialize, which is something they’ll often make obvious for others to see. Geniuses are rarely, if ever, those who internalize the suggestions of people who urge others to be ‘realistic’ and have limited perspectives of what they can achieve.

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

Banafshei: I think one reasonable definition of genius could be that of people who live up to their potential. Few people, myself included currently, get close to achieving the best that they could in any area of their natural capability. The difference between possibility and reality is often the difference between smart people and geniuses.

22. Jacobsen: How much talent has gone to the garbage heap due to racist and sexist ideologies, wars, famine, societal and cultural values against individual enterprise, political constraints on radical transformation of societal ideals and norms, etc.?

Banafshei: It would certainly be interesting to know. This question resonates with me as a person who conforms to very few stereotypes of intelligence. I have not tended to be what’s regarded as nerdy, I have no university qualifications, I’m a product and member of the working-class, and I have had considerable experiences of being overlooked as a member of minority groups which seem to be gladly associated with various forms of propaganda by growing numbers of people these days.  As a result of this, I have often felt like I’ve been treated in a way that is consistent with what many expect of me in terms of these things rather than anything observable of me in actuality, which has often felt strange and alienating. I think the result of my life experiences has been that I’ve become determined to correct what’s wrong and clarify what’s true. Being written off many times in life has motivated me to try to be a positive representation of who I truly am and to inspire others to be similarly appropriate beings. Those who face difficulties relating to your question have a responsibility to overcome the obstacles they face to create a better world not only for themselves but also those who’ll be just like them.

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

Banafshei: I have passed a basic business course in college when I was nineteen and have since worked in a variety of roles ranging from those of administration to those in the hospitality sector, I have worked as a chef for a longer period of time than I have in other roles. My current aspirations include the idea of starting my own business in the near future.

24. Jacobsen: What kind of business adventure?

Banafshei: Without giving everything away, I can say that I intend on starting a business, or business, that’ll be inclusive of the things I care about which relate to giftedness, psychology, research, community building, and various forms of media to name a few.

25. 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?

Banafshei: In relation to the above, one of the myths I’m aware of is the idea that only one in a billion of us can be an Einstein and that the rest of humanity ought to realize that they can’t be ‘geniuses’ or contribute anything of much value. The fact is there are many, many more people out there with great innovative potential than what seems to be popularly estimated. Great potential seems to be much rarer than it really is to people when they fail to grasp that the achievement of a person is not necessarily only limited by what they are capable of. Success is better evidence of intelligence than failure is of stupidity. The myths of intelligence will be dispelled by efforts of using it.

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

Banafshei: I don’t have any fixed social or political view. There are different ways of societal functioning, and different people are suited to different systems.

27. Jacobsen: Where have you sat before? Where do you sit now? I am speaking socially and politically.

Banafshei: For most of my life, my views haven’t been dissimilar to what’s seen as the prevailing ones of British society. I believe what’s right is simply a matter of context. If we want to implement the correct social/political systems, then we ought to be dedicated to being knowledgeable about things first. People who currently have loud political voices are often not very intelligent or knowledgeable. And too many people tend to be socio-politically disinterested apparently due to pessimism of change and a lack of appreciation of the important issues.

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

Banafshei: As a non-religious person, my interest in religion is based on a desire to try to understand it’s connection to historical human culture, spirituality and philosophy. Everything is connected and for those of us who have relatively vast interests of learning, it makes sense to explore this significant aspect of human social evolution.

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

Banafshei: If I had to quantify it, I’d say a lot. If reasoning of a scientific nature, or scientific possibility at least, cannot be provided for something philosophical, then it is meaningless.

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

Banafshei: I’ve taken triplex light by Ivan Ivec as well as GENE Verbal II and GIFT Verbal I by Iakovos Koukas. I achieved scores of 161, 180 and 170 sd15 on those tests respectively.

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

Banafshei: Currently, it seems the golden rule works well enough in most circumstances. The associated imperfections of it can be overcome by simply getting to know one another better, of course.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, World Genius Directory.

[2] Individual Publication Date: July 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/banafshei-one; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/22

Abstract

Christian is a Philosopher that comes from Belgium. What identifies him the most and above all is simplicity, for everything is better with “vanilla flavour.” Perhaps, for this reason, his intellectual passion is criticism and irony, in the sense of trying to reveal what “hides behind the mask,” and give birth to the true. For him, ignorance and knowledge never “cross paths.” What he likes the most in his leisure time, is to go for a walk with his wife. He discusses: existence; knowledge; values; language; mind; reason; law; political philosophy; feminist philosophy; a religious experience; society; sport; potentiality; actuality; determinism; indeterminism; freedom of the will; constraint of the will; matter; mind over matter or matter over mind; the chicken or the egg (or the BBQ or the frying pan); introspection; identity; perdurantism; space; time; necessity; dualism; monism; trialism; physicalism rather than idealism; neutral monism; metametaphysics; metaphysical deflationism; ontological deflationism; first philosophy; Shamanic metaphysics; possibility; a material cause; a formal cause; a efficient cause; a final cause; another type of cause; Monadology; a priori; a posteriori; and logical positivism.

Keywords: actuality, cause, chicken, Christian Sorensen, egg, idealism, knowledge, Monadology, philosophy, potentiality.

An Interview with Christian Sorensen on Philosophy in Shorthand (Part Seven)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Let’s do philosophy quick-draw: What is existence?

Christian Sorensen: Is “to be,” by “being there,” where “potentiality” is currently on “motion.”

2. Jacobsen: What is knowledge?

Sorenson: Is an “intellectual scar” of “failed attempts” of trying to get through “a mirror.”

3. Jacobsen: What are values?

Sorenson: Are “universal moral recipients” completed with “particular contents.”

4. Jacobsen: What is language?

Sorenson: Is a “symbolic” and “symbolizing” medium, “responsible” for human “incommunication.”

5. Jacobsen: What is mind?

Sorenson: Is “an indecipherable black box,” where the “origin” and “end” of its tape “meet at the same point.”

6. Jacobsen: What is reason?

Sorenson: Is the “purest essence” of universe.

7. Jacobsen: What is law?

Sorenson: The “name of father” and its “out-out.”

8. Jacobsen: What is political philosophy?

Sorenson: Is “a packed in tuna cans” philosophy.

9. Jacobsen: What is feminist philosophy?

Sorenson: Besides from being the philosophy of “man’s annihilation,” it is the philosophy of woman “flying at ground level,” with “deep feelings” towards “Safo of Lesbos.”

10. Jacobsen: What is a religious experience?

Sorenson: It s “an erotic experience” lived spiritually.

11. Jacobsen: What is society?

Sorenson: It is “a human way” of living the “animal gregarious instinct.”

12. Jacobsen: What is sport?

Sorenson: It is a “socially agreed evasive expression” of “basic survival” instincts.

13. Jacobsen: What is potentiality?

Sorenson: Is the “possibility of being,” but that yet“ is not.”

14. Jacobsen: What is actuality?

Sorenson: Something “that is real,” but at the very moment that I realize it, “is no longer being.”

15. Jacobsen: What is determinism?

Sorenson: Destiny.

16. Jacobsen: What is indeterminism?

Sorenson: The god of “absurd.”

17. Jacobsen: What is freedom of the will?

Sorenson: A “reactive formation” of the “feeling of slavery.”

18. Jacobsen: What is constraint of the will?

Sorenson: The “repression” for fear of “punishment.”

19. Jacobsen: What is matter?

Sorenson: The “half” of everything.

20. Jacobsen: Is it mind over matter or matter over mind?

Sorenson: It depends. In “very extreme intelligences,” it is “the mind” that is above the matter, but in “the rest,” is the opposite, since it is “the matter” that is over the mind.

21. Jacobsen: What came first: the chicken or the egg (or the BBQ or the frying pan)?

Sorenson: The “chicken,” since although “I don’t know” who put the animal there, because maybe it was an egg, but perhaps not, and then it could have been a demiurge or the spontaneous generation, “I do know” however, that for “the egg” to be there, “necessarily” it must have been laid by a “chicken.”

22. Jacobsen: What is introspection?

Sorenson: Is “to self-flex,” in order to reach an “internal sight.”

23. Jacobsen: What is identity?

Sorenson: Is “a mirror image,” assumed as something “real and proper,” but that “does not exist” nor “does it belongs” to ourselves.

24. Jacobsen: What is perdurantism?

Sorenson: A theory that believes that “objects endure” through their “temporal parts” and “not as a whole,” as “films” may do through the frames of which they are made up, although loses its “identity cohesion.”

25. Jacobsen: What is space?

Sorenson: Is ”a void” similar “to nothingness” since “it does not contains” something, but is different from the former, because “it exists.”

26. Jacobsen: What is time?

Sorenson: The existence of “past and future.”

27. Jacobsen: What is necessity?

Sorenson: It is “a condition” that demands “the presence” of “an antecedent,” for the occurrence of “a consequent.”

28. Jacobsen: What is dualism?

Sorenson: Is to sustain the existence of “two opposing faces” that unite in the “person of universe.”

29. Jacobsen: What is monism?

Sorenson: It is a doctrine similar to what occurs “to some blind,” who by grabbing the ears, tail and the trunk, each one of them believes that has an elephant in its hands.

30. Jacobsen: What is trialism?

Sorenson: It is a theory that maintains that “the legal world” is formed by three elements that are respectively the facts, norms and the values.

31. Jacobsen: What is physicalism rather than idealism (covered before)?

Sorenson: Is to believe that “everything” that exists, is made up “of matter” instead “of spirit” as a “unique substance.”

32. Jacobsen: What is neutral monism?

Sorenson: A theory that maintains that the “unique substance” of everything that exists, is neither “physical” nor “spiritual,” but is instead “a neutral matter,” which in “its nature” is neither one nor the other.

33. Jacobsen: Sometimes, things can get rather comical, verbose, inflated, arrogant, and way, way too pedantic and academic. What is metametaphysics?

Sorenson: Indeed it is “an extreme arrogance,” since is equivalent from an “ontological” assumption in which God could exists, to maintain that there is “something above” its being, or according to a “logical” point of view, to suppose that there is “something beyond” this last, which in itself and in both cases, “it is unsustainable” in function of any rational perspective.

34. Jacobsen: What is metaphysical deflationism?

Sorenson: It is a form “of eliminativism” in relation to “meanings” and “semantics,” and therefore aims to eliminate the “truth property.”

35. Jacobsen: What is ontological deflationism?

Sorenson: Is a form “of eliminativism” that pretends to denies “beings property” as “existing.”

36. Jacobsen: What is first philosophy?

Sorenson: In certain manner is “a natural theology,” that aims to study “the being” and “its properties” as such, in order to arrive at “ultimate responses.”

37. Jacobsen: What is Shamanic metaphysics?

Sorenson: Strictly speaking, it is a “pseudo-metaphysics,” since although it studies the being and its properties beyond the world of physics, and reaches final explanations regarding everything, these are loaded with “superstitions and tribal mysticism,” and lack absolutely of “all logical validity.”

38. Jacobsen: What is possibility?

Sorenson: Is the “presence,” of a admissibility condition regarding something that can “become to be.”

39. Jacobsen: What is a material cause?

Sorenson: Is what something “is made” of.

40. Jacobsen: What is a formal cause?

Sorenson: Is that “what is” something.

41. Jacobsen: What is a efficient cause?

Sorenson: It is what “has produced” something.

42. Jacobsen: What is a final cause?

Sorenson: Is what something “exists for,” or towards what “it tends” or can “become” to be.

43. Jacobsen: What is another type of cause?

Sorenson: An “un-caused” cause.

44. Jacobsen: What is Monadology?

Sorenson: It is the “metaphysics” of “simple substances” or “monads,” that are “formal atoms,” that is to say, they are not “physical” but of “metaphysical” nature.

45. Jacobsen: What is a priori?

Sorenson: It is a “judgment,” that is made on the basis of an “empty form” in itself.

46. Jacobsen: What is a posteriori?

Sorenson: It is a “judgment” that takes place after “a form” has been completed by “a content.”

47. Jacobsen: What is logical positivism?

Sorenson: Is a current of philosophy of science, that limits “the validity” of “scientific method,” only to what is “empirical and verifiable.”

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Independent Philosopher.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorensen-seven; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/22

Abstract

John Collins is an author and the Founder of William Branham Historical Research. His new book is entitled Preacher Behind the White Hoods: A Critical Examination of William Branham and His Message. He discusses: “The Message” formed in the racist sub-culture of the Ku Klux Klan; William Marrion Branham and the Serpent Seed Doctrine; the theology of William Marrion Branham supporting racist ideologies; the Klan-supportive doctrines of purported revelations and the Serpent’s Seed; William Marrion Branham claiming Martin Luther King as “communistic inspired”; the anti-integration of the school systems at the times of the Civil Rights movement; William Marrion Branham and “heathens”; and the deepest ‘revelations’ about the Serpent Seed doctrine being something only the bride could understand in any real way.

Keywords: John Collins, Klu Klux Klan, Preacher Behind the White Hoods, Roy E. Davis, Serpent Seed Doctrine, The Message, white supremacy, William Branham.

An Interview with John Collins on The Message, the Klu Klux Klan, Serpent Seed Doctrine, and William Branham (Part Seven)[A]^,[B]

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: How was “The Message” formed in the racist sub-culture of the Ku Klux Klan?

John Collins: In 1915, the Ku Klux Klan was re-birthed in Stone Mountain, Georgia, by William Joseph Simmons and a group of fifteen charter members.[1] Among those charter members, according to his own testimony, was a minister and evangelist named Roy E. Davis.[2]

Davis was an official spokesperson for the Klan in the 1920s[3] and critical to understanding the themes of white supremacy woven through William Branham’s theology. It was Davis who trained William Branham in the ways of the Pentecostal faith and the “art” of “faith healing”.[4]

Though created as a fraternal organization, the Ku Klux Klan touted itself as a “Christian” group[5] established to uphold and enforce “moral” values they referred to as “true” or “pure Americanism”.[6] Membership grew to over 500,000 recruits before government institutions realized that the nation had been silently infiltrated by a terroristic, militant force. In September 1921, New York World ran a series of articles exposing this fact,[7] resulting in a Congressional inquiry and ultimately splintering the group into several sub-sects. The Klan was suddenly exposed as an anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, anti-Black terrorist organization inciting violence in American cities. Congressman William D. Upshaw, a secret member of the Ku Klux Klan[8] and familiar name to William Branham’s “Message” cult, managed to save the group from a government-issued shutdown.

The description of events that happened next, as it relates to William Branham, are difficult to summarize in the course of one single interview. I do my best to outline the details in my book, Preacher Behind the White Hoods: A Critical Examination of William Branham and his Message. William Joseph Simmons was ousted from the group he created. Simmons and Davis attempted to create another white supremacy group called the Knights of the Flaming Sword.[9] The Indiana Ku Klux Klan grew to an enormous capacity and infiltrated Indianapolis Government,[10] only to be left in disarray with the murder and rape conviction of Ku Klux Klan Grand Dragon D.C. Stephenson.[11] Roy Davis set up his base of operations in Jeffersonville, Indiana, seemingly to seize the opportunity while evading multiple criminal convictions[12] and after serving prison time.[13] Davis’ brothers migrated to Jeffersonville, Indiana[14] to assist in revivals producing “healing miracles”.[15]

It was during the highly publicized intersection of these events that Roy E. Davis ordained William Branham into the Pentecostal faith and established him as a “faith healing” minister. Based on the timing of the articles printed in the local newspapers, Branham’s first ministerial tasks would have been to battle the negative publicity before, during, and after Roy Davis’ extradition to multiple states for multiple criminal charges. After Roy Davis was released from a 1940 “ sex pervert” prison sentence[16] and reconnected with William Upshaw[17], the two former Klansmen planned a strategy to rebirth the original Ku Klux Klan.[18] Then they reconnected with William Branham,[19] and shortly after, the “Message” was born.[20]

2. Jacobsen: When did William Marrion Branham first learn of the Serpent Seed ideology within a church led by a high-ranking official of the Ku Klux Klan?

Collins: Among white supremacy groups touting themselves as “Christian”, there is a notion of “Christian Identity” through bloodline.[21] This “Christian Identity Doctrine” is based upon the extra-biblical claim that the Original Sin in the Garden of Eden was the result of a sexual union between Eve and the Serpent. Based upon William Branham’s close ties to high-ranking members of the Ku Klux Klan and his statements aligned with Klan agenda,[22] it should come as no surprise that this would be a fundamental doctrine in Branham’s “Message” cult theology.

William Branham alleges that he first came in contact with this doctrine through George DeArk,[23] who was an elder in Roy Davis’ Pentecostal church along with Branham. DeArk continued as an elder when Davis was extradited for criminal charges and the church transitioned to the Billie Branham Pentecostal Tabernacle.[24] It is unclear whether the transfer of knowledge happened during Davis’ leadership or Branham’s, but based upon the timeline of events it would appear that Branham first learned Christian Identity Doctrine while acting as an elder of church led by a former high-ranking member of the Ku Klux Klan.

Understanding the timing of William Branham’s public position regarding the Christian Identity doctrine is critical in understanding its racial context. During the years in which the “Message” was being birthed, at least according to the sermon transcripts that we have access to read, William Branham publicly rejected Christian Identity (or his “Serpent’s Seed Doctrine) as false. Branham alleged that he disagreed with George DeArk on this subject, and preached that “Adam and Eve was the father and mother, earthly, of every living creature of human beings that’s ever been on the earth. {…} Black, white, pale, brown, yellow, whatever color you might be”.[25]

In 1958, however, as the country grew more strongly divided on the issue of Integration of black and white children into schools, Braham changed his position. Nine African Americans had enrolled in Little Rock Central High School at the end of 1957,[26] after which time the issue of Integration went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacy groups were actively recruiting in Little Rock, Arkansas to block integration, and had successfully convinced the public to keep the schools segregated.[27] The Federal Bureau of Investigation was working undercover in Little Rock, Arkansas at that time, and found Rev. Roy E. Davis at the center of the integration protests. As the Arkansas government voted to reject the Supreme Court decision to force integration,[28] Branham introduced his Christian Identity doctrine to the public.[29] Christian Identity doctrine, rebranded as “Serpent’s Seed”, would continue to be a fundamental part of Branham’s cult doctrine.

Just like it was on The Serpent’s Seed, but it’s absolutely proven to be right. I got papers right here, out of the paper, where women right now…and even in—in the great…Some of the great dioceses has got the pictures of the original, a snake crawling on a woman’s leg, and just in how it goes around her; she has all kinds of sensations and things, something a man could never touch her with, with this huge snake wrapping around her, and so forth. That’s exactly the truth. And it’s going worse and worse, and will get worse. Serpent, which he was not…he could not have had the sex affair with her when he was a serpent.[30]

3. Jacobsen: How did the theology of William Marrion Branham support racist ideologies?

Collins: Christian Identity doctrine was not the only racially charged theology that William Branham propagated, and his use of doctrine and claims of “supernatural events” were not solely focused upon theology. Some of Branham’s teachings included politically motivated agendas supportive of the white supremacy ideology. Many of these teachings were very subtle, and might have gone unnoticed without the more obvious ones to examine. Branham was very outspoken against specific public figures in the entertainment industry, for example, which would seem out of place for a minister of the “Gospel”. Many of them just happen to be the same public figures targeted by white supremacy groups. Branham frequently condemned Lucille Ball and any who watched her television show,[31] “I Love Lucy”. This show, featuring an interracial married couple, attempted to break down racial barriers.

As the battle for Civil Rights intensified, and Roy E. Davis assumed his role of Imperial Grand Dragon, the supreme leader of the Original Knights of the Ku Klux Klan,[32] Branham was no longer subtle. This was especially the case when John F. Kennedy began running for office; Kennedy promised to create equal opportunity for all mankind “by the stroke of the President’s pen”.^[33] William Branham claimed that the election of President Kennedy was “one of the greatest mistakes the colored race ever made”. Branham compared Martin Luther King, Jr. and his Civil Rights activism to Hitler,^[34] and claimed that President Kennedy’s support of equal rights was a denial of freedom of religion. This, he said, was the “antichrist”.^[35]

The most revealing, as it relates to a minister during the era of intense battle to prevent the integration of public-school systems, is a tale Branham frequently used in his sermons. Overlooking the racial slurs Branham used such as “Aunt Jemima”, the underlying theme was that of an African American boy suffering the effects of syphilis – with whom no “respectable” white mother would want her daughter to attend school:

The first thing you know, I looked, leaning across a gate, and I was going on along there singing that little song, “I’m so glad that I can say I’m one of them,” singing it to myself, and I looked across the gate, and there was a typical old Aunt Jemima with a man’s shirt tied around her head, a little old whitewash cabin of a thing setting there, and there was a—a plowpoint hanging on the gate for a weight to pull it back. And she was hanging out there looking over there. And I seen her about a hundred yards away, and I quit singing, just went on down the street. When I passed by, she started smiling, looking at me, tears running down her big fat cheeks. She said, “Good morning, parson.” I turned around. I said, “Good morning, Auntie.” I said, “How’d you know I was a parson?” She said, “Parson, did you ever read in the Bible about the Shunammite woman, who couldn’t have a baby, and she told the Lord that she was blessed, and—and Elijah told her that she was going to have a baby, and she had it, and then the baby died?” I said, “Yes, I remember that.” She said, “I’s was that kind of woman. I couldn’t have no baby, and I told the Lord I’d raise the baby,” and said, “to suit for Him.” And she said, “The Lord give me and my husband a baby.” And she said, “Parson,” she said, “the baby, my boy, when he got to be a man, he went out and done what was wrong.” And said, “I couldn’t help it, parson.” Said, “I’ve washed over the washboard” said, “to try to raise him right in church, but,” said, “he backslid, and he went away from God; and he got with the wrong crowd.” And said, “Parson,” said, “he got a bad disease, syphilitic, dying with a venereal disease.” And said, “And he’s laying in here dying.”[36]

4. Jacobsen: What were the Klan-supportive doctrines of purported revelations and the Serpent’s Seed?

Collins: As is the case with the central figure of any religious or political cult, supreme authority in doctrine and interpretation of scripture was given to William Branham by his cult following. In political cults, this authority is granted through a shared belief in a common goal. Religious cults favor the “supernatural”, their central figures claiming “visions”, “prophecies”, or “revelations”. If evaluated after the Little Rock Nine incident and Branham’s true intentions made public, it would appear that Branham’s “Message” cult following is both religious and political. Doctrine fundamental to the cult’s theology, such as Branham’s “Serpent’s Seed”, clearly aligned with Klan Agenda.

Shortly after John F. Kennedy was elected, Branham started claiming to have had a “prophecy” in 1933 proclaiming that women voting would result in “electing the wrong man” and causing the “destruction of the United States”.[37] Cult doctrine was introduced that forbade female cult members to vote, in an apparent attempt to control future ballots. (It was a common belief at that time that Kennedy won the election due to his popularity among female voters, though more women voted against Kennedy than for him.[38])

When each of Branham’s extra-biblical doctrines and “revelations” are examined in context of the timeline of the Civil Rights movement, the agenda becomes clear. This is especially the case with regards to his doctrine that a “Christian should forfeit their rights”, his stance against education,[39] and his statements claiming that African Americans should be content with their own schools.

It’s just because they want to go to school. They got schools. Let them go to school. That’s right. … a colored man is satisfied in the state he is in, so they don’t need those things[40]

5. Jacobsen: Why was William Marrion Branham claiming Martin Luther King as “communistic inspired”?

Collins: The second “Red Scare” of the 1940s and 1950s was a tool used frequently by white supremacy groups both to reinforce their agenda and to create distrust in their opponents. Many people in the United States feared that the Soviet Union and its allies had infiltrated the U.S. Government, resulting in a massive witch hunt to identify communist sympathizers.[41] As Martin Luther King took center stage in the battle for Civil Rights, these groups began to focus their efforts against King, labeling him as a “Communist.”[42]

It was during this same time that William Branham launched his own campaign against Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Civil Rights movement. According to Branham, African Americans seeking equal rights was “communistic”:

Down there that day in Shreveport when that uprise come, and them…and there was all them young colored inspired out there, communistic[43]

But look, it isn’t them real genuine borned again Christian colored people that’s causing all of this trouble. You want to condemn them for that, what about some of our renegade white kids? See? Now, what sauce for the goose is for the gander. Well, our white kids cause twice as much trouble as they have. That’s exactly right. Where’s it at? In our colleges and things like that. Some of our higher-educated people is causing those things. See? Well, what is it? Now, to show you that it’s communism and not them colored people, that’s how communism has always come in to take over.[44]

Like I said, this Martin Luther King is leading his people to a crucifixion. It’s communistic.[45]

6. Jacobsen: Did this racist attitude and worldview influence the anti-integration of the school systems at the times of the Civil Rights movement?

Collins: It is difficult to say whether William Branham’s efforts to sway politics through religion had direct impact, and even more difficult to measure how much that impact influenced the decisions made by State and local governments. Without question, it contributed to the resistance. Any of Branham’s devout followers would have been persuaded due to his authority over doctrine and scripture, some of them repeating his ideology to others. Any of those same members who were militant against the integration of schools would have used Branham’s theology as justification for their bigotry and hatred. The question is whether or not those committing hate crimes had come in contact with Branham’s recordings or literature. With Branham’s influence, especially among the right-wing, evangelical Christians in the South, it would seem more likely than not.

Regardless, it is clear that the main arguments used to remain segregated can be identified in Branham’s sermons. Whether claiming the Civil Rights movement to be “communist” or claiming that black schools during segregation were “better than white”, Branham’s racially charged statements would have been more popular among the opposition than the freedom seekers.

The question down there is “segregation of school.” Now, I was there at the first uprise, and I heard it, and I—I know from what I speak of. The colored people has fine schools, sometimes much better than the other schools. And, for instance, in Shreveport they got finer schools than the white school is. But it’s the idea of somebody inspiring them that they should go and mix themselves together. Which, I think that it’d be all right, but as long as the people are protesting it, those southern people, then what difference does it make anyhow?[46]

7. Jacobsen: Why did William Marrion Branham consider all black people “heathens” based on the culture?

Collins: Without awareness of William Branham’s connections to white supremacy, researchers would mistakenly assume that Branham was either ill-informed or had never visited the locations in Africa that he claimed. His descriptions of the South African culture mislead readers and listeners to believe that large cities such as Durban were undeveloped and untamed. His descriptions of the inhabitants were that of indigenous tribes from scenes in Hollywood movies instead of the civilized cultures that existed at the time in which he participated in the healing revivals.

Without awareness of the themes of white supremacy in his sermons, one might also mistakenly assume that Branham was simply boasting by overexaggerating the number of conversions in his revival meetings, as seemed to be the case among others in the Post World War II Healing Revival. Though the revivals Branham participated in included hundreds of other “faith healers”, evangelists, and ministers having ministries they claimed to be just as “supernatural” and “powerful” as Branham’s, there was very little mention of the other ministers involved with the revivals. Branham used the word “I” more frequently than the word “we”, seemingly with intent to claim the results of the Apostolic Faith Missions, Voice of Healing Revivals, and other movements as his own.

Durban, South Africa, for instance, had a population of almost a half of a million citizens.[47] There were (and still are) some remaining indigenous tribes outside of the cities where meetings were held, but the vast majority of Durban citizens were Christian. Of those, a large number of Christians were already Pentecostal. In the late 1800s, John Alexander Dowie (founder of the Zion City Cult in Zion City, Illinois) began growing a church of converts, mostly Zulus.[48] In 1908, the Apostolic Faith Missions (AFM) began their attempt to spread Pentecostalism, leading to racial segregation among the converts and the more than 6,000 independent Pentecostal churches that exist today. If not for one single statement[49] in Branham’s post-Africa-trip speech, Branham’s connections to the AFM might otherwise have gone unnoticed. He later tried to distance himself from the AFM, claiming a disagreement in the process of baptism.[50]

Knowing the connections to white supremacy and the types of propaganda used in the sermons, it becomes easier to identify the strategy behind the statements. The racially charged statements go far beyond racial profiling; Branham attempted to demonize the profile. In sermons with titles such as “demonology”, William Branham claimed that Africans were “big, burly, heavy fat-like people. Some of them are nearly seven-foot tall, and weigh, oh, two hundred and eighty, three hundred pounds, burly.”[51] He described citizens attending the revivals as “fifteen different tribes”,[52] without qualifying his statements with phrases such as “as well as thousands of civilized Pentecostal converts from the thousands of local churches”.

His usage of the word “heathen” was based on their use of cosmetics and jewelry, specifically earrings. Though the Bible contains many examples of the righteous wearing jewelry and cosmetics, from the beauty contest in the book of Esther[53] to God’s own description of his Bride in the book Ezekiel,[54] Branham claimed that cosmetics and earrings were “heathenism”.

That’s the heathen trait. Any paint, never in the world, but all painting of faces originated with heathens is always condemned by believers. I hope this goes real far down home, just to make you real good and sick for a few minutes. But now, don’t get angry with me; I love you. But I just want to tell you what’s truth. Remember, I’ve just returned from the African jungle. Every one, the tribals of heathen, on every kind of an occasion they paint their face and wear great big earrings. The Indian savage heathen paints his face and puts on war paint when he goes in—in the… His war is worship around his idols. He paints.[55]

I can prove this without a shadow of a doubt, that woman wearing paint come from a heathen trait. The heathens do it. And boogie-wooglie and rock-and-roll is a African dance of the heathens. Can’t you see how the devil come in and polished it up?[56]

Branham also combined negative statements describing two separate cultures, naming only the African culture. Whether strategic or not, it resulted in listeners mistakenly assuming the descriptions were of Africa. In a sermon describing his upcoming travels to South Africa,[57] for example, William Branham described scenes from a popular “spiritualist camp” in Indiana that was just a short drive from his home in Jeffersonville. Camp Chesterfield, home of the famous “Madam Mimi” offered an attraction of a floating piano that played the same jingle used in the Beverly Hillbillies television show, “Shave and a Haircut, Two Bits”. Until it was later exposed as a hoax, many visitors believed they were witnessing actual “spirits”.[58]

I’ve seen the heathens clap their hands, do a dance, speak in tongues, and do all those things, and interpret it, but they were African heathens. Sure. I seen them lay a pencil down, and that witch doctor stood there and made that pencil stand up, and run up-and-down on a place up there, and come back and played, like, “shave and a hair cut, two bits,” and drawed out an unknown tongue and wrote it out, and one of them stood there, interpreting it. Oh, my![59]

8. Jacobsen: What was the idea of the deepest ‘revelations’ about the Serpent Seed doctrine being something only the bride could understand in any real way? What were the deepest supposed revelations? Who or what was the “bride”?

Collins: As was the case with any propaganda used by white supremacy groups, the deepest secrets and most fundamental ideologies contained the vague, public version and the deeper meaning in private versions. If asked by news media or religious journal, many leaders of Branham’s cult following would simply claim that Branham’s alleged sexual union between Eve and the Serpent in the Garden of Eden resulted as a “spiritual separation” of people, not physical. Others might claim that it was physical, for a period of time, but after the Great Flood of Noah, one of the two physical bloodlines was made extinct. My grandfather, who was for almost fifty years the pastor of William Branham’s “Branham Tabernacle” after William Branham’s death would have never publicly stated his belief in two physical bloodlines from behind the pulpit, regardless of what he thought and said in private. There were a handful of African American congregants in his church, and this would certainly not have went over well. He would never mention in public that my grandmother refused to eat food served by a person with black skin in a restaurant, or that family members refused black renters for their skin color. Those who knew the public versions of cult leaders have vastly different opinions than those who knew the private, and even then, only those in agreement on those ideologies knew the extent of the private version.

To understand the “deeper revelation” behind Branham’s Serpent’s Seed doctrine, one must first understand Branham’s doctrinal teaching concerning the female gender. Under the public surface, this doctrine has the context of a physical blood type that currently exists – not a “spiritual” separation of race or limited existence. Branham taught that the female gender was not in the original creation,[60] a by-product or afterthought designed by Satan[61] for sex[62] and filth. In his twisted version of the Creation Story, Branham claimed that God created the female body as an impure creature solely for the purpose of sex with the Serpent to produce a second bloodline.[63] This “perversion”,[64] the female gender, was not limited to the “spiritual” or to a specific period of time. In Branham’s theological teaching, the female gender was physically and morally the same as Eve, the mother of all living, and were (in present tense) “not worth a good clean bullet to kill them with it”.[65]

Based on the timeline of Branham’s reversal in theology, it becomes clear that his version of Christian Identity was introduced with a deeper meaning that could be applied to the current events, specifically the integration of public schools. It was the “mystery” of a physical “perversion”, creating a physical bloodline, resulting in the modern system of education. What was the result of this physical bloodline? To the white listener in alignment with the themes of white supremacy, the serpent and Eve created the non-white race. To the black listener unaware of those themes, this bloodline created the education system they wanted the freedom to participate in through the attendance of their children. To the cult member, unaware that any of these themes exist, it is simply the idea that evil is among the public, undetectable by the human eye, which claims a direct lineage to Satan through the Serpent in the Garden of Eden.

You know that. The woman doesn’t have a seed, the female. She has an egg, but not a seed. But she…appointed him, a seed, see, appointed by God’s appointment, she took the seed. And the great Seed, course, from the woman, was that God gave. See, God appointed her a seed instead of the one that Cain slew; that, the enemy, death, serpent’s seed slew God’s seed, in perversion there, you see. God appointed, through the woman, a Seed, which is Christ, see, to bring back the original seed again. You see it? And so you see the perversion brought death through education and intelligence, and what we call today, science and religion, and so forth, it brought death. But she…appointed him, a seed, and then man began to call upon the Name of the Lord, and begin to come back to the Word again. See? And remember, follow that seed, as we will track it in a few weeks, on this serpent. You follow that, it switches right through the Scripture. Watch it. Them two vines grow right together, as you heard my Message on “the vine.” They come right up together, and so close together that it would almost deceive the very elected, if possible, in the last days when it come to the head. It puts forth a grain just like a wheat, but it isn’t a wheat, see, it isn’t. It’s a shuck, yet. Now, see there: civilization, education…I think I’ve got about ten more Scriptures, you see, wrote down there, but I think not to go through that. But we understand by this, that education, science and civilization, is of the devil. That’s right. It isn’t of God. It is of the devil.[66]

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

Appendix I: Footnotes

[A]  Author; Founder, William Branham Historical Research.

[B] Individual Publication Date: June 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/collins-seven; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

[1] “The Various Shady Lives of the Ku Klux Klan”. Time. April 9, 1965. “An itinerant Methodist preacher named William Joseph Simmons started up the Klan again in Atlanta in 1915. Simmons, an ascetic-looking man, was a fetishist on fraternal organizations. He was already a “colonel” in the Woodmen of the World, but he decided to build an organization all his own. He was an effective speaker, with an affinity for alliteration; he had preached on “Women, Weddings and Wives”, “Red Heads, Dead Heads and No Heads”, and the “Kinship of Kourtship and Kissing”. On Thanksgiving Eve 1915, Simmons took 15 friends to the top of Stone Mountain, near Atlanta, built an altar on which he placed an American flag, a Bible and an unsheathed sword, set fire to a crude wooden cross, muttered a few incantations about a “practical fraternity among men”, and declared himself Imperial Wizard of the Invisible Empire of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan”

[2] Ku Klux Klan Active in Shreveport Area. 1961, Feb 10. The Times. “Davis said that he is the only Klansman who can boast having all the degrees of the Klan conferred on him. He said that he helped write the constitution, by-laws, and ritual of the original Klan when it was revived in 1915.

[3] Klan Refused Hall. 1923, Jan 12. Reading Times. “Rev. Roy E. Davis, an official spokesman of the Ku Klux Klan”

[4] Davis, Roy. Wm. Branham’s First Pastor. 1950. The Voice of Healing. “I am the minister who received Brother Branham into the first Pentecostal assembly he ever frequented. I baptized him, and was his pastor for some two years.

[5] Constitution and Laws of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. 1921. “We the Order of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, reverentially acknowledge the majesty and supremacy of Almighty God and recognize His goodness and providence through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

[6] Constitution and Laws of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. 1921. “a fervent devotion to pure Americanism”

[7] The Ku Klux Klan. 1921, Sept 5. New York World.

[8] Norfolk Chief of Police Said to Be Member Ku Klux. 1921, Oct 12. Durham Morning Herald. “Upshaw a member. Information Gained From News Letters Sent From Klan Headquarters”

[9] Fraternity Attacked as Money Making Order. 1925, Jan 23. Lead Daily Call. “He [Roy E. Davis] said that he had been led to believe Col. Simmons was one of America’s greatest Christian statesmen and the Moses of the present order of things”

[10] Gitlin, Marty. 2009. The Ku Klux Klan: A Guide to an American Subculture. “Before the 1924 election, the Indiana Klan sent out 250,000 sample ballots to its members, indicating which candidates to vote for. The result was that Klansman Ed Jackson, an unknown before the primary, won the gubernatorial election”

[11] Lutholtz, M. William (1993). Grand Dragon: D. C. Stephenson and the Ku Klux Klan in Indiana. West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University

[12] Ex: Pastor Held in Mann Act Case. 1930, Oct 12. Courier Journal

[13] Roy Davis, Singer and Masher, Goes to Prison. 1917, Jun 29. Wise County Messenger.

[14] 3 Davis Brothers Plan a Pentecostal Revival. 1931, Apr 17. The Evening News.

[15] Gospel Healers Claim a Cure at Tent Meet. 1930, Oct 4. The Evening News.

[16] Saltarella, Jim Magus. 2017. Acworth; Heritage History Hauntings. “A record dating July 9, 1940 showed him in Huntsville Prison, in Walker County, Texas. The note ‘sex pervert’ was handwritten on the log beneath his name”

[17] 1943, Aug 8. The San Bernardino County Sun. Orphanage, School At Upland Slated To Open Sept. 15. “Former Representative William D. Upshaw is taking an active part in the organization of the institution and is to be in charge of the department of Americanism”

[18] The Present-Day Ku Klux Klan Movement. Report by the Committee on Un-American Activities. House of Representatives. Ninetieth Congress, First Session. 1967, Dec 11. “Prior to 1960, there had been no effective Klan activity in the State of Louisiana for several decades. The Klan was reactivated in Louisiana late in 1960 by Rev. Roy E. Davis of Dallas Texas.

[19] Branham, William. 1954, Feb 17. Jesus On The Authority Of The Word. “And he said, ‘Well, I [William D. Upshaw] was the president of the Southern Baptist Convention.’ said, ‘Dr. Davis, the one that ordained you in the Baptist church, was the one who sent me here to see you.’”

[20] The “Message” is a broad term describing adherents to William Branham’s cult following. In the late 1940s through early 1950s, it held other titles, such as “Latter Rain Message”. See Chapter 31, “WILLIAM BRANHAM AND THE BIRTH OF THE MESSAGE”. Collins, John. 2020. Preacher Behind the White Hoods: A Critical Examination of William Branham and His Message. ISBN 9781735160900

[21] Christian Identity. Southern Poverty Law. Accessed Oct 24, 2018 from https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/christian-identity

[22] Ex: Branham, William. 1960, Nov 13. Condemnation by Representation. “One of the greatest mistakes that the colored race ever made, was down in Louisiana and over in there, when they voted for Kennedy, the other night, put him in. They actually spit on that dress of Abraham Lincoln, where the blood of the Republican party that freed them, and voted a Catholic.”

[23] Branham, William. 1953, Jul 29. Questions and Answers on Genesis. “he said, “I tell you where Cain got his wife,” said, “Cain went over and married a great big female ape.” And said, “Out of that ape come forth the colored race.”

[24] Warranty Deed. 1936, Nov 9. Clark County Courthouse.

[25] Branham, William. 1957, Oct 6. Questions and Answers on Genesis. “Brother George DeArk and them down there. And I was walked, and the Lord led me to a little place. And they was discussing where the colored man came from. And they were trying to say that the colored man…That Cain married an animal like an ape, and through there come forth the colored race. Now, that’s wrong! Absolutely, that’s wrong! And don’t never stand for that. Cause there was no colored or white, or any other different, it’s just one race of people unto the flood. Then after the flood and the tower of Babel, when they began to scatter out, that’s when they taken their colors and so forth. They’re all come from the same tree. That’s exactly right. Adam and Eve was the father and mother, earthly, of every living creature of human beings that’s ever been on the earth. That’s right. Black, white, pale, brown, yellow, whatever color you might be”

[26] Little Rock Nine. Accessed Oct 20, 2018 from https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/central-high-school-integration

[27] Office Memorandum. 1958, Oct 2. F.B.I. Vault

[28] On This Day – Sept 27, 1958. Little Rock, Arkansas Votes to Close Public Schools Rather Than Integrate. Accessed 2020, Jun 9 from https://calendar.eji.org/racial-injustice/sep/27

[29] 1958, Sept 28. The Serpent’s Seed. “All right, we’ll just find out whether it’s wrong or not. “And I will put enmity between thy Seed and the serpent’s seed.” What? The serpent seed! She had a Seed, and he had a seed.”

[30] Branham, William. 1965, Feb 21. Marriage and Divorce.

[31] Branham, William. 1956, Aug 1. The Arrow Of God’s Deliverance Shot From A Bow. And the people today, they’d rather stay home and see “I Love Lucy,” or what is that? Lucy—Lucy something. They’re very loosey; I’ll take that again. They’re loose enough, they’re running to hell. Exactly. That might be all right for the—from the heathens, but that’s not for Christians. That’s right. It’s not for Christians. Christians won’t…?… and love the Word of God. If you’ve got something in you feeding on such nonsense as that, you need to repent.

[32] Assassination of President Kennedy. 00-2-34030. “On December 9, 1963, Inv. Brumley, Intelligence Unit, Dallas Police Department, discussed this case with the reporting agent, and he through that Earl Thornton, Klansman, and former associate of Rev. Roy Davis, might be suspect in this case. Thornton offered to allow Davis to use his printing equipment when Davis was in business as Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan. Brumley, who knows Davis personally, doubted however that Davis printed these leaflets.”

^[33] Blight, David W. Scharfstein, Allison. King’s Forgotten Manifesto. Accessed 2020, May 18 from https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/opinion/kings-forgotten-manifesto.html

^[34] Branham, William. 1963, Jun 30. The Third Exodus. “One thing, I pray that Brother Martin Luther King will certainly soon wake up. He loves his people; there’s no doubt. But if he just only see where his inspiration. What good would it do if you went to school, a million of you laying yonder, dead? Wouldn’t just be, go to school, just the same? Now, for—for hunger, if it was for something another, slaves, the man would be a martyr to give his life for such a cause, a worthy cause, and that would be a worthy cause. But just to go to school, I—I don’t see it. See? I don’t think the Holy Spirit is agreeing with him, at all, on that. It’s got the people all worked up, in a bunch of ballyhoo, you see. Just—just like Hitler did, over in Germany, led them right into a death trap.”

^[35] Branham, William. 1963, Jun 30. The Third Exodus. “The natural man, the antichrist, is growing now. Through politics, he’s already got to the White House. In religion, he’s got all the people so scrupled up, till actually they’d fall right for it. And the denominational leaders, practically every church that there is in the nation, is already in the confederation of churches. Raamses is growing. And they’re all uniting together, and that’s what they’ll have. And what does it do? It makes a power, a beast just like the first one.”

[36] Branham, William. 1955, Aug 7. Leading of the Spirit of God.

[37] ^[37] Branham, William. 1960, Nov 13. Condemnation by Representation. “It shall also…has been an evil thing done in this country, they have permitted women to vote. This is a woman’s nation, and she will pollute this nation as Eve did Eden.” Now you see why I’m hammering the way I do? I got THUS SAITH THE LORD. “In her voting, she will elect the wrong person.”

[38] Gallup poll information for 1960

[39] Branham, William. 1961, Apr 11. “Today they want to make an educational school out of it: reading, writing and arithmetic. When I got to Africa amongst my colored brethren, what did they know? Reading, writing, and arithmetic, they had no business for that. That’s the reason when they seen a real true moving, God come into the midst of the people, thirty thousand accepted Christ at one altar call: Durban, South”

[40] Branham, William. 1963, Jun 28. O Lord Just Once More.

[41] Second Red Scare. Accessed 2020, Jun 9 from https://ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Second_Red_Scare. “The Second Red Scare (1947-1957) was a fear-driven phenomenon brought on by the growing power of communist countries in the wake of the Second World War, particularly the Soviet Union. Many in the U.S. feared that the Soviet Union and its allies were planning to forcefully spread communism around the globe, overthrowing both democratic and capitalist institutions as it went. With the Soviet Union occupying much of Eastern and Central Europe, many in the U.S. perceived their fears of communist expansionism as confirmed. The U.S. also feared that communist agents had infiltrated the federal government. A massive witch hunt to root out communist sympathizers ensued.”

[42] Honey, Michael K. 2018. To the Promised Land: Martin Luther King and the Fight for Economic Justice “In the 1960’s, right-wing groups demonized King and the movement he represented. The Ku Klux Klan in Alabama and Mississippi bombed black churches, murdered civil rights activists, and made life hell for SNCC organizers in Mississippi. A segment of evangelical white Christians based in the Southwest also demonized the civil rights movement. The Christian Anti-Communist Crusade mass-distributed a vituperative pamphlet with a drawing of King wearing a mask, titled, “Unmasking the Deceiver, Martin Luther King, Jr.” This eight-page flyer outlined the standard anticommunist lines: “King Associates with Communist School”; “King Lauded by Communist Press”; “King Works With Communists”: “Lawlessness and Violence Accompany King”; “King Aids Communist Party Objectives”

[43] Branham, William. 1964, Aug 30. Questions and Answers #4

[44] Branham, William. 1964, Aug 30. Questions and Answers #4

[45] Branham, William. 1964, Apr 18. A Paradox.

[46] Branham, William. 1963, Jul 21. He Cares

[47] “Population of capital cities and cities of 100,000 and more inhabitants”. Demographic Yearbook 1965. New York: Statistical Office of the United Nations. 1966. pp. 140–161.

[48] Historical Overview of Pentecostalism in South Africa . Accessed 2020, Jun 10 from https://www.pewforum.org/2006/10/05/historical-overview-of-pentecostalism-in-south-africa/

[49] Branham, William. 1953, Nov 14. Africa Trip Report. “And so the—the next day, Brother Schoeman going up, which he was—he belonged to the—the Apostolic Faith Missions of Africa. And he was the President of the—of my—of my group. And he was a National Committee”

[50] Branham, William. 1957, Aug 21. Hebrews, Chapter One. In Africa they baptize three different ways: they baptize once for the Father, and once for the Son, and once for the Holy Ghost. The Apostolic Faith mission, they baptize three times, face forward, to His death. What they call the Full Gospel on the West Coast, or the East Coast, baptize three times backward, said He…unto His burial.

[51] Branham, William. 1953, Jun 9. Demonology, Religious Realm.

[52] Branham, William. 1953, Jun 9. Demonology, Religious Realm.

[53] Esther 2:1-18. Bible, King James Version.

[54] Ezekiel 16:12. Bible, King James Version. “And I put a jewel in your nose, earrings in your ears, and a beautiful crown on your head.”

[55] Branham, William. 1956, Oct 3. Painted Face Jezebel

[56] Branham, William. 1958, May 9. Life.

[57] Branham, William. 1963, Dec 1. Just Once More, Lord. “And then we come back here, through July and to the middle of August. And then go back, way down under the earth, at South America…not South America, South Africa. And on the second day of September, this coming 1964, the Lord willing, we begin in—in Durban, South Africa, where we saw thirty thousand people come to the Lord, at one time.”

[58] Marimen, Mark. William, James A. Taylor, Troy. 2008. Weird Indiana: Your Travel Guide to Indiana’s Local Legends and Best Kept Secrets

[59] Branham, William. 1963, Dec 1. Just Once More, Lord.

[60] Branham, William. 1965, Feb 21. Marriage and Divorce. She is not in God’s original creation. She is a by-product

[61] Branham, William. 1965, Feb 21. Marriage and Divorce. You may question me about Satan being her designer, but that’s the Truth. Satan designed her. He still does it.

[62] Branham, William. 1965, Feb 21. Marriage and Divorce. Excuse this, young ladies. She is nothing but a human garbage can, a sex exposal. That’s all she is, an immoral woman, is a human sexual garbage can, a pollution, where filthy, dirty, ornery, low-down filth is disposed by her. What is she made this way for? For deception. Every sin that ever was on the earth was caused by a woman. And an analyst just from Chicago, a—a woman wrote this article, the police force; that they chased down, in United States, metropolitan United States, that “Ninety-eight percent of every crime that was ever did in any form, in the United States, there was either a woman in it or behind it.

[63] Branham, William. 1965, Feb 21. Marriage and Divorce. Why didn’t He make her like that in the beginning, like the rest of His females? Because it would be unbecoming to Him. He is the Fountain of all purity. That’s the reason He had to let Satan get a hold of her, what he done in the perversion. Such a creature would be, would not be becoming to Him, originally designed for.

[64] Branham, William. 1965, Feb 21. Marriage and Divorce. You remember what was the first perversion? Was a woman.

[65] Branham, William. 1965, Feb 21. Marriage and Divorce. This was my remark then, “They’re not worth a good clean bullet to kill them with it.” That’s right. And I hated women. That’s right. And I just have to watch every move now, to keep from still thinking the same thing.

[66] Branham, William. 1965, Oct 31. Power of Transformation

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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/22

Abstract

Dionysios Maroudas was born in 1986. He lives in Athens. He has a passion for mathematics, photography, reading, and human behaviour. He is a member of the ISI-Society, Mensa, Grand IQ Society (Grand Member), and THIS (Distinguished Member). He discusses: family nurturance; early social life; family history; redoing things in youth; academic progress in elementary and high school; early intellectual interests; developments in early life reflecting later interest in the high-IQ world; academic qualifications; financial and professional success; and finding a lifework. He discusses: odd jobs in youth; building character and work ethic; most significant portions of life; the tipping point to formally decide to enter into higher education and acquire a postsecondary qualification; the earned credentials to date; thankful or grateful for in life in spite of the regrets; a Lifework; some inspirations; human beings will simply never know in full; the progress of individual societies; and hoping to pursue intellectually into the future.

Keywords: Dionysios Maroudas, intimate love, Lifework, odd job.

An Interview with Dionysios Maroudas on Lifework (Part Two)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: When we’re gathering steam in life and beginning to build one, there will be odd jobs and work that one may not appreciate in the moment, but will later realize as, in some manner, positive for the growth of change of trajectory needed at the time. What were some of the odd jobs in youth for you?

Dionysios Maroudas: When I finished school, I had to find a part-time job to cover my expenses. I started privately teaching maths to secondary and high school students. I knew it was a temporary job, and I had difficulties in earning parents and student’s trust, besause of my age. Another odd job I went through with, was in an organic food processing and packaging company. It was a small family company, without money, with many production machines bought on auctions, only two employees and one employer with huge ambitions.

2. Jacobsen: How were these jobs important for building character and work ethic?

Maroudas: Private lessons was my first job. I received it as a challenge to find what a school teacher had done wrong, so that a student would need extracurricular help. Many times I tried to help younger teenagers change their perspective, and I dedicated personal time finding ways to achieve it. I found out, that there are plenty fruitful learning methods linked with rewarding, and I used them.

After years I met a student of mine and he rewarded me back, with one great compliment “thank you for the abilities you showed me I possesed, but I never knew”. It was the first time, someone showed me his warm appreciation for something I had succeeded through my work.

This job helped me thinking out of the box. I noticed that you can chase your goals in many ways when you work with people. Improving my co-workers or underlings to make it as a team, demanded less effort by me in the end and a better secured result for my team.

To sum up, my odd jobs taught me to be a team-player, to invest on people improvement, to be adaptable and well-organized.

3. Jacobsen: Some of the most significant portions of life come from the sense and sensibilities around social life and closest relations found in intimate love. How has life been in these domains for you? Only have to share that which seems comfortable to share in public.

Maroudas: One of the most important portions in my youth was my friends. Friendship is the first volitional relationship someone may develop in life. I was lucky, as I always have had good and loyal friends, since I was a kid. Expectations, love and patience is the key for a long-time friendship.

On the other hand, is the intimate love. I was never what we call a Greek-lover. [Laughing] I mean, the macho lover for the summer time who lives for a few intense moments and then changes his partner. I am romantic and loyal. I respect people around me, as well as my time, so when I fell in love, I tried to figure if I can co-exist with the person next to me, before I even start. I guess, this behavior may stem from my parents divorce.

I found all I asked in my wife and I feel proud of it. Finding your partner in life is like choosing the way you wish to live and the way your child would wish to raise, so I feel more than happy for my choice and my baby’s mother.

4. Jacobsen: When you pursued more of a formal education, what was the tipping point to formally decide to enter into higher education and acquire a postsecondary qualification?

Maroudas: In Greece, postsecondary education is free. You may enter public universities depending on your grades you receive on national exams after high school and for a specific number of positions per department. This has raised a culture for Greek parents, that their children have to obtain a bachelor’s degree or even a postgraduate if they want to be competitive in the job market.

Thus, I had decided to study maths or marketing long before I finished high school. Unfortunately, if you want to enter the department of mathematics in Greece, you are also examined on courses non-relevant with the subject like history and writing composition which cut me away from the chance to enter it, so I entered my very next choice which was department of marketing. Marketing is what a small shop, a company, and even a whole market department needs to function and make profit. That’s what made it so challenging for me and I decided to study it.

5. Jacobsen: What have been the earned credentials to date? Why pursue those particular interests as intellectual interests? What doors have those particular interests opened for you?

Maroudas: I don’t believe I owe an enviable bio, or a CV that would make someone excited. My credentials depend mostly on my results and productivity. In every job I have joined, I have helped it progress and I have made statistically significant improvements in most of them. Telling people that I belong to numerous high-IQ societies, I would probably scare them or even awake in them unpleasant feelings. People are scared of what they don’t know and what would make them feel being in comparison. One of my interests is that I try to solve prime numbers problems (Goldbach’s conjecture, Riemann’s hypothesis, etc.) and reading about medicine and psychology. These interests have helped me meet people with similar curiosity to mine.

6. Jacobsen: When you look at the way things have progressed in life for you, and how things could have progressed in life for you, what do you regret? What do you remain thankful or grateful for in life in spite of the regrets?

Maroudas: Except for spending more time in studying, when I was a teen, I can’t think of anything [Laughing].

A few years ago, I and my wife were thinking moving to Canada for a better quality of life. Living in a country that is famous for its meritocracy, was the motivation I needed to make such a decision. Unfortunately, some health issues of our family member, was the additional weight on our decision steelyard that held us in our homeland. This was one of the biggest turn I took in my life.

Daily we make small decisions that form our future and we have to support them, or to correct them on time. And of course, we have to understand that there are many variables that cannot be affected by us. Being a little bit stubborn, let me no space for regrets. I am afraid, that if I changed anything in my life, I would have commited a treason to my principles or beliefs that led me to do this action in the beginning.

After all, I am grateful for my family, for our health and living in one of the most beautiful countries, even if it is in one of its hardest times.

7. Jacobsen: Many individuals in some of the highest levels of giftedness have what I call a “Lifework” as a dream and can, in fact, pursue this as a reality if they are among the few lucky people in the world with the ability even further in luck with the time, interest, and energy to pursue such things to their fullest. Do you have a Lifework? If so, why this? If not, any idea as to the reason for this not entering into the arena of cognitive or real life for you?

Maroudas: The last years I am trying to decode the Holy Grail of maths, prime numbers. Their purpose, their randomness – or better the structural rules they follow – and why not, to give a clear and simple solution to one of the greatest math mysteries. Hunting ghosts like this, demands focus and time. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, this is a self-actualization need. So, if I need to spend time for the top of the pyramid, I have to make it stable at the beginning. For the moment, I prefer spending my time trying to satisfy my first-4-levels necessities and enjoy my newborn child in my free time. I believe that everything can be succeeded if you have patience and persistence, so I am decided to wait for my lifework.

8. Jacobsen: Who have been inspiring figures in the history of the world for you? Also, what about the ordinary people one meet in life who do not plan any grand schemes or have anty spectacular mental talent? What have been some inspirations from them? Those people who have little, want for little, and make due for a life of just and noble cause in their own way, regardless.

Maroudas: Many bright people have inspired me with their work, cognitive abilities or revolutionary ideas. Homer, Archimedes, Pythagoras, Newton, Gauss, V.Hugo, Galois, Riemann, Curie, Tesla, Umberto Eco, Freud and many others had an inspiring lifework for humanity and our evolution.

In my eyes, every single human can be an example for another one. A good one or a poor one. No matter what abilities someone may have, being useful is mostly a matter of will. Personally, I observe attributes in ordinary people’s character and I try to adopt the ones I consider at best quality. I have received great principles from many people I’ve met, so I ‘ve learned to have respect for everyone.

9. Jacobsen: What do you think human beings will simply never know in full?

Maroudas: I believe human beings will never know in full our limits. Human beings are those who built pyramids some thousands years before, traveled to space and researched the genetic code, but still argue about the shape of Earth, nurture racism and vote governors because of their hate speech.

10. Jacobsen: If we take the ways in which the women of the world have not had full access or equal access to the levers of power, so-called, or, more accurately, the reins of individual freedom to pursue their own course or path, to make their own journey in life, how many women geniuses have we simply lost in recorded human history? How have the progress of individual societies and, in turn, the progress of humanity been regressed, halted, or slowed as a result at times?

Maroudas: Unfortunately we have lost a lot of geniuses. Ceteris paribus, I would say that the missing number of women geniuses we have lost in human history because of sexism, is equal to the number of known men geniuses minus the known women geniuses. I believe in statistical equality in this parameter. Another parameter we should also take into account is financial status and physical ability. We can have no idea on how many geniuses male and female have been lost because of them, and how many diseases, unsolved problems and social inequalities would have vanished in a truly meritocratic world.

11. Jacobsen: What are you hoping to pursue intellectually into the future, whether formally through the academic system developed over centuries or in an autodidactic manner for personal intellectual interest and pursuits?

Maroudas: As I stated, in our top of needs, an egocentric need is hidden and patiently waits to make someone the best he can be. The sector I care about is based on creating cognizance and knowledge, instead of adopting another one’s. Prime numbers have many unsolved problems, and I hope to find the ability and time to solve at least one of them.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, ISI-Society; Member, Mensa; Grand Member, Grand IQ Society; Distinguished Member, THIS.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/maroudas-two; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/22

Abstract

Sam Vaknin is Visiting Professor of Psychology, Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia and Professor of Finance and Psychology in SIAS-CIAPS (Centre for International Advanced and Professional Studies), as well as a writer and the author of Malignant Self Love: Narcissism Revisited. He discusses: Narcissistic Personality Disorder or NPD; disorders and syndromes in the orbit of or related to NPD; the typical emotional age of someone diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder; impact their life trajectory; giftedness and narcissists; NPD marry someone, if at all, what is the divorce rate; a gifted narcissist who, finally, hits a limit of their talents; novel contributions to the field; differentiates work set forth by qualified self-help experts, self-styled self-help ‘experts’ (poorly trained, even badly self-trained), and qualified non-self-help experts/certified academic-oriented experts; in the area of NPD research; and Mayo Clinic Staff in “Narcissistic personality disorder“ list some of the attributes of NPD.

Keywords: malignant self love, narcissism, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, pathological narcissism, Russia, Sam Vaknin.

An Interview with Professor Sam Vaknin on Narcissistic Personality Disorder[1]^,[2]

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: You are a leading expert in Narcissistic Personality Disorder or NPD. What is NPD?

Professor Sam Vaknin: Pathological narcissism is a life-long pattern of traits and behaviours which signify infatuation and obsession with one’s self to the exclusion of all others and the egotistic and ruthless pursuit of one’s gratification, dominance and ambition. As distinct from healthy narcissism which we all possess, pathological narcissism is maladaptive, rigid, persisting, and causes significant distress, and functional impairment.

2. Jacobsen: What are disorders and syndromes in the orbit of or related to NPD?

Vaknin: All the dramatic (or erratic) personality disorders – also known as cluster B – are closely related. The overlap is so great that two or more of them are often diagnosed in the same person, a phenomenon known as comorbidity. Another problem is the polythetic nature of the DSM: to be diagnosed with a disorder, one must satisfy only a few of its diagnostic criteria. So, we can have two patients with the same diagnosis, but utterly different traits and behaviors. NPD is also often comorbid with mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and substance abuse or other addictions.

3. Jacobsen: What is the typical emotional age of someone diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder?

Vaknin: Between 4 and 11, with a median of 6.

4. Jacobsen: What does this emotional age mean for individuals who are chronologically in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and beyond with formal NPD? How does this impact their life trajectory?

Vaknin: Such eternal adolescents (Puer Aeternus or Peter Pan) – children really – refuse to accept adult responsibilities and chores and to commit themselves to anything or anyone. They are ludic (like to play), self-centred, defiant, impulsive, immature both cognitively and emotionally, incapable of deciphering social and sexual cues, not fully differentiated as far as their gender and psychosexuality, lack impulse control, foresight, and the ability to delay gratification, are reckless, and suffer from identity diffusion (shifting values, allegiances, opinions, plans, even memories). They are highly dissociative and confabulate to make up for the time lost. Many suffer from addictions. They are not goal-oriented and both the level of organization of their personality and their self-efficacy are low.

5. Jacobsen: You have commented on giftedness and narcissists. Not all gifted people are narcissists; not all narcissists are gifted. However, when gifted people are narcissists, or vice versa, how does this impact the life of a child in interpersonal relations with peers and teachers, and when girl-girl, boy-boy, or girl-boy time in adolescence?

Vaknin: The prodigy – the precocious “genius” – feels entitled to special treatment. Yet, he rarely gets it. This frustrates him and renders him even more aggressive, driven, and overachieving than he is by nature.

As Horney pointed out, the child-prodigy is dehumanised and instrumentalised. His parents love him not for what he really is – but for what they wish and imagine him to be: the fulfilment of their dreams and frustrated wishes. The child becomes the vessel of his parents’ discontented lives, a tool, the magic brush with which they can transform their failures into successes, their humiliation into victory, their frustrations into happiness.

The child is taught to ignore reality and to occupy the parental fantastic space. Such an unfortunate child feels omnipotent and omniscient, perfect and brilliant, worthy of adoration and entitled to special treatment. The faculties that are honed by constantly brushing against bruising reality – empathy, compassion, a realistic assessment of one’s abilities and limitations, realistic expectations of oneself and of others, personal boundaries, team work, social skills, perseverance and goal-orientation, not to mention the ability to postpone gratification and to work hard to achieve it – are all lacking or missing altogether.

The child turned adult sees no reason to invest in his skills and education, convinced that his inherent genius should suffice. He feels entitled for merely being, rather than for actually doing (rather as the nobility in days gone by felt entitled not by virtue of its merit but as the inevitable, foreordained outcome of its birth right). In other words, he is not meritocratic – but aristocratic. In short: a narcissist is born.

Not all precocious prodigies end up under-accomplished and petulant. Many of them go on to attain great stature in their communities and great standing in their professions. But, even then, the gap between the kind of treatment they believe that they deserve and the one they are getting is unbridgeable.

This is because narcissistic prodigies often misjudge the extent and importance of their accomplishments and, as a result, erroneously consider themselves to be indispensable and worthy of special rights, perks, and privileges. When they find out otherwise, they are devastated and furious.

Moreover, people are envious of the prodigy. The genius serves as a constant reminder to others of their mediocrity, lack of creativity, and mundane existence. Naturally, they try to “bring him down to their level” and “cut him down to size”. The gifted person’s haughtiness and high-handedness only exacerbate his strained relationships.

In a way, merely by existing, the prodigy inflicts constant and repeated narcissistic injuries on the less endowed and the pedestrian. This creates a vicious cycle. People try to hurt and harm the overweening and arrogant genius and he becomes defensive, aggressive, and aloof. This renders him even more obnoxious than before and others resent him more deeply and more thoroughly. Hurt and wounded, he retreats into fantasies of grandeur and revenge. And the cycle re-commences.

Prone to shortcuts and to shallowness, the narcissist always feels like a fraud, even when his accomplishments are commensurate with his grandiose fantasies.

This all-pervasive conviction serves several paradoxical psychodynamic functions: it supports the narcissist’s sense of omnipotent superiority (as he is able to deceive everyone into believing his tall tales all the time); it justifies his profound belief that everyone, like him, is just pretending to knowledge and skills that they do not possess (otherwise they would have spotted and exposed him long ago); it gives him licence to indulge his intellectual laziness and emotional absence (he gets by without investing too much, so why bother); and it constantly generates the adrenaline rush that he is so addicted to (the tantalizing fear of being outed as the con-artist that he truly is.)

Recent studies seem to indicate that prodigies grow up to become narcissistic under-achievers.

Fields like literature require maturity and life experience. Prodigies, no matter how gifted, rarely possess the requisite emotional spectrum, an acquaintance with the nuances and subtleties of human relationships, or the accumulated knowledge that comes from first-hand exposure to the ups and downs of reality.

In contrast, the manipulation of symbols – in mathematics, music, or chess – does not require anything except the proper neurological “hardware and software” and access to widely available objective knowledge.

In a way, prodigies can be compared to computers: both excel in symbol manipulation and fail to impress in other, more fuzzy undertakings.

Precocious prodigies seem to be a culture-bound phenomenon. There are far fewer “gifted” children in the collectivist societies of Asia and Africa, for instance. Based as they are on statistical comparisons and ranking, Western IQ tests reflect the values of competition and individualism. Ipso facto, prodigies proliferate in rich, white, developed countries, and not in the poorer ambiences of the Third World, the inner cities, and minority communities.

Still, if you study the biographies of hundreds of men and (the far fewer) women who started life as Wunderkinder, you will find that many of them actually hailed from underprivileged backgrounds, replete with indigence, familial dysfunction, racial or other discrimination, and other forms of deprivation.

Thus, one would do well to distinguish between two types of prodigies: the pampered, cosseted, tutored, often narcissistic type versus the prodigy whose excellence is the only way of fleeing the miserableness of his or her circumstances. The second type of gifted youngster leverages what endowments he possesses to extricate himself from his destitute surroundings and restore hope to an otherwise bleak existence.

The child prodigy compensates with grandiose, fantastic, and inflated self-efficacy (“I can do anything if I just apply myself to it”) for a deficient sense of agency (“the life I am living is not mine”). The child prodigy suppresses his true self because his parents’s love is conditioned on the performance of a false self.

Consequently, the child feels that her life has been hijacked. She makes up for it by excelling and becoming proficient at what she does thus regaining a modicum of mastery and control, however illusory. Such attempts to carve out a parent-free enclave or niche often lead to pathologies such as eating disorders or substance abuse.

As an adult, the child prodigy becomes narcissistic, defiant, self-destructive, and manipulative. She adopts one of several narratives: 1. I am the sleeping beauty princess in need of saving from my monstrous tormentors (codependent) or 2. I am the Law and no one will tell me what to do and how to do it, I know best and one day I will shine again (antisocial-narcissistic) or 3. The world doesn’t deserve me and is too hostile, so I withdraw from it (paranoid-schizoid) or 4. I am broken, unfixable, and so free to act any which way (entitled-borderline).

6. Jacobsen: When individuals with NPD marry someone, if at all, what is the divorce rate of these marriages?

Vaknin: We have no statistics. But, paradoxically, trauma bonding and the shared fantasy in these marriages and the narcissist’s propensity to threaten and blackmail his intimate partner into submission would tend to reduce the divorce rates, not increase it.

7. Jacobsen: What happens with a gifted narcissist who, finally, hits a limit of their talents, e.g., in university, and then the reality of having to work hard, develop study habits, etc., hits home for them? Their false self hits the real world and does not have the emotional tools to deal with the hurt to their false self.

Vaknin: Allow me a quote: His genius was betrayed by lofty and indomitable traits of character which could not yield or compromise. And so his life was a tragedy of inconsequence.” (The poetess Harriet Monroe, quoted in the book “The Devil in White City” by Erik Larson)

You are asking if pathological narcissism is a positive adaptation, if it is a blessing or a malediction?

The answer is: it depends. Healthy narcissism is a mature, balanced love of oneself coupled with a stable sense of self-worth and self-esteem. Healthy narcissism implies knowledge of one’s boundaries and a proportionate and realistic appraisal of one’s achievements and traits.

Pathological narcissism is wrongly described as too much healthy narcissism (or too much self-esteem). These are two absolutely unrelated phenomena which, regrettably, came to bear the same title. Confusing pathological narcissism with self-esteem betrays a fundamental ignorance of both.

Pathological narcissism involves an impaired, dysfunctional, immature (True) Self coupled with a compensatory fiction (the False Self). The sick narcissist’s sense of self-worth and self-esteem derive entirely from audience feedback. The narcissist has no self-esteem or self-worth of his own (no such ego functions). In the absence of observers, the narcissist shrivels to non-existence and feels dead. Hence the narcissist’s preying habits in his constant pursuit of Narcissistic Supply. Pathological narcissism is an addictive behavior.

Still, dysfunctions are reactions to abnormal environments and situations (e.g., abuse, trauma, smothering, etc.)

Paradoxically, his dysfunction allows the narcissist to function. It compensates for lacks and deficiencies by exaggerating tendencies and traits. It is like the tactile sense of a blind person. In short: pathological narcissism is a result of over-sensitivity, the repression of overwhelming memories and experiences, and the suppression of inordinately strong negative feelings (e.g., hurt, envy, anger, or humiliation).

That the narcissist functions at all – is because of his pathology and thanks to it. The alternative is complete decompensation and disintegration.

In time, the narcissist learns how to leverage his pathology, how to use it to his advantage, how to deploy it in order to maximize benefits and utilities – in other words, how to transform his curse into a blessing.

Narcissists are obsessed by delusions of fantastic grandeur and superiority. As a result they are very competitive. They are strongly compelled – where others are merely motivated. They are driven, relentless, tireless, and ruthless. They often make it to the top. But even when they do not – they strive and fight and learn and climb and create and think and devise and design and conspire. Faced with a challenge – they are likely to do better than non-narcissists.

Yet, we often find that narcissists abandon their efforts in mid-stream, give up, vanish, lose interest, devalue former pursuits, fail, or slump. Why is that?

Narcissists are prone to self-defeating and self-destructive behaviors.

The Self-Punishing, Guilt-Purging Behaviors

These are intended to inflict punishment on the narcissist and thus instantly relieve him of his overwhelming anxiety.

This is very reminiscent of a compulsive-ritualistic behavior. The narcissist feels guilty. It could be an “ancient” guilt, a “sexual” guilt (Freud), or a “social” guilt. In early life, the narcissist internalized and introjected the voices of meaningful and authoritative others – parents, role models, peers – that consistently and convincingly judged him to be no good, blameworthy, deserving of punishment or retaliation, or corrupt.

The narcissist’s life is thus transformed into an on-going trial. The constancy of this trial, the never adjourning tribunal is the punishment. It is a Kafkaesque “trial”: meaningless, undecipherable, never-ending, leading to no verdict, subject to mysterious and fluid laws and presided over by capricious judges.

Such a narcissist masochistically frustrates his deepest desires and drives, obstructs his own efforts, alienates his friends and sponsors, provokes figures in authority to punish, demote, or ignore him, actively seeks and solicits disappointment, failure, or mistreatment and relishes them, incites anger or rejection, bypasses or rejects opportunities, or engages in excessive self-sacrifice.

In their book “Personality Disorders in Modern Life”, Theodore Millon and Roger Davis, describe the diagnosis of “Masochistic or Self-Defeating Personality Disorder”, found in the appendix of the DSM III-R but excluded from the DSM IV. While the narcissist is rarely a full-fledged masochist, many a narcissist exhibit some of the traits of this personality disorder.

The Extracting Behaviors

People with Personality Disorders (PDs) are very afraid of real, mature, intimacy. Intimacy is formed not only within a couple, but also in a workplace, in a neighborhood, with friends, while collaborating on a project. Intimacy is another word for emotional involvement, which is the result of interactions in constant and predictable (safe) propinquity.

PDs interpret intimacy as counter-dependence, emotional strangulation, the snuffing of freedom, a kind of death in installments. They are terrorized by it. To avoid it, their self-destructive and self-defeating acts are intended to dismantle the very foundation of a successful relationship, a career, a project, or a friendship. Narcissists feel elated and relieved after they unshackle these “chains”. They feel they broke a siege, that they are liberated, free at last.

The Default Behaviors

We are all, to some degree, inertial, afraid of new situations, new opportunities, new challenges, new circumstances and new demands. Being healthy, being successful, getting married, becoming a mother, or someone’s boss – often entail abrupt breaks with the past. Some self-defeating behaviors are intended to preserve the past, to restore it, to protect it from the winds of change, to self-deceptively skirt promising opportunities while seeming to embrace them.

Moreover, to the narcissist, a challenge, or even a guaranteed eventual triumph, are meaningless in the absence of onlookers. The narcissist needs an audience to applaud, affirm, recoil, approve, admire, adore, fear, or even detest him. He craves the attention and depends on the Narcissistic Supply only others can provide. The narcissist derives sustenance only from the outside – his emotional innards are hollow and moribund.

The narcissist’s enhanced performance is predicated on the existence of a challenge (real or imaginary) and of an audience. Baumeister usefully re-affirmed this linkage, known to theoreticians since Freud.

But, we are well-advised to make a distinction between high-functioning narcissists whose personality is highly organized and low-functioning narcissist who often end up being failures and losers.

Narcissists are low-functioning (with a disorganized personality), high-functioning, or dysfunctional (usually when the patient’s narcissism is comorbid with other mental health problems.) High-functioning narcissists are indistinguishable from driven and ambitious alpha over-achievers. But even they tend to implode and self-destruct. Low-functioning narcissists are antisocial, sometimes schizoid, and beset by disorders of mood and affect.

Three traits conspire to render the low-functioning narcissist a failure and a loser: his sense of entitlement, his haughtiness and innate conviction of his own superiority, and his aversion to routine.

The narcissist’s sense of entitlement encourages his indolence. He firmly believes that he should be spoon-fed and that accomplishments and honors should be handed to him on a silver platter, without any commensurate effort on his part. His mere existence justifies such exceptional treatment. Many narcissists are under-qualified and lack skills because they can’t be bothered with the minutia of obtaining an academic degree, professional training, or exams.

The narcissist’s arrogance and belief that he is superior to others, whom he typically holds in contempt – in other words: the narcissist’s grandiose fantasies – hamper his ability to function in society. The cumulative outcomes of this social dysfunction gradually transform him into a recluse and an outcast. He is shunned by colleagues, employers, neighbors, erstwhile friends, and, finally, even by long-suffering family members who tire of his tirades and rants.

Unable to work in a team, to compromise, to give credit where due, and to strive towards long-term goals, the narcissist – skilled and gifted as he may be – finds himself unemployed and unemployable, his bad reputation preceding him.

Even when offered a job or a business opportunity, the narcissist recoils, bolts, and obstructs each and every stage of the negotiations or the transaction.

But this passive-aggressive (negativistic and masochistic) conduct has nothing to do with the narcissist’s aforementioned indolence. The narcissist is not afraid of some forms of hard work. He invests inordinate amounts of energy, forethought, planning, zest, and sweat in securing narcissistic supply, for instance.

The narcissist’s sabotage of new employment or business prospects is owing to his abhorrence of routine. Narcissists feel trapped, shackled, and enslaved by the quotidian, by the repetitive tasks that are inevitably involved in fulfilling one’s assignments. They hate the methodical, step-by-step, long-term, approach. Possessed of magical thinking, they’d rather wait for miracles to happen. Jobs, business deals, and teamwork require perseverance and tolerance of boredom which the narcissist sorely lacks.

Life forces most narcissists into the hard slog of a steady job (or succession of jobs). Such “unfortunate” narcissists, coerced into a framework they resent, are likely to act out and erupt in a series of self-destructive and self-defeating acts (see above).

But there are other narcissists, the “luckier” ones, those who can afford not to work. They laze about, indulge themselves in a variety of idle and trivial pursuits, seek entertainment and thrills wherever and whenever they can, and while their lives away, at once content and bitter: content with their lifestyle and the minimum demands it imposes on them and bitter because they haven’t achieved more, they haven’t reached the pinnacle or their profession, they haven’t become as rich or famous or powerful as they deserve to be.

We all try to replicate and re-enact our successes. We feel comfortable and confident doing what we do best and what we do most often. We enshrine our oft-repeated tasks and our cumulative experiences as habits.

Asked to adopt new skills and confront unprecedented tasks, we recoil, procrastinate, or delegate (read: pass the buck). Performance anxiety is common.

Someone who keeps failing is rendered very good at it, he becomes adept at the art of floundering, an expert on fizzle and blunder, an artist of the slip. The more dismal the defeats, the more familiar the terrain of losses and botched attempts. Failure is the loser’s comfort zone. He uses projective identification to coerce people around him to help him revert to form: to fail.

Such a loser will aim to recreate time and again his only accomplishment: his spectacular downfalls, thwarted schemes, and harebrained stratagems. A slave to a repetition compulsion, the loser finds the terra incognita of success intimidating. He wraps his precious aborted flops in a mantle of an ideology: success is an evil, all successful people are crooks or the beneficiaries of quirky fortune.

To the loser, his miscarriages and deterioration are a warm blanket underneath which he hides himself from a hostile world. Failure is a powerful and addictive organizing principle which imbues life with meaning and predictability and allows the loser to make sense of his personal history. Being a loser is an identity and losers are proud of it as they recount with wonder their mishaps, misfortune, and vicissitudes.

Why do some narcissists appear to be bumbling fools, never mind how intelligent they actually are? Eight reasons:

1. No impulse control, no forethought, no foresight = counterproductive, self-defeating, and self-destructive decisions and actions.

2. Acting out: when narcissistic supply is deficient, narcissists decompensate and go haywire (see: collapsed narcissists).

3. Pseudo-stupidity: to avoid the consequences of their misdeeds, narcissists pretend that they have misunderstood something you have said or done or that you took advantage of their good nature.

4. Gullibility: narcissists are grandiose and fantasts, so they misjudge reality (impaired reality test), their skills and limitations, and the intentions of others.

5. No empathy means that the narcissist disastrously misreads others and behaves in socially unacceptable and clownish ways.

6. His sense of entitlement renders the narcissist an overweening buffoon, the butt of mockery and derision, rather than the awe he believes that he inspires and the respect he thinks that he deserves.

7. Hypervigilance leads to disproportionate aggression directed at imaginary slights and to persecutory delusions: paranoid ideation often directed at innocent targets.

8. Finally, the narcissist uses false modesty to fish for compliments. But his attempts are so transparent and inarticulate, so fake and manipulative that people react with repulsion and seek to humiliate him.

8. Jacobsen: Why does NPD happen more in men and Borderline Personality Disorder happen more in women?

Vaknin: Ever since Freud, more women than men sought therapy. Consequently, terms like “hysteria’ are intimately connected to female physiology and alleged female psychology. The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, the bible of the psychiatric profession) expressly professes gender bias: personality disorders such as Borderline and Histrionic are supposed to be more common among women. but the DSM is rather even-handed: other personality disorders (e.g., the Narcissistic and Antisocial as well as the Schizotypal, Obsessive-Compulsive, Schizoid, and Paranoid) are more prevalent among men.

Why this gender disparity? There are a few possible answers:

Maybe personality disorders are not objective clinical entities, but culture-bound syndromes. In other words, perhaps they reflect biases and value judgments. Some patriarchal societies are also narcissistic. They emphasize qualities such as individualism and ambition, often identified with virility. Hence the preponderance of pathological narcissism among men. Women, on the other hand, are widely believed to be emotionally labile and clinging. This is why most Borderlines and Dependents are females.

Upbringing and environment, the process of socialization and cultural mores all play an important role in the pathogenesis of personality disorders. These views are not fringe: serious scholars (e.g., Kaplan and Pantony, 1991) claim that the mental health profession is inherently sexist.

Then again, genetics may be is at work. Men and women do differ genetically. This may account for the variability of the occurrence of specific personality disorders in men and women.

Some of the diagnostic criteria are ambiguous or even considered “normal” by the majority of the population. Histrionics “consistently use physical appearance to draw attention to self.” Well, who doesn’t in Western society? Why when a woman clings to a man it is labeled “codependence”, but when a man relies on a woman to maintain his home, take care of his children, choose his attire, and prop his ego it is “companionship” (Walker, 1994)?

The less structured the interview and the more fuzzy the diagnostic criteria, the more the diagnostician relies on stereotypes (Widiger, 1998).

9. Jacobsen: As a foremost expert on NPD, what have been the novel contributions to the field by you?

Vaknin: I started my work in this then obscure field in 1995. I had to coin a whole new language, a glossary of neologisms and terms adapted from other branches of psychology in order to describe my observations and studies. Most of the terms and phrases in use today can be traced back to my pioneering efforts (including the ubiquitous “narcissistic abuse”). My website – with well over 2000 articles – was the only one dedicated to the subject until 2004 and I ran all the online support groups for victims of narcissistic abuse until that year. I want to believe that there is no aspect of our current understanding of narcissistic disorders of the self that does not bear my stamp and signature. I am still innovating: “cold empathy”, “collapsed histrionic”, “covert borderline”, “flat attachment” and dozens of other new concepts. I also came up with a new treatment modality, “Cold Therapy”, that shows promise in our attempts to reverse NPD and major depression. I have been teaching all these things for 5 years now to generations of students and mental health practitioners in several countries. Parallel with that, I am helping to revive a theory in physics that I came up with in 1982-4 and which is gaining mainstream currency now and I contribute to diverse fields such as economics and philosophy. Keeping busy.

10. Jacobsen: What differentiates work set forth by qualified self-help experts, self-styled self-help ‘experts’ (poorly trained, even badly self-trained), and qualified non-self-help experts/certified academic-oriented experts in the area of NPD research and public presentation of theories and empirics?

Vaknin: There are very few true experts and scholars in this relatively new and embryonic field and not one of them is accessible online. The overwhelming majority of the self-styled “experts” online are charlatans and worse. They spew dangerous and misleading nonsense and capitalize on the victims’s plight. I have never charged a cent for my work: it has all been available online at no cost since 1995. The only thing I charge for is my time. The rest is free: books, videos, papers, articles, everything. Whatever I make available is based on decades of in-depth research into the literature and an experience of 25 years, triple that of anyone else.

11. Jacobsen: So, the Mayo Clinic Staff in “Narcissistic personality disorder“ list some of the attributes of NPD:

• Have an exaggerated sense of self-importance
• Have a sense of entitlement and require constant, excessive admiration
• Expect to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
• Exaggerate achievements and talents
• Be preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
• Believe they are superior and can only associate with equally special people
• Monopolize conversations and belittle or look down on people they perceive as inferior
• Expect special favors and unquestioning compliance with their expectations
• Take advantage of others to get what they want
• Have an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
• Be envious of others and believe others envy them
• Behave in an arrogant or haughty manner, coming across as conceited, boastful and pretentious
• Insist on having the best of everything — for instance, the best car or office

How accurate is this listing? The Mayo Clinic is pretty darn good on most stuff, I assume. Does this differ from the DSM-V or align with it?

Vaknin: This text merely paraphrases the diagnostic criteria listed in the DSM IV-TR without adding a single thing or insight to them and without adapting the language – first published in 2000 – to the most recent advances in the field. Here is a modified version of my own:

• Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates accomplishments, talents, skills, contacts, and personality traits to the point of lying, demands to be recognised as superior without commensurate achievements);
• Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, fearsome power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion;
• Firmly convinced that he or she is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special or unique, or high-status people (or institutions);
• Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation – or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious (Narcissistic Supply);
• Feels entitled. Demands automatic and full compliance with his or her unreasonable expectations for special and favourable priority treatment;
• Is “interpersonally exploitative”, i.e., uses others to achieve his or her own ends;
• Devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with, acknowledge, or accept the feelings, needs, preferences, priorities, and choices of others;
• Constantly envious of others and seeks to hurt or destroy the objects of his or her frustration. Suffers from persecutory (paranoid) delusions as he or she believes that they feel the same about him or her and are likely to act similarly;
• Behaves arrogantly and haughtily. Feels superior, omnipotent, omniscient, invincible, immune, “above the law”, and omnipresent (magical thinking). Rages when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted by people he or she considers inferior to him or her and unworthy.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Visiting Professor of Psychology, Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia; Professor of Finance and Psychology in SIAS-CIAPS (Centre for International Advanced and Professional Studies).

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/vaknin; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/15

Abstract

Dr. Giuseppe Corrente is a Computer Science teacher at Torino University. He earned a Ph.D. in Science and High Technology – Computer Science in 2013 at Torino University. He has contributed to the World Intelligence Network’s publication Phenomenon. He discusses: overexcitability; Positive Disintegration theory; “gifted” as a term; Positive Disintegration; partial underachievers; main figures advancing Positive Disintegration theory; competing theories in contradistinction to Positive Disintegration theory; and a gifted educational system orientation focus on Positive Disintegration theory to advance more positive experiences for the gifted youth.

Keywords: gifted, Giuseppe Corrente, IQ, Italy, Positive Disintegration Theory.

An Interview with Giuseppe Corrente on Positive Disintegration Theory (Part Five)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Now, one certain trait among many of the gifted, if defined in a standard psychometric sense, is the phenomenon of overexcitability. In that, these individuals remain stuck on overdrive. Or if not much of the time, if a subject of deep interest to them, then they can become extremely focused and excited by the topic so as to exhibit overexcitability characteristics in the pursuit of mastery of the discipline. Something can happen with a surface negative and a subterranean positive. The gifted and talented can become excited beyond capacity to handle it. They collapse, fall apart, break away, and slither into a corner. Positive Dsintegration theory posits something akin to a creative destruction of self. The breaking down and apart is part and parcel of the becoming part of the wider framework of the evolution of self to higher levels of coherence, understanding. How is Positive Disintegration theory important for understanding the condition of life for many gifted and talented individuals?

Giuseppe Corrente: Gifted and talented people are often special for something since their birth. It can be for a particular sensibility or for an artistic talent or for high IQ that represents intellectual over-excitability, or for some other feature. This, together environmental conditions and mutual interaction with it, can be the cause of a strong psychological crisis, but also the source of a stronger ‘rebirth’. This matter is studied in Positive Disintegration.

2. Jacobsen: Why is Positive Disintegration theory important, period?

Corrente: Because, if associated with high innate abilities, can transform a crisis period in the beginning of a growth, at the end also a spiritual growth, instead of the beginning of the end.

3. Jacobsen: Is the term gifted outmoded or relevant still here?

Corrente: When we consider Positive Disintegration theory we must consider not only people with high IQ but also persons with other features that could make those persons too susceptible of crisis periods, but also adapt to view these as an opportunity, a real opportunity to become real more and more aware and precious, for himself and for the whole society. In ’60 as now.

4. Jacobsen: How can Positive Disintegration not only help understand the condition of the gifted, but also not in other ways?

Corrente: The common way to view anxiety, a sense of nullity, in worst cases the desire to end with all killing himself, is as a mental illness symptom, a sign of disease in the better case; only with Positive Disintegration when it’s possible it is viewed as a almost necessary step with which few special individuals have the opportunity to go towards a more full level of existence, a more aware way of living and to explicate their own talents in an individual, unique way and in the same time becoming potentially a guide for the society.

5. Jacobsen: What makes partial underachievers important to consider in the case of Positive Disintegration and Gifted Coaching? I suspect this might mean the cases in which the gifted individual had negative disintegration, as this seems like a logical (behavioural-psychological) complement in the opposite direction as positive disintegration as posited in the theoretical framework of Positive Disintegration theory.

Corrente: Partial underachievers may take inspiration from the Positive Disintegration theory with the aim to see and review their life and their failures as a sign of a wrong reaction to inner and external difficulties and so begin to be fully aware of their rich inner world and of their great potentialities.

6. Jacobsen: Who have been the main figures in the advancement of Positive Disintegration theory?

Corrente: Dabrowski. He was a psychologist and developed his theory in years ’60. He was also like a guru for the small group of his theory’s followers. It is a theory applicable to few cases, in a field, the psychology of gifted and talented, that regards as target to a little percentage of population, so it is not as popular as one could expect reading or studying some pieces of theory, that seems very profound and significant.

7. Jacobsen: What are competing theories in contradistinction to Positive Disintegration theory? 

Corrente: Perhaps for more common aspects Positive Psychology founded by Maslow; I am not a psychologist or an expert, but in my opinion Positive Disintegration has no rivals, I think no other theory exists that gives a so whole picture of what can be the tormented unique path that a genius generally does becoming who he is.

8. Jacobsen: How could a gifted educational system orientation focus on Positive Disintegration theory to advance more positive experiences for the gifted youth? 

Corrente: Positive Disintegration should be surely in the toolbox of psychologists that work with gifted and talented youth, together with other theories and clinical practices. It is also a self-educational way. A gifted person can study it with the aim to empower himself and his own self-knowledge. A precious matter that each gifted or talented person needs to have in his cultural baggage.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Ph.D. (2013), Science and High Technology – Computer Science, Torino University.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 15, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/corrente-five; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/08

Abstract

Christian is a Philosopher that comes from Belgium. What identifies him the most and above all is simplicity, for everything is better with “vanilla flavour.” Perhaps, for this reason, his intellectual passion is criticism and irony, in the sense of trying to reveal what “hides behind the mask,” and give birth to the true. For him, ignorance and knowledge never “cross paths.” What he likes the most in his leisure time, is to go for a walk with his wife.

Keywords: Christian Sorenson, ideal reality, mathematics, natural, ontology, pure philosophy, Quantum Mechanics.

An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Consciousness, Ideal Reality, Mathematics, and Ontological Reality (Part Six)[1]^,[2]

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

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Math/maths/mathematics, what is it?

Christian Sorenson: I feel, they are like “musical melodies,” that when “listened to” and “contemplated” through soul, produce a “sensation of pleasure,” similar to “sexual enjoyment.”

Jacobsen: As a branch of science, how do mathematical sciences seem to exist in some nether world between natural philosophy/science and pure philosophy?

Sorenson: I think the opposite, since “math” is the one that should be found above science and above natural and pure philosophy, due to the fact that if “ultimate reality is ideal,” then this last should be written by “means of numbers,” and therefore they are “not perceptible by senses” nor can they be studied through “empirical object models.”

Jacobsen: Is math created, discovered, both, or more?

Sorenson: I don’t have the certainty that “math” is created, I only have the conviction that “it exists,” and likewise, I believe it’s not “discovered,” since it only “knows how to show itself.”

Jacobsen: Why does math describe the natural world so well?

Sorenson: Because the “natural world,” is an “image” or “shadow” of the “ideal world” that is “real,” and “written” in “mathematical language.”

Jacobsen: What unites the mathematical descriptions of the world and the conclusions of the world as a natural dynamic object?

Sorenson: The “subject.”

Jacobsen: Why does the quantum mechanical world mean an ontological uncertainty about the world? In that, the universe does not have complete information about itself.

Sorenson: Since “quantum mechanical world,” tries to study “ontological reality” of the universe through what I will denominate as “model of being,” due to the fact that the “nature” of what quantum theory considers as “elementary particles,” constitutes in my opinion nothing more than “supposed entities,” because until now has never reached to observed them. Therefore, I believe that these last, only fulfills an “instrumental empirical function,” that’s just able to provide “indirect ontological certainties,” and in consequence it is logical to conclude, that “universe,” does not have complete information about itself, since “yet has not been able first to complete itself.”

Jacobsen: Why does a natural philosophy or science mean an epistemological uncertainty? In that, the tools of science only give partial and incomplete knowledge in various fidelities about the universe.

Sorenson: In my opinion it is not about “natural philosophy” or “science,” but rather of “natural philosophy” and “science,” since both “can share the bias” regarding the “object of study,” nevertheless not so, in relation to their “response capacity,” because meanwhile one of them “responds to how” and only fulfills with “intermediate responses,” the other instead does it “regarding to what,” in function to “ultimate responses,” and therefore by reaching higher degrees of “certainty,” which can never go beyond the “principle of non-contradiction.”

Humanly speaking, the latter “is our limit,” since until now we have not been able to exceed it.

Jacobsen: Why does sensory uncertainty mean yet another layer of uncertainty for us?

Sorenson: Because “esse, est percipi.”

Jacobsen: Why does the knowing that we know and being a here-and-how consciousness amount to the main certainty available to us, as individual consciousnesses?

Sorenson: Regarding “individual consciousness,” I feel that rather than having an “amount of certainty,” only has an “ephemeral” one, since it constitutes a “present-moment” that when it’s “apprehended,” at the same time “disappears.” Nevertheless, what I consider as “collective consciousness,” is quite different, because unlike the “individual,” allows us to capture “present’s-presence” through what I would name as “inter-relational noetic consensus.”

Jacobsen: If we have the certainty of the existence of ourselves as knowing that we know and being here-and-now consciousnesses or richly aware though highly flawed interconnected information processors, and if we have the sensory uncertainty provided via the various sense modalities of the body feeding into this consciousness, and if we have the second epistemological uncertainties of the sciences and various means by which some reasonable estimates of the natural world are derived from natural philosophical/scientific tools, and if we have the third ontological uncertainty of the universe being built quantum mechanically and, therefore, having incomplete knowledge about itself, then the one certainty comes down to individual self-awareness with everything extended out from this and back into us implying a layered cake of individuated and reasonably understood uncertainties with distinct characteristics and implications for the individual self-awarenesses. In this natural world and one describable by mathematics, we come to a naturalistic mind and a mathematical description in principle or in theory possible about such awarenesses, which makes the simulation and replication in different mediums possible for or about these consciousnesses. In that, the mathematical models of human consciousnesses individually at first and then as a range of elements in the set of all possible natural human consciousnesses become possible to download from or simulate into some massive future database or computer. Some things follow from the overarching constructs here. One, the universe is a natural place. Two, it can be described by mathematics. Three, human beings are naturalistic and describable by math. Four, human consciousness is naturalistic and describable by mathematical sciences, eventually. Five, this means an eventual replication in artificial intellects, including feeling, sensing, emoting, in ranges and fidelities far beyond current human forms. Six, as with anything understood, there is a continual wonder about it, but a mundane-making of it. In that, human consciousness will be probably devalued as a result of comprehension and replication. It becomes another thing that the scientists can do now. Seven, the room for magical, supernatural, extramaterial, supernormal, extramundane, spooky, paranormal, or miraculous hypotheses about the natural world get, more or less, squeezed out of possible. As Hawking had noted about the functionality-victory of science compared to religion, “It works.” Or as Dawkins noted, “It works… bitches.” Yet, as I see in Canada, and as I see in the United States of America, and throughout the world, truly, a continual onslaught of non-sense – as in making no sense at all, practically or reasonably or scientifically – pummeling the eyes and the minds of the nations. Is there as asymptote on the levels of actual knowledge about the world citizens can handle, simply as a fact about the species?

Sorenson: I agree about that “science” is the answer, nevertheless I consider that it is possible “to go further” towards a science but “with capital letters,” that is to say, that allows us to find responses that until now neither “conventional science” nor “philosophy” have been able to reach. I believe that all the “uncertainties and disorientations” that exists, have indeed led out to a “great world convulsion,” since pragmatically speaking, the “most principal common sense,” that’s our “reason common sense” has “shone by its absence.” From my point of view, deep down, what exists is a generalized “syndrome of learned despair,” as a consequence of not being capable enough to find solutions to “fundamental problems” that affect us as a specie. In this sense, I estimate that a possible path, would be to try to “broaden the field of consciousness,” in order to “discover and explore other dimensions,” that may allow to “expand our micro-cosmos,” and in this way to achieve an “evolutionary leap” that enables “higher cognitive resources” to gain access to “realities” with other “registers of complexity.”

Jacobsen: How do the uncertainties and certainty in the universe mix to you? What makes them coherent?

Sorenson: Actually for me they mix when “I dream,” since “for dreaming,” first of all it is necessary “to awake.”

Jacobsen: Are the laws of nature really “laws”?

Sorenson: From my point of view, they are “neologisms of linearity” with “abstract existence.”

Jacobsen: Why do these “musical melodies” bring about a joy or enjoyment akin to sexual pleasure?

Sorenson: Since I define the “subject” as “S -1,” and in my opinion if “math” is “metaphorically encrypted” on the space of “incognito” as “unknown,” and in turn “sexual pleasure” is always with respect to a “lack,” then it could be said that what I can experience, is close “to enjoyment,” which in “its nature is sexual” though not necessarily “carnal.”

Jacobsen: For numbers, as the representation of the ideal reality in a notation comprehensible to human beings, what does this say about numbers in and of themselves?

Sorenson: I believe that “number” as an “ideal reality” exists autonomously, nevertheless, as “an entity it is barred” in itself, since it is not possible to access towards its inside, and therefore it is “not capable of expressing anything.” In consequence, is only by “forming chains” and establishing “operational relationships” with others as “entities of same nature” that’s able to express “comprehensible meanings.”

Jacobsen: What does this say about mathematics apart from human forms of notation of the ideal world in the mathematics, where mathematics becomes the closest translational tool for comprehension of the ideal world from which human beings derive?

Sorenson: Implicitly speaking, they say that although they cannot be written down as “forms of notation,” there’s an exception if this regards a particular “symbol,” since what ultimately try to represent is nothing less than “infinite,” due to the fact that at all times they “spin around” and somehow keep “in relation” to it.

Jacobsen: What is the ideal world?

Sorenson: In my opinion it is similar to a “spiritual world,” that is in another “place of reality” perhaps parallel to ours, which is “eternal and immutable,” and from which we descended by “emanations” into “this existence.”

Jacobsen: Is the ideal world infinite, absolute, both, or more?

Sorenson: I believe it’s a “universal form,” that simultaneously is “alpha and omega,” and which “evolves expanding and compressing spirally.”

Jacobsen: Why did mathematics end up as the translational tool, i.e., numerical symbolization and operators relating the numbers?

Sorenson: Because our “formal rational processes” works with a “binary logic” that I will denominate as “logic of out-out,” and which lastly will be the base that enables numbers, to relate through operators, between each other.

Jacobsen: Even in the case of a “conviction,” isn’t this simply a more sophisticated manned of stating a sensibility akin to a faith in the extant nature of math?

Sorenson: Actually not, since “faith convictions” necessarily “are apodictics” in their certainties, and therefore follow the “path of truth,” while mine doesn’t, because actually continues “that of doxa.” Therefore if at the same time, a “mathematical idea” may be thought, then someone needs to exist for being so. And in turn, if this “occurs inside me,” then I can “affirm with conviction” from experience, that indeed “it exists at least within myself,” and that “this is as much as I do.”

Jacobsen: What are the ways in which math “knows how to show itself,” as this phrase connotes a conscious intent “to be known”?

Sorenson: “Math” in my opinion does not have to manifest itself “through a veil.” Analogically speaking, it is the only entity that actually can absolutely say “that is the one who is,” since “does not participates of its ideal form.” For this reason, in turn they don’t “show themselves,” but on the contrary, we are the ones who instead “need to follow some path” to access them, which is neither derived from “intellectual reflections” nor of “pragmatism,” yet only through “reminiscence” they will be achieved. In other words, is by “reminding” that these “will emerged spontaneously,” and at a certain moment in “the field of our consciousness.” And is with the mediation of “contemplation,” which

enables them for “being visualized” in a “fleeting space” with our “spiritual senses,” that we “are authorized” to access their “knowledge deeply.”

Jacobsen: In “ultimate reality is ideal,” what is meant by “ideal”?

Sorenson: I think that “ideal” in itself means something similar to a “immaterial model” in an “aesthetic and ontological” sense of understanding it, with respect to which all “other entities of identical substantial attributes are comparables.” Therefore, “with whom” also we can “formally identify ourselves” since it will be in relation to “properties” that are possessed by an “essence.”

Jacobsen: Is there truly a bottom, philosophical bedrock? Or is it an onion to peel, and peel, and peel, ad infinitum?

Sorenson: At the “level of consciousness and logic” in which sciences and philosophy are currently found, I believe that indeed there is a bottom beyond which it is not possible to go. Nevertheless, at same time I am convinced about the premise, that there are “other possible levels of consciousness,” and also other “logical formalities” that probably would only have “infinity as a limit.”

Jacobsen: Of numbers, these are part of math. Math is part of a toolkit to represent the ideal reality. What are numbers before representation?

Sorenson: I believe they were part of an “undifferentiated ideal whole” which was different from “zero,” and that could be “symbolized” mathematically assuming the “sign of infinity.”

Jacobsen: How much is left out in the “shadow” or the “image” of ideal reality? Obviously, we have enough clarity to survive and get along.

Sorenson: I feel that what is left, is “as much as a mirage,” though in the desert “nothing is more real” than that.

Jacobsen: What is the subject in this intermediary role between mathematical descriptions of the world and the conclusions of the world as a natural dynamic object?

Sorenson: In my opinion, is a “divided subject,” who in its “actual evolutionary degree,” is not able to access not even to itself, nor to the natural and ideal worlds, since it’s incapable to remove “the barrier” interposed “between symbol and its meaning,” and therefore has no choice, but to “access indirectly into it,” only through the use of “metaphor and metonymy.”

Jacobsen: Between these four points of contact between the ideal reality, the mathematical descriptors, the subject, and the natural dynamic object, how does one “bleed into” another? That is to say, three of these, by definition, should have fuzzy edges of one “feeding off” and into another.

Sorenson: A “Mathematical descriptor,” is similar to a “double pendulum” that joins the other three elements through “unpredictable movements,” that in my opinion follow a “coherent chaos.” On one end, it unites “ideal reality” which “sustains others,” and acts as the “founding matrix” of others. And on the other extreme, it does so with the “natural world,” that is “the least subsistent” of all, ontologically speaking. The “subject” for its part, is found “in the pendulum joint,” and metaphysically speaking is alike to “a middle child” or to “the ham of a sandwich,” due to fact that it’s “not a completely subsistent and pure form,” as occurs with the “ideal one,” but in turn it is “not either” a “purely sensitive substance” because doesn’t belongs entirely to the “natural” world.

Jacobsen: What is intelligence in relation to the ideal reality, the mathematical descriptors, the subject, and the natural dynamic object? Most organisms never formalize a mathematical language for description of the ideal world. (Some) Human beings remain unique in operation within a world of natural dynamic object while having some level of knowledge of mathematics to comprehend the formal descriptors of the ideal reality.

Sorenson: “Intelligence,” is similar to “a non-abstract-able” and “semi-immaterial drive motor,” that in relation to “ideal reality” is “potentially capable” of “abstracting an essence,” and therefore of “extracting it symbolically” through a “formal identification” process, which “leads it to assimilated” as if it was a part of itself.

Jacobsen: What is ontological reality? Is this another way to speak of ideal reality?

Sorenson: It is not equivalent to speak of one or the other, since “ideal reality” is always an “ontological reality” but the latter is not always an “ideal reality.” The “ontological reality,” is “the reality of being as such,” therefore it comprises “all existing beings,” while “ideal reality,” only encompasses a type of beings that are “eternals,” “pure forms,” and “subsistingly existing.”

Jacobsen: Who was the first to speak of an ideal reality?

Sorenson: In my opinion who first spoked of “ideal reality” more consistently and systematically was Platon.

Jacobsen: Since we can predict, hypothesize, and visualize, we can create low-fidelity versions of the ideal reality with the proper mathematical constructs in mind, even more true for internal abstractions of the “images” of ideal reality brought forth into us. Our capacity is intriguing and points to orientations towards abstracted notions of truth and objectivity as something approximated via evolution (sorry, Plantinga), simply as a matter of the flowing course of evolution over time. I can make this more concrete. The adjacent sexual pleasure derived from some music appears to come from the representation of mathematical certainties and in the real “musical melodies” of music, as per the Mozart example from before, or some recent tones in some of Gibbons, Haydn, and Hindemith, who I have been listening to today. We seem to have evolved a system of reward or “pleasure” from encountering the mathematical “musical melodies” reflective of some ideal reality, while represented in a variety of modalities in the image world derived from the ideal world. There is no direct question here. Only some thoughts for reflection and extension by you.

Sorenson: The “sexual pleasure” of which I refer, is not necessarily equivalent to something of “carnal nature.” Indeed, and at the same time “sexual pleasure” as such, has evolved overtime in “its function,” but not with “its goal,” therefore somehow has remained unchanged in this development context, since “pleasure” has being until nowadays a “reward response” to “sexual behavior,” and this in turn occurs as a way of “ensuring procreation and survival” of our specie. From my point of view “sexual pleasure,” constitutes “structurally” speaking “the subject,” due to the fact that its mind, “cannot-but-function” exclusively “for pleasure.” Meanwhile the latter in turn, “cannot-but-be solely” of “a sexual nature.” I sustain that “pleasure is structuring and structural,” because “it works thanks to a piece that does not have,” that is to say “to a lack.” And its “nature is sexual,” for the reason that throughout existence, searches “an object” with which intends to “symbolically copulate,” in order “to complete” by that way the structurally missing piece, which ultimately will “be felt as pleasant.” The last occurs, since at the moment that “crush arrives with the object,” an “illusion similar to infatuation” emerges and “fades away” afterwards, as a consequence that “it actually did happened,” though “it does not exists.” In consequence, what is reached “is a failed alliance,” that secondly derives into a “subjective feeling of emptiness,” which translates into a sensation of “butterflies flying in the stomach,” and that lastly allows me to refer to “pleasure.”

Jacobsen: Will this ontological reality ever be able to complete itself?

Sorenson: I think that if “ontological reality” were to be completed in a moment, “movement” would then be stopped, and “existence” of everything “will be ended” as consequence.

Jacobsen: Can we get past the “principle of non-contradictions”?

Sorenson: I believe “we can” but “we haven’t done it,” since “this principle” is linked to “formal logic,” that until now has ruled “science” and “philosophy.” In my opinion, there have been “failed attempts,” such as occurred with “Hegelian dialectic.” Indeed from my point of view, they have done nothing “but just to rest the same,” due to the fact that they aren’t capable to reach to get out of “a tripolar frame of reasoning,” currently based on “two premises engaged with a conclusive deduction” if is the case of traditional logic, and of a “thesis and antithesis linked to synthesis” if is dialectic thinking.

Jacobsen: If to be is to be perceived, or to be is to perceive, what does this mean for the act of perception of the “subject” existent between the ideal world and the natural dynamic object?

Sorenson: In my opinion, means that “reality is for the subject,” in the sense of being “what it is perceived,” and therefore “is partial” because of “its relativity and changing reflection” regarding natural world, which in turn consist of “images” regarding “real figures,” that “walk in front of fires light” as if they were representing “ideal models” of everything,

Jacobsen: In a transactional sense of “esse, est percipi,” does the being of one inform the being of another via the mutual act of perception?

Sorenson: I think that the “perceived being” informs the “perceptual subject,” nevertheless the latter “partially perceives” the first, and therefore “completes the rest,” based on its “own subjectivity,” regarding its “self and circumstances,” in order to ultimately “reach to form” what I will denominate as “hybrid gestaltic perception.”

Jacobsen: If individual consciousness is an ephemeral sense of the here-and-now, and to grasp itself, as in to turn the “esse, est percipi” upon the self, then it becomes an attempt to “see one’s own back,” which doesn’t work. It is an interesting framing because it appears to imply others are required, more than one operator is required, for a more verified self-existence to make sense and be confirmed in a more certain sense, as attempts on one’s own lead to evaporation of the self based on its “ephemeral” nature. Could there be such a case of a single brain split in consciousnesses able to perceive themselves (itself) in one body?

Sorenson: I believe it “should be possible,” as long as it is based on a “profoundly gifted brain.” The key for achieving it, is by expanding ourselves into other “higher dimensions of consciousness.” The restriction will outcome for “common brains,” since they can only reach “three dimensions,” that I will represent as “body, mind and soul.” The challenge is to first incorporate “the spirit,” in order to access a “fourth dimension,” and afterwards through a “superior self,” that would be a “portion of the total self,” to enter into a level of consciousness of “two or three dimensions higher” than what is known as “common consciousness dimension.”

Jacobsen: Are we really a unified consciousness or more of a committee coming to more or less singular aims at any given moment with only the apparency of the unity of mind?

Sorenson: At the level of “consciousness” in which we find ourselves, we have managed to recognize that in addition to “forming a group entity,” we are capable of being aware of our” individual entity,” but not to the point of having “crystallized individualization,” and therefore not to a level of “consciousness unity.”

Jacobsen: Can you expand on a “science” that ‘goes father’ “with capital letters”?

Sorenson: This science would be “less technocratic,” able to “unite all its branches integrally into only one,” capable of “overcoming the scientific method,” and empirically that “dispenses with inductive thought.”

Jacobsen: What is contemporary science “with lower case letters”? What is current philosophy “with lower case letters”?

Sorenson: In my opinion currently it is an increasingly “micro-cephalic,” “dissociated” and “superficial” science.

In regards to today’s philosophy, I feel it “is a den of ignorant doctorates” and “fancy professors” who “stubbornly” repeat a “moth-smelling speech.”

Jacobsen: What is absent in the shining of “reason commonsense”?

Sorenson: The “self-referential” supremacy of “basic dichotomous and involutive impulses.”

Jacobsen: What are some hints of this higher reality comprised of greater complexity in comprehension (all-at-once understanding)?

Sorenson: The fact that there may be “an intersection or simultaneous trans-position” between “different and co-existent realities,” where meanwhile “temporality runs in another direction,” “principle of non-contradiction is abolished,” and that of “sufficient reason” is replaced by one of “necessary reason.”

Jacobsen: Does this make umbers autonomous quanta of the ideal reality?

Sorenson: “Numbers” as “original forms” of the “ideal world” are “autonomous,” nevertheless as “descriptors of natural reality” are “not autonomous,” since although they “aren’t material” they are though “representations” of “ideal numbers,” to which we “don’t have any access,” but “that we could do,” if “complex realities” were able to be reached

Jacobsen: What would permit a tapping into the internal nature of a number itself?

Sorenson: More than “touching the internal nature of number” in itself, would be “to contemplate it” within “its ideal state,” since with that condition it could be found in “its very essence,” and therefore regarding “internal nature,” there “would be nothing within something.” The quickest and most direct “probable path” to achieve this, should be “through death.”

Jacobsen: Why is the ideal world spiritual? What is the meaning of spiritual in this sense?

Sorenson: “Spiritual” within all the “energy vibrations,” is a state “equivalent” to one that “was emanated” during a supposed “breath of creation,” and therefore by “achieving that equivalence,” we can “make the way back” to return towards the “emanating vessels.”

Jacobsen: To make a number in and of itself “brought down” to human comprehension, the use of mathematical and numeric symbolization limit the infinite nature of an ideal world number.

Sorenson: I think so, since “the numbers” as we know them, are in certain way “an embodiment” of them in an “ideal state,” and therefore they are “impoverished representations” of what they are “in reality.” However, on the other hand that “limited form,” is the “only way” we have so far “to access them.”

Jacobsen: What makes a model of ideal reality both ontologically and aesthetic (beautiful or satisfying in a non-carnal sense)?

Sorenson: “Harmony” and “perfection.”

Jacobsen: If intelligence is somewhat immaterial, does this provide a proper framework to seeing how this can reproduced algorithmically in silica? In that, it is about the pattern of information channeling the processing rather the material substrate or physical manifestation. It is about the form rather than substance upon which the form is represented in many, but not all, cases.

Sorenson: “Information processing” has to do “with both,” that is with “form and matter.” In the case of “human intelligence,” the “substance” would “have to do” with “the form,” since the former would refer to “its essential attributes.” Nevertheless, as it seems to me that the “question implicitly” aimed to know what happens to “artificial intelligence,” then it is necessary to specified that regarding this case, it would “be the other way around,” because “the matter as material substrate” is going to act as “substance,” in order to determine the “formal characteristics” which would channelled to “processing the information.”

Jacobsen: If an ideal reality represented by an infinity sign is in some sense a bottom, and if the numbers of this ideal reality rather than in the mathematical descriptors of this reality co-exist as an extended part of it, and if a property of aseity is implied by an autonomous existence, does this mean that time is a derivative rather than a fundamental of ideal reality? In that, time is in the shadow or image reality rather than the ideal reality and, therefore, the property of time comes out as a shadow of a reality of no time in which atemporality is an extended meaning of aseity or autonomous existence.

Sorenson: In my opinion, in the “ideal world” of “subsisting entities,” the “only form of temporality” that exists “is present,” which “is not strictly temporary,” and therefore “does exists” nevertheless “time does not,” since in this context “present is not being a delimited instance.” For this reason paradoxically, in “our reality “and perhaps in others of “greater complexity” where “temporality exists,” what we name strictly speaking “as present, does not really exists.”

Jacobsen: What is logic a delimitation or self-limitation of, in reality?

Sorenson: Both “are logical,” but have “different connotations,” since “self-limitation” can be due to “metaphysical” factors, that’s to say regarding “beings order” or in reason to “circumstantial” elements, or perhaps “the two of them,” while “delimitation” usually is “a subjective exercise,” in relation to “certain reality” which is “cut into parts,” and in that sense “its outlined figuratively or not.”

Jacobsen: If everything stopped bubbling means a stoppage of all motion, and if the classical world of the large-scale physics shows a dynamic but apparently solid universe, does this mean the universe is in some sense moving toward a state of ultimate staticization? A state of penultimate stoppage; if so, what differentiates the image reality or shadow reality if everything came to a stop and the ideal reality at that point? It would seem the universe moves, in some manner, to closer and closer approximations to some subset state of the ideal reality.

Sorenson: I consider that the “world of classical physics,” does not exhaustively represents “reality of the universe,” since among other things, has operated with “linear causality criteria,” and in fact also “current physics” continues to do so even though uses “other forms of causality.” I believe indeed that “movement exists” regarding “ours dimensional reality,” and in that context, what is described in this question, might effectively occur. Nevertheless, I am not sure that “movement does exists” in “other realities,” and therefore if hypothetically “doesn’t exists,” it would be plausible to affirm that perhaps “the universe” only “expands and compresses” within a “crooked circularity process” and in consequence it could be deducible to believe that is “indestructible.”

Jacobsen: What are other important qualitative differences one sees at the level of the profoundly gifted?

Sorenson: Besides the fact that they might reach “higher dimensions of conscience” and that they are “ultra-sensibles,” is the circumstance that “they never” will be individuals with “equilibrated intelligences,” since this last apart from being “a logical counter-sense,” is “a lack of respect” towards the “intelligence” of “geniuses,” because it is “a sneaky way” of approaching to “a magical realism” in order to “try to normalize” their personalities and “turn them off.”

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Independent Philosopher.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 8, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-six; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/01

Abstract

Christian is a Philosopher that comes from Belgium. What identifies him the most and above all is simplicity, for everything is better with “vanilla flavour.” Perhaps, for this reason, his intellectual passion is criticism and irony, in the sense of trying to reveal what “hides behind the mask,” and give birth to the true. For him, ignorance and knowledge never “cross paths.” What he likes the most in his leisure time, is to go for a walk with his wife. He discusses: the main forces at play in international affairs and politics; economics create a basis for peace-time and war-time; current conflagrations between the two juggernauts, China and the United States, and the fraying of the European Union, the freeing itself of colonial rule in Latin America, and the continual self-impoverishment of the Russian Federation due to expenses diverted from the direct wellbeing of its people;  China or is the United States acting in a more irresponsible manner; Brexit; Latin America – Central and South America; Russian Federation; Sino-Russian relations; the Middle East; New Political Cosmogonia; imperialist ambitions of the United States; the East and the West; a just state; an equitable state; a just state and an equitable state of a nation come together; materials goods necessary to live a modern base life; pyramidal cascade of grace; member countries of the European Union fighting one another; biological terrorism; Different governments – leftist, rightist, centrist, and the derivatives; a global culture with men having more sense and acting with more maturity; biological terrorist attacks emanating from China; if the European Union fractionates; the majority of this ongoing political and economic tension; the confrontation one and the other ‘will be killed’”; the dumb hunting traps placed on the road for President Trump by the Chinese; acting in a more irresponsible manner; many Russians blinded with a love for Putin; the greatest leader now; the Americans, the Russians, and the Chinese; authoritarian or liberal democratic tendencies; the looming threats of anthropogenic climate change and nuclear catastrophe; the earliest recorded moment of anti-Semitism; anti-Semitism developed over time; experienced any of this in personal life; hatred used as a political tool; the support of some fundamentalist Christian sects for the Jewish people out of some biblical prophecy of the end of day; anti-Semitism portrayed in media; important ways to combat anti-Semitism; effective authors, speakers, organizations, and movements in culture to reduce the fear, stereotyping, and hatred of Jewish peoples; “Messianic” and “Messianic Era”; Jewish peoples in the “Masada massacre”; forms of intelligence seem strongest in Jewish peoples; wife attacked by an Islamic fundamentalist; a form of blaming Jewish peoples simply for being Jewish; any deep meaning to “Jewish pig” ; Jewish peoples become a common group rather than others as an outsourcing of blame for political ineptitude; chosen people; Christian theologians justify group bigotry over one person’s act of murder of their claimed Messiah; Spielberg; Golda; fundamentalist Christian idea in the United States of hoping for the annihilation of the Jewish peoples for Christ to come back in glory; Jung; Freud; cultural strength behind this for the Jewish peoples; g; counter this theological excuse; the “reins” of the most influential and strategic spheres; a literal protection or more of a metaphorical protection; questioning if theology is even useful anymore, or is it more of an intellectual exercise; Christian theology; the conscious the unconscious; the two points of contact; “weak thinking”; cognitive neuroscience; god talk; the world of Academia; dead academics; the language and vital energy of the unconscious; the barrier between the conscious and the unconscious; the conscious and the unconscious; if we integrate with digital computers; the next reasonable step in the advancement of psychopharmacology; aberrant psychological constellations of traits aren’t considered disorders, now, should be seen as disorders; and mental illnesses, syndromes, and disorders are formally psychological issues or psychiatric diagnoses but will likely be removed as the science of the mind advances.

Keywords: Christian Sorenson, politics, psychology, religion.

An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five)[1]^,[2]

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Let’s talk a bit about the current political moment or, rather, moments, the various forces at play in the world. What do you consider the main forces at play in international affairs and politics?

Christian Sorenson: Even if it is a premature diagnosis, since neither the international community nor the United States has become aware of it, I think there has been a “deep schism,” and probably with “no-return,” which I will name as “new political cosmogonia.” The “hegemonic power” of the United States, in all senses, and its “imperialist expansion ambitious,” have been “neutralized” and “forcluded” by a big giant. If this is so, then the main “paternalistic leader,” and “protector” of the West has been “displaced,” and lost his place, with remote possibilities of being able to reposition itself again. Obviously, if it is “not one,” then it is “the other,” however beyond that, is presumable, that the control that the East will exercise over the West, from now on, is going to be based on a policy profile that could be denominated as “passive-aggressive submission,” because will not only imply an “ideological turn” tending towards the “left side,” but also “cultural dis-encounters,” that are going to unleash greater “conflicts” than those that already existed. Therefore, if those felt “differences,” are in a framework of “political fundamentalism” or “theocratic policies,” then it could be expected, that rather than being assimilated, they are going to be “introjected” by exercising “violence of conscience.”

2. Jacobsen: How does economics create a basis for peace-time and war-time?

Sorenson: Depending, if respectively they promote “human solidarity,” through the development of a more “just” and “equitable “society, that allows “material-goods,” to be “reachable” and “profitable” by everyone. Or if instead, what they encourage is the “social-class struggle,” accentuating the “gap” between the most rich and poor people, whether by “liberalizing” or “capitalizing” everything, including those “goods,” that constitute “basic rights,” such as “education” and “health.” And basing their “enrichment philosophy,” on a “distorted pre-conception” that believes that there should be a sort of “pyramidal cascade of grace,” between the “apex” of the most powerful, and the “base” of the most dispossessed.

3. Jacobsen: Looking at the current conflagrations between the two juggernauts, China and the United States, and the fraying of the European Union, the freeing itself of colonial rule in Latin America, and the continual self-impoverishment of the Russian Federation due to expenses diverted from the direct wellbeing of its people, how are the United States and China going to resolve this issue? Some related questions to follow.

Sorenson: It does not seem to me, that there is a liberation from colonial rule in Latin America, nor in Europe. In fact, I think it is quite “the opposite,” since there is a strong “interventionism,” of the “Chinese-Russian-Iranian” trio in countries with leftist governments, and also an insistent attempt to “undermine and overthrow,” liberal democracies. Interventionism, has been direct and comprehensive in “socialist-oriented” governments such as Venezuela, Nicaragua, and until recently Bolivia. Simultaneously there are “militarized” invading actions “economically camouflaged,” as is the case of Argentina, with the project that aims to build a Chinese nuclear reactor next year. Something similar, occurs in a more accentuated form in the European continent, being even worse, since we currently can verify how “their own colonies, are now colonizing them.” The “dismemberment” of the European Union, has been “indirectly” induced by the Iranian influence, with China’s back-up, and “directly” by the large migratory masses since 2015, which together with the “terrorist attacks,” have collaborated to destabilize its “economies” and “policies,” because the member countries have come into conflicts with each other. Actually I believe, that’s not possible any more to talk about “terrorist attacks,” as something light and simply, due to the fact that a “new category” has emerged for me, which I will name as “biological terrorism.” Therefore, it would be necessary to differentiate between those that are of “explosive nature” and the latter. The above could be said, based on what has happened with the “pandemic” in Europe, since it can be clearly stated in my opinion, that its origin was due to “biological terrorist attacks” perpetrated by China, who differed from the “classic ones,” by the fact that “terrorists,” instead from being “loaded with explosives,” now they charge themselves “with viruses.” The fate of the European Union, taking into account the “accumulated crisis,” that was already drafting, which by the way also has triggered strong “separatists” and “nationalists movements,” along with the “shocks” of the pandemic, has shown its worst face even with their owns, as with what has happened to Italy and Spain, in which they “turned their backs” against them. I feel that all this “catastrophic constellation,” shows above everything, that at this moment the European Union is in “the intensive care unit,” and that this story is ultimately “a chronicle of an announced death.” I see that the escalation of aggressions, has been increasing, not only between the United States and China, but also with the Russian Federation, which in others, diverts all its resources towards the “arming race” held for long with the States, and that lately has also intervened in favor of its ally. Given the “fatal dynamic condition” of the current political situation, I believe that within at least the “near future,” there is no solution to the conflict between the United States and China. And even more, it is sustainable to think that what we are “experiencing,” is already a “third world war on going.”

4. Jacobsen: Is China or is the United States acting in a more irresponsible manner? If both, what way for either?

Sorenson: For me it’s like a “Rottweiler fighting against a snake,” both are “lethals,” and from the confrontation one and the other “will be killed.” I believe, that China clearly “committed the murder,” and now is trying to arrange the disaster, that by the way also got out of control from them, by “hiding” with “eastern unflappability” the “weapon,” and the “corpse.” Nevertheless, and “this is the apple of discord,” President Trump, but not the United States, has made the mistake of “over acting,” and falling in every “dumb hunting traps” that the Chinese have “placed on the road.”

5. Jacobsen: With Brexit, and the cascade of negative effects following from this, what is the likely outcome for the integrity – economic, political, inter-national/intra-regional – of the European Union in the 2020s?

Sorenson: There has always been an “historical constant” on the European continent, that is that “history repeats itself, over and over again.” If this is right, then this time it will not be the exception, and things shouldn’t be quite different from before. Although, apparently the cause of the dissolution of the European Union will be attributed to Brexit, since at least for me is a “fact,” that “this is the end,” I feel that paradoxically, that will rather be due to the “strengthening of Germany,” more than anything else. The “deepest wound” that Europe has had until now, which lastly will “emerge” in some way or another if the crisis of the pandemic is overcome, is the “resentment feeling” that exists, against Germany, after its “refused” to provide aid in favor of the “most affected” Schengen countries.

6. Jacobsen: Latin America – Central and South America – have been under the thumb of colonial rulership for a long, long time. Some of the more recent have been the coups and invasions by the United States and others. With a shuffling off their backs of the colonial rule of the United States and others, how will this increased freedom of economic and political activity create a foundation for more just and equitable societies as determined and decided by the peoples of Latin America?

Sorenson: In my opinion is a situation of “out-out,” since “neither one nor the other serves, nor offers any solution.” Central and South America, have what in my opinion are “infra and supra structural” problems, since respectively there are serious “economic” and “educational” “gaps” between the “extreme poverty” that represents the majority of the population, which in many cases is even more accentuated when it’s related to indigenous, and the “richest” by the other side who are a minority. At the same time, the presence of “colonial ambitions” through the most empowered countries, that are “vying for the same steak,” by “strengthening” the “factual powers” of “local governments,” in exchange for “agreeing” to be intervened, by “sacrificing their own people,” in order to obtain geo-political advantages or economical benefits, over their natural resources, as is the case, for example, with Venezuela’s oil, does not precisely improves the “state of affairs” on this continent. The only solution from my point of view, is “one that is absurd,” in order to arrive to more just and equitable societies. That would be something analogous to “empty” the continent of their people and resources, and in that way by “eliminating the bitch, the dog cam would be ended.”

7. Jacobsen: The Russian Federation continues its long run under a former KGB operative, President Vladimir Putin, while its GDP remains below Canada with a significantly higher population than Canada. This single metric can sing a thousand songs and a tell a hundred tales. What is the sustainability of the situation for the Russian Federation?

Sorenson: I feel that, its people, their nationalism, and the “blinded love” towards Putin.

8. Jacobsen: How will Sino-Russian relations develop as Russian & American antagonisms remain below the surface and Chinese & American antagonisms remain above it?

Sorenson: From now on, I do not think that there will continue to be “antagonisms” of any kind or “changes, regarding their positions,” in the “power-relations” between them. Rather what’s going to arrive, is a “maintained “or “fixed” “position-power” on what regards the Russian Federation and China from one side, and the United States from the other. Being in this “dynamic,” the existence of “resignation and submission,” the “most prevalent feelings” of this last, since for this nation they won’t be “enough resources” nor “state of minds” in order to face “anything powerfully.”

9. Jacobsen: Will the Middle East continue to be unstable?

Sorenson: I feel in this case, that there are “questions” that “really aren’t,” and “problems” that “do not exist,” when respectively what is happening, is that the “answer” is “known beforehand,” and the “solution” is “nowhere.”

10. Jacobsen: For this New Political Cosmogonia, does this mean a largely bipolar world (China and the United States) shifting into a multipolar world (when more than bi-)?

Sorenson: According to this “New Political Cosmogonia,” the United States would be “de-profiled,” as the “world’s leading power,” and with that, the world is going to cease to be a “bipolar-based” on two main blocks, western and eastern respectively, and instead should moved to a “tripolar-based” conformation, sustained on “three fundamental poles,” around of which all countries will gravitate. One of them would be around China, the other will focus on the United States and a third would be constituted by the European countries, which regardless of whether or not the European Union will continue existing, still will remain forming a single bloc in terms of “extra-European policies.” In this regard, Europe, as the “third pole,” is going to try to occupy an “intermediate” position, that would serve to “mediate” between the “other two,” against matters that may cause conflicts that put world peace at risk. Nevertheless, this last, “deep down” would be a “strategical way,” to obtain greater “commercials” and “economics” benefits.

11. Jacobsen: For the imperialist ambitions of the United States, how will continued escalations or conflagrations harm both countries? How will their feuding impact nations closest in their economic and politics networks?

Sorenson: In my opinion, this crisis that “affects hopelessly” the United States, will be seen by many of the countries that were close until now, as a “negative influence,” from which it is better to stay away, so as not to be economically or politically in risk. The “marriage of convenience,” that many countries had with the States, taking advantage of the “display of power” that was exhibited, is going to “cool down” and “take distance,” and will ultimately leave the United States, “quite alone” on the world stage.

12. Jacobsen: How will the East and the West continue to pull apart from one another culturally? How will this cultural arrogance in either case exhibit itself?

Sorenson: The East, always has thought that “if it is more, then is better.” They operate on a “quantitative,” and not with a “qualitative” basis, because they intend to sustained their power, through a “purely numerical approach.” It is for this reason, in my opinion that one of its primary objectives has been to “invade” the world by “over-populating” it from their eastern countries, and by using this “population superiority,” as a means to introduce their “own cultures,” pretending through a “passive-imposition” or “passive-resistance,” to bypass every other culture. In this sense, they have no intentions of living “harmoniously” and “respectfully” with the other ones, and much less they intend to “integrate” with them. What they actually seek, is to “invade” and “conquer” the West by “coercion,” similar as happened in “Sandokan’s” tale, with the “expressed desire” of making any Western cultural vestige, to lastly “disappear.”

13. Jacobsen: What is a just state?

Sorenson: A state, that watches over the “common good,” and respects “distributive justice,” understanding by this, the fact that everyone, has the “same right” of access to “property.”

14. Jacobsen: What is an equitable state?

Sorenson: A state, that respects and defends “human dignity” above all things, since does not discriminates in function of ethnic, cultural and beliefs differences.

15. Jacobsen: How do a just state and an equitable state of a nation come together? What countries represent this tendency?

Sorenson: I feel, that this would be possible if those who “rule nations” were really the “best prepared” ones, from an “intellectual” and “deontological” point of view, and if they took into account, that “power” must be used exclusively to “serve people.” In my opinion, at the moment there is “no country” capable to represent this trend. I affirm the above, not because I believe that just and equitable nations “were an ideal,” but rather the opposite, because I am convinced, that nations “as they are,” are in turn “perfectibles,” and therefore it is actually possible to reach that aspiration as a “goal-model.”

16. Jacobsen: In these contexts of materials goods necessary to live a modern base life, what makes them rights rather than privileges?

Sorenson: I believe in fact, that they not only “collaborate,” either “directly” or “indirectly” in the “production chain,” but also and primarily, that they

are “essential” for its existence. And therefore, it is logical to assume that is a right for them, to have “access” and “participate profitably” of it.

17. Jacobsen: This pyramidal cascade of grace, this trickling down hypothesis, what does this mean for populations in destitute circumstances in some peoples in the Middle East, in some states of the African Union, and in several transitioning economies in Asia? Will they replicate this form of life and waterfall economy or shirk it entirely?

Sorenson: What this “pyramid” means to me, is that “grace” must flow towards the base after has “overflowed” the apex. That is once the “wealth” exceeds the “abundance to the richest,” it should drip downward, until “gravity” reaches to the “most deprived.” According to this approach, “wealth” would flow “only in one direction,” and depending on the “scraps discarded” by the richest. As a “goods distribution system,” it seems to me that not only is applicable in these places, but also that it is “convenient” and “coherent” with them to do so. Since they are regions, where what exists is people that acts as “human masses” or “human hordes,” and therefore that are “easily manipulable,” due to the extreme conditions of “poverty” and “lack of education” in which they live. When I think in this “philosophy of life,” I remember the Christian “image” of “the poor Lazarus,” who stood under the table along with dogs, waiting for the rich to drop a “crumb of bread to spare.”

18. Jacobsen: How are the member countries of the European Union fighting one another?

Sorenson: Since they all, have ever made statements of “mutual rights” and “human rights,” that they promised to defend and aid, but when they have to “pass into act,” and “put their hands in pockets” in order to pull out money, then they “back down,” for defending their own “nationalist interests,” to the detriment of those who regard the European community.

19. Jacobsen: Any other examples of the proposed “biological terrorism”?

Sorenson: In a similar context, but not as an “unprecedented fact,” as it happened with China. They can be pointed out, some epidemics in Africa, such as Ebola, which show evident “external intervention.”

20. Jacobsen: Different governments – leftist, rightist, centrist, and the derivatives – come from different sensibilities. Different forms of governance imply different leadership. To prevent global civilizational collapse, what forms of government make most sense now? Obviously, we cannot continue to have petty intra-regional and inter-national (nation to nation) squabbles. It seems unsustainable with the power of technology and the integration of the world’s various deeply interdependent networks.

Sorenson: If all “forms of governments,” from the most “purist” to the more “eclectic” ones, have demonstrated their “inability” to satisfy the “demands” of people, regardless of their nationalities. And on the other hand, not even with the “alternation in power,” they have managed to “fulfill” their “expectations.” Then it is presumable to conclude, that at present time none of them will be capable of preventing a global collapse, and therefore it is necessary to develop a “novel conception” of these. In order to reach that goal, two conditions would be necessary. Respectively, to “re-define” a new original principle, and to “centralize” the entire world government in “just one.” Regarding the first of them, it is essential to understand, that all the forms emerged until now, have born from “ideal associations,” that after being theorized, were implemented into practice, by making “reality to fit” abruptly into them, as if they were “rigid molds.” Based on the latter, it would be required to follow an “opposite method” of process, by first of all, developing “citizen consultations,” in order to allow people, based on their “needs and priorities” to reach and define it first, and by “raising” afterwards an “ideal-form.” In consequence, the achievement of a “flexible” and “adaptable” conception related to “reality” and to a “theoretical model” of government as well, would ultimately make them “fit-ables” and run more smoothly in practice.

21. Jacobsen: Following from the previous question, what types of governances are needed as reflected by particular leadership styles – as those seen in leaders in the past?

Sorenson: In my opinion, “none of them” are needed. The first thing to do, would be to “centralize” the entire world government, physically speaking in “one, and only one entity,” And then, to “transfer” leadership towards people, by focusing its “management” on them, in such a way that “who rules,” only plays an “auditory” and “subsidiary” control role.

22. Jacobsen: Jerry Seinfeld joked, one time, about men, more or less, living as if low-level superheroes in our own little worlds. Mencken remarked on the vanity of most men and the sense of most women. What could build a global culture with men having more sense and acting with more maturity (not seeing themselves as the center of the universe on a superhero’s crusade for justice, truth)? Those sensibilities leading to an electorate and a leadership, if male, with more reality-testing, a balanced sense of the real world, and a balanced intelligence. I note far more variance in reality-testing ability of men and in the manifestations of intelligence in men with power, title, and influence.

Sorenson: I feel that, through a “global culture,” that “dethrones” all kinds of “phallic images” in society, and that promotes and protects “trans-gender ideology” since school education, and in turn also empowers “trans-gender parent families.”

23. Jacobsen: What is the evidence for the claim of an origin of biological terrorist attacks emanating from China rather than a bat-to-human transmission of a coronavirus in a Chinese wet market? Isn’t the latter more in line with the vast majority of evidence, reportage, and the principle of parsimony?

Sorenson: If there is something for which the “evidences” provided by the authorities in this “plan-demic” are useful, is that allows to be “certain” of “what it is not being.” For this reason, we must be thankful of the “childish evidences” facilitated, and the “parsimony” of them, but in a “simplistic sense,” since their contributions with all kinds of absurd explanations, “do not resist any kind of logical analysis.” For naming only some, this happened for example, with the “hypothesis of cross contamination,” when at that time “bats” were in their “hibernation period,” and therefore were not traded in markets. Or what occurred, regarding the assumption that the “virus was of natural origin,” when in its genetic mapping, shows cuts at four points with “grafts from the HIV virus.”

If we want to argue about “real evidences,” to see if such “conspiracy theory” mentioned by me, “hits the target or not,” and watch out because probably will not be the only one, since other dozen of “viruses,” have already been synthesized at the “Chinese Military Academy of Medical Sciences,” in order to evaluate the impact over humans. Then it might be helpful to verify that “this bat-virus,” is almost “not-immunogenic,” that is to say with zero immunogenic capacity, which should not exist in viruses of natural origin. What this last means, is that those who have overcome “the contagion,” will be infected “again and again” until they probably die, and therefore, there is no such “community or herd immunity,” neither “categories of supposed recovered patients,” since mathematically, and strictly speaking, they have the “same probability” of dying that the “uninfected” ones. And consequently, the search for “herd immunity” is a big error because does nothing else but to “accelerate” the death of people. In this sense this “virus,” in my opinion is a sort of “highlander-type killing machine,” that will never disappear, unless the population disappears first, or a treatment is discovered.

Somehow, in summary, I believe in this case and regarding evidences, that “the content of this wine bottle, is more important than its label.”

24. Jacobsen: If the European Union fractionates, what will be the outcome in Western Europe and Eastern Europe?

Sorenson: I think, Eastern Europe would especially regress in its “economy,” and will probably be more largely exposed to the influence of the Russian Federation. Regarding Western Europe, the “superiority” of the re-unification of Germany would be felt, and become even stronger. In turn, the countries that were always like “poor and retarded brothers,” such as Spain and Portugal, but which were the “trailers pulled” until now by the European Union, would return to “their small town country place of yesteryears.” And perhaps, the strengthening of “local nationalisms,” will lead to the “separation” and “independence” of some regions, and therefore definitely “fracture” some countries, such as Spain, Belgium and maybe Italy.

25. Jacobsen: Can the majority of this ongoing political and economic tension reflect itself as a war-time scenario happening in real-time on the internet?

Sorenson: I feel that, instead of being a scenario of war-time, happening on the internet, is rather the “time scenario,” of a “third world war,” which is underway through “the timing” of a “war of communications.”

26. Jacobsen: You note “the confrontation one and the other ‘will be killed’.” Why both?

Sorenson: Because I believe President Trump “is wrong,” when he invokes “inside its conscience,” the “lex Talionis” regarding “an aye for an eye,” and “a tooth for… A tooth.” Since his “response,” is being given in an “outside-other register” than the one gave by the Chinese in their “offensive,” and what is worse, that is “out-of-timing.” If this is actually occurring, then is logical to imagine, that if the “escalation of hostilities” continues, President Trump, is going to feel “cornered,” and therefore will react by making a “forceful attack,” wishing to make China “disappear,” either in a “real” or “imaginary” sense. This last, in turn would lead to China to respond, by giving a “final thrust” to the United States.

27. Jacobsen: What have been the dumb hunting traps placed on the road for President Trump by the Chinese?

Sorenson: It should be noted that of all, the first “dumb hunting trap,” was placed by the same President Trump “on himself.” When until recently, he did not “stop flaunting” about his “super-powers,” perhaps as a way of “over-compensating” the “length of his ties.” Indeed, I think that in this case, one of “the principles” fulfilled, is the one that says that “if you tell me of what you presume, I will tell you what you lack.” Other “decoys,” in which he has fallen, were to “minimize” the severity of the epidemic, by adopting a “denialist attitude,” even in relation to the consequences that could affect the United States. To some extent they were expressly consented, since until now its “main concern,” is not to slow down the economy, especially in relation to “sea cruises,” that are businesses in which he has a “stake.” Likewise, his “deafness,” to listen at everyone, but especially to the scientific advisers, who had been warning for two years, about the need to take measures to prevent this incoming pandemic. And the worst of all, I would say “the thorn in its back,” which is the bad habit to “dis-appreciate” the threats of the most dangerous enemies. Not only “not realizing,” that “there is no small enemy” but what is even more serious, by the fact of not being aware that the “worst enemy,” sometimes arrives to be “the smallest of all.”

28. Jacobsen: Is China or is the United States acting in a more irresponsible manner? If both, what way for either?

Sorenson: I think, they are both irresponsible. China, was irresponsible at the beginning, because apart from the “global damage,” caused “intentionally” by them, did not “dimensioned” that it was going to “be greater” than imagined, and that additionally the situation was going to get “out of control.” For its part, the United States was not responsible “before” the beginning, when having all the resources in its hands, “refused” to take “preventive measures,” to avoid the pandemic. And by the way, it is also doing so now, since has “overlapped” economy above everything, including the “lives and rights of its citizens,” and because instead of “resolving” the conflict with China has “increasingly accentuated” it, that in the best of scenarios, will leave us all in a “New Cold War.”

29. Jacobsen: Why are many Russians blinded with a love for Putin?

Sorenson: Because they see in Putin, the image of a “Siberian bear,” who at the same time is “wild” and has “refined tastes.” “Protector” of his country, but “sensitive” and “close” to people. With a “strong temper,” capable of dominating a tiger, only with his “personal charm,” as well as getting the rest of the world to “respect” him, and “think twice” before “wanting” to start any conflict.

30. Jacobsen: Who seems like the greatest leader now? I do not mean power of military, size of economy, and popularity in the polls. I mean character and virtue required for true leadership.

Sorenson: I feel that “Pope Francis I,” especially when it “comes to mind,” his “passion” for soccer, and when I think about the “character” and “virtues,” of the “simpleton priest of my town.”

31. Jacobsen: Are the Americans, the Russians, and the Chinese – their respective ruling and governing elites – willing to continue in an indefinite stalemate?

Sorenson: Maybe now, but “maybe not” after we enter the “Messianic era.”

32. Jacobsen: Will authoritarian or liberal democratic tendencies win out in the end?

Sorenson: I don’t think so, since both are a “failure.” But I also believe, that the “best government,” is going to be the one that arises, after “money has been eliminated” from the world.

33. Jacobsen: What about the looming threats of anthropogenic climate change and nuclear catastrophe?

Sorenson: I believe that currently, there is a “planning” strategy that searches to “eliminate” almost all the world population, and expects to leave at the end, no more than one hundred million inhabitants. This basically would be executed through “biological controls,” exercised by the “progressive introduction” of untreated diseases, poverty and famine. The goal, is to start a “novel civilization,” mainly based on “technological” and “molecular genetics” developments, in order to improve and facilitate the “foundation” of other forms of societies, sustained on new “anthropological” conceptions and “ethical” values.

34. Jacobsen: A lot of the thinking in the world is dichotomous. In that, there is a claim to some binary invisible ordering of our lives. One of the forms in which this arises in the concept of good and evil, god and the devil, angels and demons, and the good people and the bad people. Some of the manifestations of this can take the form of ethnic hatreds. One of those is anti-Semitism. What seems like the earliest recorded moment of anti-Semitism?

Sorenson: One of the most recorded images I have, is the site and massacre of “Masada” by the Romans. I feel that it is not only a demonstration of anti-Semitism, but also the “exhibition,” in its greatest splendor, of what “human cowardice and cruelty” can reach.

35. Jacobsen: How has anti-Semitism developed over time, fractionated into different forms?

Sorenson: I feel that throughout history, “the theme,” has not varied regardless of whether it was the Inquisition, Nazism or the persecution of Egypt. Since, we have always “been envied” for being the chosen people, or for having a greater degree of intelligence, and “strategically control the world since ever.”

36. Jacobsen: Fundamentally, anti-Semitism is a perception of the world as one divided in the manner mentioned before with good people and bad people. Good people are those are non-Semites and the bad people are those who are Semites. Then the rest of a hatred, prejudice, and bigotry follow from this. Have you experienced any of this in personal life?

Sorenson: Indirectly yes, when my wife was once brutally attacked by an Islamic fundamentalist, unfortunately these cases go “unpunished,” as authorities justifies the aggressors as “poor deranged,” who were provoked by the “mere presence” of a Jew. Directly also, since “my sweet childhood,” I guess so. When among other things, my stepfather often reminded me that I was a “Jewish pig.”

37. Jacobsen: How is this form of hatred used as a political tool?

Sorenson: I think they have always been used as a “scape-goat,” and with a “double standard” to divert attention and blame the Jews, due to “the political ineptitude” they have to rule their nations.

38. Jacobsen: What is the nature of the support of some fundamentalist Christian sects for the Jewish people out of some biblical prophecy of the end of days, or some such thing? How is this taken so seriously as to be politically consequential in places like the United States?

Sorenson: I believe that the most “classical and common accusation,” from the religious point of view, is to blame Jews of “having murdered Christ,” and therefore they are obliged to “pay eternally” for that sin. In the United States, the racist idea of ​​thinking that they “transmit genetic defects,” that spoil the purity of a supposed “superior race,” has gained a lot of strength in “white supremacist groups.” And from a political sight, the “Zionist conspiracy theory,” such as the “Andean plan” to appropriate the “world’s freshwater reserves” in the Patagonia of South America, which among others is becoming increasingly popular, since according these, Jews would try to “globally control” through the economy, communications and politics, in order to “seize all the resources,” and “dominate the entire world.”

39. Jacobsen: How is anti-Semitism portrayed in media?

Sorenson: Through the press, showing a “biased” vision of Israel, and in turn associating it with a “Nazi state” that commits “genocidal crimes” against Palestinians. Also by “ridiculing” the Orthodox diaspora communities, through “any type of events and circumstances.” And “hypocritically promoting,” all kinds of means that strengthen the “boycott against Israel.” The aforementioned, is what they currently denominate mainly in Europe, as “anti-Zionism,” which in my opinion, is nothing more than a “cynical excuse” to hide the “real face of the new anti-Semitism.”

40. Jacobsen: What are important ways to combat anti-Semitism?

Sorenson: I feel that first of all, and along with “not being afraid of anti-Semitism,” is to apply what for me is the “golden rule,” this is “we must respect and make ourselves respected.” And secondly, that we “do not have to hide,” quite the contrary, “we must dare to show ourselves,” and “feel proud of our customs and of being Jews.”

41. Jacobsen: Finally, who have been effective authors, speakers, organizations, and movements in culture to reduce the fear, stereotyping, and hatred of Jewish peoples?

Sorenson: From a political point of view I think we have great examples like “Golda Mier.” Culturally speaking Steven Spielberg, has made important contributions regarding the “collective unconscious.” As well, all Jewish community organizations or leagues in diaspora, such as anti-Semitic ones, those of social aid, like Wizo, and Maguen Adom, or with lay- religious purposes, as Chabad and reformists.

42. Jacobsen: What do you mean by “Messianic” and “Messianic Era”?

Sorenson: What will occur when the “diasporic exile” of Jewish people ends, because we all are going to return to Israel. And when all nations, recognize “its anointed,” the God of Israel who will be invested to “rule both,” Jewish people and the rest of humanity, so that “peace and justice reigns.”

43. Jacobsen: What things were done to Jewish peoples in the “Masada massacre”?

Sorenson: In the context of the First Roman Jewish War, the Jews “were besieged” by the troops of the Roman Empire, and when they saw that “defeat was imminent,” they carried out a “collective suicide,” which in my opinion is a “symbol of self-affirmation and resistance” as Jewish people, who prefer death rather than to “bend themselves” or “be slaves again.”

44. Jacobsen: What forms of intelligence seem strongest in Jewish peoples? Is this innate, culture, or both? How so in any case?

Sorenson: I think it’s definitely an “innate, racial and genetic superiority of general intelligence,” inherited from the mother, recognized by many, “likes it who wants to,” and “annoys it to whoever,” equivalent on average, to “one standard deviation” above the general adult population.

45. Jacobsen: How was your wife attacked by an Islamic fundamentalist? Where was this? What were the health consequences?

Sorenson: It happened here in Belgium, once we were walking back home, a guy pulled out a firearm and aimed it at her head, yelling that “she was a Jewish bitch and that the next time, he would put a bullet in her head.” My wife was terrified, and for a long time felt afraid even to go outside. Says that she doesn’t wants to see an Islamic fundamentalist close to her never again in life.

46. Jacobsen: Following from the last question, does this reflect a form of blaming Jewish peoples simply for being Jewish and being in the presence of an anti-Semite?

Sorenson: In my opinion, it “reflects much more” than the pure “simplicity” of that. And in turn, is “much more serious,” since if “hypothetically” someone arrives to eventually “feels that hate” towards Jews, in the silent and “private sphere” of its personal conscience, which in itself is already “something despicable” … Then, nothing has to do with the rest, or with the fact “of believing” that since the aforementioned, there’s something similar to a “kind of right and freedom,” that authorizes someone for “acting-out” those “irrational beliefs,” through “intolerant” and “aggressive behaviors,” that afterwards are justified by “mental distortions” of fanaticism, that judges them as “licitly-good actions,” or that are “passively protected,” by the “blindness” of justice, that “prefers to hide all the grime under the carpet,” pretending to “make believe” that nothing bad has happened, in order “to protect the political image” of the authorities on duty.

47. Jacobsen: Is there any deep meaning to “Jewish pig” or is this simply a bigoted statement of dehumanization, or both?

Sorenson: Taking into consideration that my mother is Jewish by womb, and of Sephardic origin, since comes from one of the oldest families in the Jewish quarter of Barcelona, about the year 1000​​ AD. I feel that “this epithet,” mainly denoted from my stepfather, who in my opinion suffers of “Procusto’s Syndrome” regarding myself , “his impotence” of not being able to find anything more hurtful, with which to insult, mixed besides, with a “feeling of rage,” because in its daily life, he had to “see the man,” that my mother really loved, and the predilection that she has always had for me, over him and the rest of my half brothers, due to the reason that she considers me her “genius and adored child.”

48. Jacobsen: Why do Jewish peoples become a common group rather than others as an outsourcing of blame for political ineptitude?

Sorenson: Since unlike other ethnic groups, “throughout history,” we “have taken the reins of the world” from the most strategic and influential spheres, which has “sown hatred and rage” accumulated after generations, due to the fact that they have never been able to “assume and tolerate,” that a “small bunch,” has always achieved that and much more, despite the “constants persecutions and atrocities” suffered as people. And what “get hives on their skin” even more, because they have never been capable “to digest” so, though they are aware of it. It is the fact, besides that never they will be superior to us, that “we are like reeds,” since when being alone “we bend but never break,” and together “we are even stronger.”

49. Jacobsen: What does chosen people mean in this context?

Sorenson: What means is that is the people with whom God made a “covenant of alliance,” and therefore that’s “protected” by Hashem, and for which Adonay has a “predilection.”

50. Jacobsen: How do Christian theologians justify group bigotry over one person’s act of murder of their claimed Messiah? It was one person; therefore, it’s all Jewish peoples. “Overgeneralization” doesn’t do this leap justice.

Sorenson: Since Christian theologians, believe that the Messiah they claimed, was also the “son of God made man,” and therefore “the act” of Jews and the Sanhedrin at that time, was even more serious because who they killed was nothing less than “the person of God made man on earth.” From my point of view, this generalization is a “theological excuse” to justify the eternal punishment that Jews must suffer, for “being a treacherous race,” and for “having committed” and “continue to commit,” a much deeper sin, that is to “have denied” and “continue to deny,” who they claimed was the “true Messiah.” Which in consequence implies denying in their consciences, the “redemption of the human species,” from the original sin of our first parents, Adam and Eve, and finally with pretending to keep “the doors of paradise closed.”

51. Jacobsen: Any favourite works by Spielberg?

Sorenson: Personally, the film about “Schindler’s List,” and especially regarding the shocking black and white image of a little girl who is first shown “lining up to go to death row,” and then “highlighted in red,” in the middle of a pile of corpses.

52. Jacobsen: Any favourite quotes by Golda?

Sorenson: For her courage and firmness of decision to execute the “Operation Fury of God.”

53. Jacobsen: What do you think of this fundamentalist Christian idea in the United States of hoping for the annihilation of the Jewish peoples for Christ to come back in glory, from their view?

Sorenson: Indeed, that is what Jehovah’s Witnesses “believe,” since for them this would be a “sign of the end times,” before “the final battle of Armageddon.” The basic issue of it, is that even though they actively desire and promote the annihilation of Jews, they forget that what they affirm “is a sign, as long as Jews disappear.” If this does not happen, which in fact not only does not occur, but also is the opposite because the world Jewish population “increases every year.” Then it would be “not a sign of the end times,” nor consequently the “coming of any Christ in glory and majesty.”

54. Jacobsen: Do you support Jung? If so, how, and what parts? If not, why not? Any idea as to the recent repopularization of Jung?

Sorenson: Despite the fact that Jung tries to reach the depths of “unconscious,” through “archetypal images,” and the “collective unconscious,” it seems to me that his “theoretical proposal,” that at first sight may be striking, nevertheless is “weak and superficial,” since lacks of a “coherent and systematic conceptualization” and it is “adorned by plenty of superfluous and figurative images.” Besides in my opinion, has budgets that may be linked to the “Nazi ideology” and the “Aryan race.” Currently, apart of the “nationalist exacerbations” that are “in vogue,” it has regained strength within the “humanistic and transpersonal” currents of psychology, regarding especially to the “Palo Alto School” in California, and with what I consider as “weak thought” in relation to the “New Age” movement.

55. Jacobsen: Any thoughts on Freud? We have talked using some of the relevant terminology.

Sorenson: I think Freud made an important contribution grace to its “original conceptualization” of the “unconscious.” In my opinion, its two fundamental works regarding the main Freudian concepts are “Die Traumdeutung” and “Jenseits des Lustprinzips.” I consider, that perhaps it would be valuable nowadays, to “return to Freud,” to carry out a “re, re-reading,” worth the redundancy, of his work. However, at the same time I think that the “clinical results” of psychoanalysis,” must be “demystified,” since they have a “strong suggestibility” charge.

56. Jacobsen: You mentioned bending and not breaking. What is a cultural strength behind this for the Jewish peoples, apart from innate factors?

Sorenson: Because we are a “suffering people,” who seems to be “under a sign” since ever. Through wars, slaveries, exiles, exterminations and persecutions, has had to go through the “whimsical destinations of history,” stored already “in our retina” with Goliath and King David, and indeed at the same time symbolized in the “Magen” as a “protective shield.” At least one matter for sure, “comes out of our pores” for generations. The fact that “adversity” repeats cyclically for us “over and over again,” even if “actors change but the plot is identical,” and that “our survival” is inextricably linked to it, though we also “bear in mind,” that some “black and terrible” episodes of our history, whatever this implies, “will never happen again.”

57. Jacobsen: Is this standard deviation above the norm in g or in something factorizing into g, i.e., verbal intelligence?

Sorenson: It is in relation to “factor g,” in Wechsler’s Scale of Intelligence for adults, in which one standard deviation, is equivalent to 15 points on IQ.

58. Jacobsen: What can counter this theological excuse?

Sorenson: In my opinion, through “lay thought,” that combats any type of “intolerance and dogmatism,” derived from the “fanaticism” of “salvific religious doctrines.”

59. Jacobsen: What have been the “reins” of the most influential and strategic spheres?

Sorenson: Since the “Middle Age” until now, with finance, philosophy and science, from antiquity, especially in medicine, and among others with the sage of Maimonides. Until the contemporary time, being up to now eighty percent of the “Nobel Prizes,” and passing through art and literature, for arriving till today, with technology, economy, politics and communications. That is, all that encompasses the “intellectual world of ideas,” in other words “with everything.”

60. Jacobsen: Do you believe in a literal protection or more of a metaphorical protection, as the many mass killings of Jewish peoples would probably raise questions in some Jewish people’s minds, “Chosen for what”?

Sorenson: I feel that the “insistent” historical attempt to “exterminate” the Jewish people, precisely demonstrates, regardless of what it means, that are actually “chosen,” since up to now they have never been able to achieve this proposal. Therefore, from this point of view, it shows the opposite of what they may believe, and allows us to affirm that we are “indeed protected,” because is the people that has the “mission to survive.”

61. Jacobsen: Is theology even useful anymore, or is it more of an intellectual exercise (if not an exercise in futility)?

Sorenson: For me it is as “useless and entertaining,” as it can be “to play Loto,” since is similar to believe that “if I pay” to look for the winning number, “I may find it,” and if I succeed, then “I will be a winner” because “I will be able to enter paradise,” and therefore “I became a millionaire.”

62. Jacobsen: Christian theology has a nice story. However, its violent manifestations tell another narrative in the social world. Why the dichotomy? A story of redemption into a culture of violence and bigotry.

Sorenson: What occurs with Christian theology, is that “with one hand they give” while with “the other, they take away,” or “they hide a dagger to bury it at the right moment.” It is rather a “dualism,” since they occupy a “good and charitable face” to evangelize, but because they consider themselves a religion of “divine origin,” and therefore “sacred and unique,” in consequence they feel with the right to show “their bad face,” by “condemning and forcing with violence” to consciences, in case that someone dares to “reject the truth.”

63. Jacobsen: What is the conscious?

Sorenson: From my point of view, it is the “most superficial” part of the “psychic apparatus,” the seat of all emotions, whose principal function is to “relate with reality,” where the “sense of self” as “self-concept,” and personality as well, are formed in an “imaginary and speculate” way, and where all the processes of “formal reasoning” are developed.

64. Jacobsen: What is the unconscious?

Sorenson: I think it is the “deepest” and “darkest” part of “mind,” that is “structured” with “its own language,” that works “through a force” that is like a “vital energy,” and that strongly “determines” the “psychic world” of an individual.

65. Jacobsen: What relates the two points of contact?

Sorenson: Strictly speaking, I believe that actually “nothing connects” or “communicates” them, and that is one of the reasons why it is very difficult to access “someone’s psychological world,” and to understand “one’s own mind.”

66. Jacobsen: Is “weak thinking” simply a synonym for unprincipled thinking based on little evidence?

Sorenson: Not really, what I mean is that it is a proposal that lacks of a “reasonable background,” since when digging deeper you “don’t get to anything.” It’s like “an onion,” that if you peel it expecting to find “the skin,” not only is it not found, but also you end up “running out of onion.”

67. Jacobsen: Cognitive neuroscience is an interesting marriage between the precision of neuroscience and the operations orientation of cognitive science. How might these provide a firmer basis and tighter standard of evidence for psychoanalysis and understanding the unconscious and the conscious, and so Freud and Jung?

Sorenson: The first matter to understand, is that Freud and Jung have almost nothing in common, since the latter soon separated from the former and of psychoanalysis, to develop what afterwards became known as “Jungian psychology,” which took an orientation more closely related to “humanistic psychology of Gestalt,” and with “Bio-Energetic” proposals. Regarding the main question, it is necessary to understand that “psychoanalytic treatment” as such, has always been “very restricted,” not only due to the fact it lacks “scientific basis,” but because it is very little applicable, since it is extraordinarily expensive and prolonged, and also in reason that requires that patients need to have “high personality structures,” that is to say be more or less “mentally healthy.” This situation has derived in the development of “psychoanalytic-oriented therapies,” that are basically divided into those that are of “brief and longer duration.” These, unlike “psychoanalysis,” are accessible to all “types of patients” and “have scientific support” as solid as “cognitive therapies.” And what is more paradoxical, from the “technical” point of view and “their settings,” both models are quite similar. From this perspective, the point of “inflection,” is not between the “two psychological approaches,” but rather with “neurosciences,” since this last discipline advances at “dizzying steps” in its “psycho-pharmacological methods, and it is much more efficient in terms of “results and velocity of achievements” and at a “much lower cost” than any psychological therapy. This does not mean that “psychotherapy,” is not evolving, but comparatively it is falling further behind than “psycho-pharmacology.” Over time, I think that this “psycho- models” will end up “being obsoletes,” because analogically speaking, the correspondence that existed between the two in Freud’s time, or a couple of decades ago, is “diametrically opposed” to what exists today.

68. Jacobsen: Where does all this god talk leave atheists and agnostics politically and socially in societies?

Sorenson: I feel that “leaves them nowhere,” since for this “kind of talk,” there should be “no-space possible” for atheists nor agnostics,” due to the fact that both “represent evil or evilness,” and therefore must “be fought” through “evangelization” and “extirpated” from life. According to my point of view, the “worst atrocities of humanity,” have been committed in “name of god,” and for this reason, this last has historically “stained its hands with blood,” and used “religion” ultimately as its “persecuting executioner,” in order to “corner freedom” until “strangled,” in order “to uproot” the “deepest part” of dignity.

69. Jacobsen: In the world of Academia, who seem like the most intelligent academics alive now?

Sorenson: James Watson, but more than for its studies on the DNA, for his latest comments on “race and intelligence.”

70. Jacobsen: Of the dead academics, who seem like the most influential and politically consequential now?

Sorenson: Charles Darwin, for his search of “the missing link.”

71. Jacobsen: What is the language and vital energy of the unconscious?

Sorenson: Sex and the “language of lack.”

72. Jacobsen: What could break the barrier between the conscious and the unconscious?

Sorenson: In my opinion, “structurally speaking,” the barrier between both, is “not possible to be broken,” not even through the psychoanalytic treatment, since the “conscious,” is subjected to the “formal process of thought,” and therefore works through “univocal meanings,” while the “unconscious” is shaped based on a “symbolic chain” that “operates metaphorically” by the “absence of symbol,” and in consequence does so with the evocation of “equivocal significations.

73. Jacobsen: What marginally breaks the barrier between the conscious and the unconscious?

Sorenson: I think that it would be factible by a “form of pleasure experience,” understood as a “moment,” and therefore as a “sensation,” that at the same time may be lived as “presence and absence” of something

74. Jacobsen: If we integrate with digital computers, what will this do to the sense of self and identity to human beings?

Sorenson: I believe that it would be possible to “integrate” with digital computers, as long as they have “symbolization capacity,” which would imply that actually they are endowed of what I name as “artificial intelligence with high cognitive capacities.” If this were to occur, we “could relate” each other as equals, and in turn they could “intervene” and eventually “modify our minds.”

75. Jacobsen: What would be the next reasonable step in the advancement of psychopharmacology to help deal with various mental disorders and illnesses?

Sorenson: It seems to me, that in the short term it could be possible to advance in a greater “specialization of some drug families,” such as neuroleptics and antidepressants, in order to cover some “clinical syndromes” that are excessively wide. In turn, would be to work more on the line of “deposit drugs for prolonged release,” more based on what I would denominate as “intelligent self-dosage” regarding “active substances.”

76. Jacobsen: What aberrant psychological constellations of traits aren’t considered disorders, now, should be seen as disorders?

Sorenson: I think that the “diagnostic category” of “sexual paraphilias,” should “be deepened conceptually” speaking and “expanded” respectively regarding “pedophilia,” and “incestuous behaviors,” since until now these are “legitimated” in some cultures. The same should be done, with respect to “antisocial conducts,” in relation to those that “exercise violence and serious mistreatment against women,” such as physical mutilations, slavery, and traffic, which by the way like previous ones, are openly and normally practiced in certain regions.

77. Jacobsen: What mental illnesses, syndromes, and disorders are formally psychological issues or psychiatric diagnoses but will likely be removed as the science of the mind advances?

Sorenson: In my opinion those related to certain “types of addictive behaviors,” especially regarding “consumption of drugs,” and “sexual dysmorphic syndromes,” associated with “gender identity disorders.”

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Independent Philosopher.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/01

Abstract

John Collins is an author and the Founder of William Branham Historical Research. His new book is entitled Preacher Behind the White Hoods: A Critical Examination of William Branham and His Message. He discusses: the coinciding development of Jim Jones, The Message, and the formation of the Peoples Temple; Jim Jones; things that happened to some of the followers of Jim Jones; the mental health of Branham; psychotic episodes and mental illness of Branham; and the prophecy of the ‘final text’ revival and its interpretation, by some, as a possible resurrection.

Keywords: ​Joel’s Army, John Collins, Latter Rain, Manifest Son of God, Manifest Sons of God, Manifested Sons of God, mental health, NAR, preacher, New Apostolic Reformation, The Message, visions, white hoods, William Branham Historical Research, William Marrion Branham.​

An Interview with John Collins on The Message, the Peoples Temple, Jim Jones, and William Marrion Branham’s Mental Health (Part Six)[A]^,[B]

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Jim Jones joined The Message around the time of the formation of the Peoples Temple. Why is this non-coincidental?

John Collins: This is a subject that can be very difficult to explain, depending upon the audience.  There are those who are familiar with William Branham and his faith healing ministry who are unaware of the “Message” religious cult following that grew with him through various stages of his ministry.  Some of those stages used different stage personas.[1]  There are those who have escaped (or are still a member of) Branham’s cult following who are not aware that their specific version of the cult had previous or later attempts, with different stage personas and (to some extent) different sets of beliefs.  Unfortunately, leaders in the “Message” religious cult that exists today are the ones largely responsible for creating the “historical William Branham”, and the version that has been created bears very little resemblance to the version that documented history records.  These “histories” certainly do not mention the differences between stage personas.

I do my best to explain this in my book, Preacher Behind the White Hoods: A Critical Examination of William Branham and His Message.  To fully understand the relationship between Jim Jones, Peoples Temple, William Branham, and the “Message”, one must also understand the histories of each of these entities as well as how and why they intersect.  One must also understand how and why some of those histories have changed, why they were re-written, and the strategy behind the alteration.

William Branham did not simply have one “Message”, whether referring to the group of people or his collection of doctrine.  Most of the history that exists today has been written based upon his claim to have been given the “gift of healing” by an “angel” in May of 1947.[2]  Later versions of his stage persona made this claim, erroneously connecting that date to the formation of the Nation of Israel, which occurred May 14, 1948. ^[3]  Those familiar with that version of the stage persona are unaware that documentation exists[4] for much earlier “healing revivals”, having different stage personas, supernatural stories, and doctrine.  It should come as no surprise, since the first few seconds of Branham’s earliest audio recording still available for sale starts with the words, “We’re getting some new gadgets for recording”[5], and that his April, 1947 sermon pre-dates his claim to have received the “gift” in May of 1947.

In 1947, William Branham’s healing revivals in Canada became a catalyst for a movement that would later become known as “Latter Rain” and would nearly split modern Pentecostalism in half.  It was during this time that Branham began publishing his “The Voice of Healing” newsletter promoting himself and other “divine healers”, calling for unity among all of the revivalists.  What resulted is a movement that became known as the Latter Rain Revival, Voice of Healing Revival, or simply “Healing Revival”.[6]  Those who leaned towards the Latter Rain movement and its doctrine included William Branham[7] and many of his associates, promoters, campaign team and business partners.  Ministers and evangelists in that camp referred to their specific style of sermon as the “Latter Rain Message”,[8] and eventually the “Message”[9]

Not everyone approved of the Latter Rain movement, however, due to its extreme doctrinal teachings and practices.  When the Assemblies of God sect of Pentecostalism severed ties with many of its own churches[10] and officially declared the movement as Scripturally unsound, those involved with Latter Rain were forced to choose sides.  Men and women who worked closely with William Branham, such as A. W. Rasmussen and Joseph Mattsson-Boze, sided with Latter Rain.  Those opposing this movement viewed those men and women as heretical.  So much so that some churches forced the removal of their pastors over the Latter Rain division, and Rev. Jim Jones was one of those impacted.

After Jones lost his chance at becoming head pastor of the Laurel Street Church in Indianapolis and shortly before Peoples Temple was formed, Joseph Mattson-Boze offered Jim Jones an ordination certificate into the Independent Assemblies of God.  This was one of the “Latter Rain” sects that promoted William Branham, and plans were made for Branham himself to launch Jones’ career as a “faith healer” at the Cadle Tabernacle in Indianapolis in June of 1956.  Though their union would only last for a little over one year and two major events, one in 1956[11] and one in 1957,[12] Jones would continue to defend the “Message”[13] and preach[14] William Branhams[15] “Manifest Sons of God” doctrine well into the 1970s.  This doctrine was the notion that the Son of God would be made manifest physically in the form of a “prophet”, which Branham alleged to be.  It should come as no shock that Jones referred to himself as The Spoken Word[16]after Branham’s death in 1965.

Understanding the timeline of the intersection of these men is critical to understanding the impact it would have on Jim Jones and Peoples Temple.  Starting in 1953, William Branham began attempting to distance himself from the Latter Rain movement[17] while still holding to key elements of the Manifest Sons of God theology it produced.  Specifically, Branham focused upon his own deity claims based upon this theology.  The notion of a “prophet god”[18] was a key element to Branham’s version of this theology, and Branham claimed that he was “God’s Voice” to the people.[19]  Those familiar with Jim Jones and his version of the Manifest Sons of God theology will find it eerily similar, but unfortunately it wasn’t until recently that Branham’s association to the Manifest Sons of God theology has gained national attention.[20]  Interestingly, sermons with the title “Manifested Sons of God” were renamed, apparently to conceal all traces of Branham’s connection to Jim Jones.[21]

2. Jacobsen: Who was Jim Jones?

Collins: When the word “cult” is mentioned, images of Jim Jones and Jonestown immediately begin to surface.  Phrases like, “Don’t drink the Kool-Aid” have become commonplace due to his legacy; almost a thousand people were convinced to willingly commit mass suicide at Jones’ command by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid in November 1978.  It was one of the greatest tragedies in the modern world.

Jim Jones was a Pentecostal minister from Indiana who rose to limited fame in the Post WWII Healing Revival.  With the help of William Branham and Joseph Mattsson-Boze, Jones’ “Brotherhood Healing” campaigns[22] gained him quick recognition in the revival circuits.  Locally in Indianapolis, Jones was recognized for his work supporting impoverished African Americans and advocating for Civil Rights.  Ironically, this conflicted with William Branham’s position and his close ties to white supremacy groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.  Whether because of this or some other reason, Jones migrated Peoples Temple to Redwood Valley, California.

Like William Branham, Jones referred to himself as God’s Voice to the People, referring to his own sermons as the “Spoken Word” [23] or “Living Word”.  William Branham had claimed shortly before his death in 1965 that God would return to earth in the form of a human “prophet”,[24]  and Jones claimed that he, himself was the “Manifested Son of God”[25] from William Branham’s theology.  Also like Branham’s authority over his cult following, this theology gave Jones the ultimate authority over his own cult following.

3. Jacobsen: What happened to some of the followers of Jones?

Collins: In July 1977, the Peoples Temple cult staged a mass exodus from California to Guyana.  This was the same year[26] as one of William Branham’s doomsday predictions,[27] and the prediction that is most remembered.[28]  Peoples Temple members followed Jones, their “prophet leader” to the South American jungle seeking utopia.  On November 18, 1978, over nine hundred people took their own lives in murder/suicide, the vast majority of them by willingly drinking cyanide-laced poison.

4. Jacobsen: Is the claim, by Branham, that he was mentally unstable relevant here? 

Collins: Without a patient to examine, it is difficult to accurately diagnose mental health.  Much speculation has been presented in the case of Jim Jones, however, some of which would seem relevant.  According to Professor Gary Maynard, Jones appeared to suffer from acute Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) during the last stages of his life, and likely suffered from at least eight – if not nine – characteristics of NPD throughout his life.[29]  This disorder would have produced such violent and paranoid delusions and tendencies that when combined with Branham’s dangerous theology, could have been the underlying cause for the Jonestown Massacre.  Had Jones been properly treated with strong medication and intensive therapy, the disaster could likely have been prevented.

William Branham, on the other hand, has not had the same level interest or speculation by mental health experts.  Since Branham died before a similar tragedy within his own cult following occurred, there haven’t been many – if any – studies performed as to his mental stability.  There has, however, been some speculation among former members of his cult following due to the fact that William Branham himself frequently admitted to suffering from mental health issues.  Not to mention the similarities between Branham’s and Jones’ grandiose delusions and deity claims.

According to Branham, he suffered from mental health issues since childhood, and mental health continued to decline with a major event approximately every seven years.

I’ve been a neurotic all my life. As a little boy there was something struck me, that scare me, about every seven years it would happen to me. Brother Jack remembers when I first started, come off the field for a year; something just happened.

Branham, William. 1965, Nov 28. On The Wings Of A Snow White Dove

That being said, we do not have the exact diagnosis or even a patient to examine.  We cannot fully trust that his own description covers the full extent of his suffering, or if those descriptions themselves were the result of an altered state of mind.  It is clear by the examination of his sermon transcripts that delusions of grandeur became progressively worse during the latter part of his life, which would appear to match the decline in mental health for Jim Jones.  Towards the end of his ministry, Branham began to insinuate that he was the return of the prophet “Elijah” from the Old Testament, as did Jones.[30]  Branham also alleged that this “Elijah” (himself) was the “Lord Jesus Christ”.[31]

It is difficult to predict what might have happened had William Branham not died in 1965, but if prominent leaders in his religious cult and campaign team are any example, the path to destruction may not have been so different from Jones.  Branham’s proto commune called “The Park” in Prescott, Arizona, which operated under the rule of Leo Mercer, made national news after it was alleged that physical and sexual abuse resulted in a cult member’s killing spree.

Leo Mercer, a self-proclaimed minister, ran the park.  After Brother Branham’s death in 1965, Mercer gradually became more authoritative, employing various forms of punishment.  He would ostracize people from the community and separate families.  Children were beaten for minor infractions like talking during a march or not tying their shoes. Mercer would punish girls by cutting their hair, and force boys to wear girls’ clothing.  There was also evidence that Mercer sexually abused children.[32]

Similar to the final days leading up to the Jonestown Massacre at the Jonestown compound,[33] the “Message” compound in Prescott, Arizona became militant.  Children were marched around the compound military-style and trained to believe that those outside the commune would be destroyed while those inside suffering abuse would be “saved.”

Education was not valued in the church, and many children dropped out of school.  Boys were expected to marry and have children at age 18.  Children were taught they would either go to heaven or burn forever.  People outside the church were considered “atomic fodder” who would die, while believers would be saved.[34]

5. Jacobsen: What does the description of squirrels running through his stomach – so to speak – in psychotic episodes state about William Marrion Branham? Is mental instability or mental illness – though something to be empathic about – a serious problem, especially in religious leaders of prominence and influence?

Collins: Throughout his ministry, William Branham gave very few descriptions of his battle with mental health.  Other than stating that an episode occurred approximately every seven years, one might assume that he simply struggled with mild depression or anxiety.  Shortly before his death, however, he described one of his “neurotic” episodes in full.[35]

And I remember when I finally thought I had enough money to go to Mayos’ for an examination; they said, “They’ll find what your trouble is.” Wife and I, and Becky back there…Sarah was a little, bitty fellow. I just entered my healing ministry. And we took off to Mayos’.

I went through the clinic. And the night before I’d find…had my finals the next morning, I just woke up and was setting there on the bed looking around. And I looked out in front of me, and there was a little boy, looked just like me, about seven years old; and looked at it, and it was me. And he was standing by an old snag tree. And on that tree…

Any of you squirrel hunters know you can rub a stick up and down on a tree like that, and it’ll scare a squirrel and run him out if he’s in the hollow.  And I was seeing there where that squirrel had been, and I thought, “What kind of squirrel is that?” and I rubbed it. And when I did, I looked over and it was me then about thirty-eight years old, the little boy was gone. So I rubbed that limb, and out of the hollow log, pole, come a little squirrel about that long, dark, almost black, and looked like little currents flying from him; little bitty beady eyes, the wickedest looking thing that I ever seen, looked like a weasel more than a squirrel.

And he looked right at me. And I opened my mouth to say, “Well…” And when I did, he…Before you could’ve batted your eye, he flew right into my mouth, went down into my stomach, and just tearing me to pieces. And as I come out of the vision, with my hands up, looking, I went screaming, “O God, have mercy! It’s killing me!”[36]

This is a serious condition worth considering, especially with regards to the leader of a religious movement.  Cult leaders claiming “prophecy” and “visions” often associate their experience with the supernatural, but very few have admitted having been in the hospital for a “neurotic episode” at the time their “vision” occurred.  It is surprising that Branham’s description of this episode have not been erased from the recordings and transcripts, but even more surprising that so few of Branham’s followers are aware that he even entered hospitals seeking treatment for mental health.

The fact that we are even discussing the question as to whether or not religious leaders of prominence and influence displaying symptoms of mental health instability is concerning is a clear representation of the nature of the problem.  There are those who find the “supernatural” appealing, so much so that they suppress their own critical analysis of the person or persons claiming supernatural powers.  When critical analysis is avoided, the door to disaster is opened.  It should come as no surprise that most of our examples for religious cult leaders are those who left mainstream religion for “independent” or “non-denominational” groups having no accountability.

6. Jacobsen: How might this relate to various claims to prophecies including the ‘prophecy’ about the final tent revival? How did several ministers interpret this, in terms of a resurrection?

Collins: I find William Branham’s “tent prophecy” to be fascinating, no matter which path of study is taken.  For everyone in Branham’s “Message” cult following, it is a “prophecy” that is clearly left unfulfilled, resulting in cognitive dissonance.  Yet each of the many sects and sub-cults within the “Message” have addressed the internal conflict in a variety of different ways.

My grandfather taught his church that the final tent revival William Branham described was a “prophecy”.  William Branham claimed that his “tent prophecy” was the result of a vision,[37] and that it was not his voice making this proclamation – it was “THUS SAITH THE LORD”.[38] After William Branham’s death in 1965, however, this presented a huge problem.  Either William Branham was a false prophet,[39] or he must resurrect to fulfill the “prophecy”.  As a result, grandpa began claiming that William Branham would rise from the dead.[40]  When Branham’s funeral was held at the Branham Tabernacle, this notion continued to spread.[41]  Over the years, this “resurrection” became a theme for Easter meetings held at Branham’s church in Jeffersonville.  Pearry Green, pastor of Branham’s satellite church in Tucson, Arizona, added fuel to the fire by making the same claim.[42]

Though I vividly remember my grandfather, aunts, and uncles discussing the “resurrection” at family events, Grandpa’s public version of his beliefs did not match his private.  Over time, Grandpa denied such a belief to non-members of the cult – especially news reporters[43] – while privately continuing to claim that Branham would resurrect for one final tent revival.  Whether because of this or not, other sects within the “Message” cult did not believe in a physical resurrection.  Both myself and former members of other “Message” sects also heard pastors who claimed that the “tent prophecy” was a “spiritual tent”, while others claimed that the “vision” was merely speculation instead of “prophecy”.

Taking a step back from all of this, it’s difficult to imagine that so many people have held onto this belief of a “tent prophecy” and/or a “resurrection” for so many decades.  Back when William Branham made the claim, and revivalists were gathering large crowds to attend “tent revivals”, this might have seemed probable.  In today’s world, with so many convention centers, sports arenas, and other buildings available to rent, it is highly improbable that a “tent” would be the preferred place of gathering.  Even towards the end of his life, the enthusiasm over the notion of a “tent revival” was dwindling – most people prefer the controlled climate of a properly-ventilated building with a good heating and air system.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[A]  Author; Founder, William Branham Historical Research.

[B] Individual Publication Date: June 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/collins-six; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

[1] Example: Stage persona used after 1947 claimed that the “gift of healing” was given by an “angel” in May 1947.  Stage persona used in 1945 (as described in “I Was Not Disobedient to the Heavenly Vision” tract) described healing after receiving a vision of “white robed” people.

[2] Branham, William.  1954, Jul 18.  The Great Coming Revival and the Outpouring of the Holy Spirit.  “And a strange thing of that, that you might not know, the very day the Angel of the Lord called me out, May the 6th, 1947, and issued the gift to pray for the sick, was the very same day that Israel become a nation for the first time for twenty-five hundred years. Oh, I believe there’s something in it. I just can’t keep from believing that we’re near the end of time. That’s right.

[3] The State of Israel Is Born. 1948, May 14. The Palestine Post.

[4] Branham, William.  1945.  I Was Not Disobedient to the Heavenly Vision.  “It was in the month of March, 1945, one morning about 3:00 A.M”

[5] Branham, William.  1947, Apr 12.  Faith Is The Substance Rev. William Marrion Branham http://table.branham.org

[6] Crowder, John.  2006.  Miracle Workers, Reformers, and the New Mystics.  “Known simply as the healing revival, Voice of Healing Revival, or Latter Rain Revival”

[7] -The Sharon Orphanage Connection Accessed 2019, May 1 from

http://abc-history.blogspot.com/2008/02/before-i-was-born-my-father-ramon-haas.html  “One of Branham’s teachings was the ability to use the “Spirit of God” to make things move on their own accord. My dad related to me he had tried this, just once, and said that things in the room moved on their own but the air had become cold, dark and heavy. It scared him and he never tried it again. After this he rejected this teaching by Branham but he maintained many other principles taught by Branham and the Latter Rain Movement and incorporated many of the Branham / Latter Rain Movement principles into the fabric of his teachings to the Assembly of the Body of Christ. In this way he carried forward some of these Branham doctrines.”

[8] Latter Rain Message at the Latter Rain Chapel.  1952, Feb 23.  Tampa Bay Times.

[9] Example: Hear the Message of the End Time.  1951, Feb 3.  Arizona Republic.

[10] 1949, Sept 9-14.  Minutes and Constitution with Bylaws: Assemblies of God, the Twenty-third General Council.  “That we disapprove of those extreme teachings and practices, which, being unfounded Scripturally, serve only to break fellowship of like precious faith and tend to confusion and division among the members of the Body of Christ, and be it hereby known that this 23^rd General Council disapproves of the so-Called “New Order of the Latter Rain”

[11] 1956, Jun 9.  Peoples Temple Will Be Host to the Great William Branham Brotherhood-Healing Crusade

[12] Peoples Temple.  1957, Jun 1.  Indianapolis Star.

[13] Handwritten Notes of Jim Jones.  Accessed 2020, May 18 from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=13782.  “I know there are things about the Message that you may not see but it is God.”

[14] Jim Jones and he Malachi 4 Elijah Prophecy.  Accessed 2020, May 26 from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=70743

[15] Example: Branham, 65-1127B – Trying To Do God A Service Without It Being God’s Will.  “And Elijah was not…That wasn’t Elijah; That was the Spirit of God on Elijah; Elijah was just a man. Now, we’ve had Elijahs, and Elijahs’ coats, and Elijahs’ mantles, and Elijahs’ everything. But the Elijah of this day is the Lord Jesus Christ. He is to come according to Matthew the seventeen-…Luke 17:30, is, the Son of man is to reveal Himself among His people. Not a man, God! But it’ll come through a Prophet.”

[16] Jones, James.  1974.  Accessed 2020, May 28 from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=28198  “That’s what I am. The Word. The Spoken Word. The Living Word.”

[17] Branham, William.  1953, Jun 14.  I Perceive That Thou Art a Prophet.  “And if you’ll excuse it, and please don’t think I say wrong here, that’s where in the little break-up that come amongst the Pentecostal people recently, called Latter Rain, that’s where they got off the line, right there. For a when a gift of prophecy come to a man, they declared him to be a prophet. Now, that’s wrong. There’s quite a difference between a gift of prophecy and prophet.”

[18] Branham, William. 1965, November 28. God’s Only Provided Place Of Worship.  “No leaven among you, that brings the entire fulness of the godhead bodily among you. Couldn’t do it in Luther’s age, couldn’t do it in Wesley’s age, couldn’t do it in Pentecostal age; but in the day when the Son of man will be manifested, revealed, brought back the Church together with the entire Deity of God amongst His people, showing the same visible signs, manifesting Himself like He did at the beginning when He was manifested on earth in a form of a Prophet-God. Oh! Glory! Promised by Malachi 4, promised by the rest of the Scriptures. Where you worship at? The house of God, seated (in present tense).”

[19] Branham, William.  1951, May 5.  My Commission.  “I am God’s Voice to you. See? I say that again. That time was under inspiration.”

[20] Southern Poverty Law Center, Klanwatch Project, Militia Task Force. 2008. Intelligence Report: A Project of the Southern Poverty Law.  Accessed 2020, May 28 from https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2008/todd-bentley%E2%80%99s-militant-joel%E2%80%99s-army-gains-followers-florida.  “Through Cain came all the smart, educated people down to the antediluvian flood — the intellectuals, bible colleges,” Branham wrote in the kind of anti- mainstream religion, anti-intellectual spirit that pervades the Joel’s Army movement “

[21] Manifested Sons of God.  Accessed 2020, May 28 from https://www.williambranham.com/manifested-sons-of-god-60-0518 “This Message by Brother William Marrion Branham called Manifested Sons Of God was delivered on Wednesday, 18th May 1960 at the Branham Tabernacle in Jeffersonville, Indiana, U.S.A. The tape, number 60-0518, is 2 hours and 5 minutes, and consists of 2 cassettes. This message is available in book format (Adoption).”

[22] 1956, Jun 9.  Peoples Temple Will Be Host to the Great William Branham Brotherhood-Healing Crusade

[23] Jones, Jim. 1972.  Accessed 2020, May 26 from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=27429.  “We’re not in a praying house here, we’re in a speaking house. The Spoken Word is here. The Word is made flesh. We don’t pray and beg anymore, we don’t grovel around on our knees anymore, we can talk to God face-to-face, and we can hear God with our own ears, and with our own understanding.”

[24] Branham, 65-1127B – Trying To Do God A Service Without It Being God’s Will.  “Son of man is to reveal Himself among His people. Not a man, God! But it’ll come through a Prophet.”

[25] Jones, Jim. 1972. Accessed 2020, May 26 from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=85676.  “That’s my desire. I did not come this far by faith, to just end this race as being one manifested son.”

[26] Branham, William.  An Exposition Of The Seven Church Age.  “I still maintain this prediction after thirty years because, Jesus did NOT say no man could know the year, month or week in which His coming was to be completed. So I repeat, I sincerely believe and maintain as a private student of the Word, along with Divine inspiration that 1977 ought to terminate the world systems and usher in the millennium.”

[27] Doomsday Predictions.  Accessed 2020, May 30 from https://william-branham.org/site/topics/doomsday_predictions.  “Years Branham either predicted for the “day of destruction” or claimed to have been “spiritually significant” in the setup for destruction: 1948 (1948 issues of Voice of Healing, William Branham listed as “Publisher”) 1954 (54-0513 #33) 1956 (56-0212 #12) 1962 (62-0518 #112) 1975 (64-0705 #76) 1977 (61-0806 #196) 1983 (63-1229M #219) 1999 (63-1124E #320) 2000 (63-1229M #219)”

[28] Example: Bruce, Alexandra.  2009.  2012: Science or Superstition.  “William M. Branham predicted that the rapture would take place in 1977”

[29] Maynard, Gary.  Jim Jones and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.  Accessed 2020, May 27 from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=29416 “From this brief analysis of Jones’ behavior using the DSM IV-TR diagnostic criteria, it is apparent that he suffered from at least eight – if not all nine – of the characteristics at some point during his life. The question then becomes not whether he was a narcissist, but how severe was his narcissism? By the time he died, it is clear that he was suffering from an acute case of narcissistic personality disorder with violent and paranoid delusions and tendencies. Most psychiatrists would have put him on strong medication combined with intensive therapy. “

[30] Q1023 Transcript.  Accessed 2017, May 30 from http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=27309

[31] Branham, William. 1965, Nov 27. Trying To Do God A Service Without It Being God’s Will .  “Son of man is to reveal Himself among His people. Not a man, God! But it’ll come through a Prophet.”

[32] People v. Keith Thomas Loker.  Supreme Court of California Super. Ct. No. SCR-582212

[33] Gardner, Phyllis Ph.D, Williams John Ph.D, Sadri, Mahmoud Ph.D.  Peoples Temple: From Social Movement To Total Institution.  Accessed 2020, May 28 from https://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=33160.  “For a variety of reasons which will be explored later, Peoples Temple evolved into a militant total institution, complete with weapons, talk of revenge against enemies and threats of revolutionary suicide”

[34] People v. Keith Thomas Loker.  Supreme Court of California Super. Ct. No. SCR-582212

[35] Branham, William.  1965, Nov 28.  On The Wings Of A Snow-White Dove.  “I’ve been a neurotic all my life. As a little boy there was something struck me, that scare me, about every seven years it would happen to me. Brother Jack remembers when I first started, come off the field for a year; something just happened.”

[36] Branham, William.  1965, Nov 28.  On The Wings Of A Snow-White Dove

[37] Branham, William.  1958, Oct 1.  Lifting Him Up Out of History.  “And then some time ago I was in a vision, and I saw a large tent. Oh, it was a mammoth, big affair.”

[38] Branham, William.  1956, Apr 3.  Look.  “One of these days I want to pitch that tent the Lord’s going to give me, right outside of this side of Chicago… those things are not mythical. In contact with the Holy Spirit…when I come under His anointing, and He takes me away and shows me things, I just got perfect confidence that it’s just exactly right, ’cause it’s never failed. And He will never say one thing outside what’s written in this Bible. That’s right. You watch it. Through the years, He’s never said one thing at any time, unless it was absolutely Scripturally based on the Bible, THUS SAITH THE LORD.”

[39] Branham, William.  1953, Nov 6.  Do You Now Believe.  “You can go to my hometown and find it one time, in all the times that It’s ever told anything, that didn’t come to pass just exactly the way It said. Now, you pin a sign on my back as a false prophet, and I’ll walk through your streets.”

[40] Evangelist William Branham.  1966, Apr 14.  The Kane Republication.  “Some remained at Jeffersonville still apparently convinced that the man they called ‘Brother Billy’ and ‘prophet-messenger’ would arise from death … the Rev. Willard Collins, associate pastor at the Branham Tabernacle there, said he was among the believers in the evangelist’s resurrection because Branham ‘had a halo over his head when he was born in a log cabin in Burksville, Ky.’”

[41] Evangelist William Branham.  1966, Apr 14.  “There were similar rumors that ‘Brother Billy’ would rise from the dead when funeral services were conducted at his Branham Tabernacle at Jeffersonville on Dec. 29.”

[42] Dead Prophet Lures Thousands.  1982, Apr 12. The Courier Journal.  “Some of his followers began saying that the services were being delayed because their prophet would rise from the dead Easter day.  The talk swelled when 700 people came to town for Branham’s burial April 11; while in town for the services, the Rev. Pearry Green, pastor of a Tucson, Ariz., tabernacle that was a member of the Braham sect, talked openly of the resurrection belief.

[43] Dead Prophet Lures Thousands.  1982, Apr 12. The Courier Journal.  “All along, local leaders of the Branham sect repeatedly said they didn’t believe any of that, and today Collins says, “It’s just not true at all, regardless of what you have heard.”

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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/01

Abstract

Anthony Sepulveda scored 174 (S.D.15) on Cosmic and is a member of the World Genius Directory. He discusses: family background; family life; experience with peers in elementary and high school; early gifts; nurtured by guardians/parents, teachers, friends, or community; post-secondary education; memorable or pivotal moments in early life; meaning in life; memories of Christianity in the Pacific Northwest; etymology of the name Sepulveda, or Brown; mother in the daycare and father in the military; consistent uprooting and displacement; mathematical talent indications; college “an almost completely ridiculous institution nowadays”; intellectual interests; men taking upon themselves the defensive posture; Christianity in particular; religion or faith; believe in a god or gods; nature of problems; universally fair IQ test; reframing in a survivor and positive manner; step-father; and other aspects of the university system.

Keywords: Anthony Sepulveda, Background, Christian, Christianity, gifts, intelligence, Pacific Northwest.

An Interview with Anthony Sepulveda on Background and Intelligence (Part One)[1]^,[2]

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: As always, some background with some family and personal contexts can be helpful for the audience expected now, or others unexpected into the future. What is some family background, e.g., geography, culture, language, and religion or lack thereof?

Anthony Sepulveda: A little over three decades ago,I was born in the Pacific Northwest of the United States. My parents met in college and were practicing Christians. I haven’t spoken with them much about how things were for them during that time, so any picture I could paint for you would have such broad strokes that would likely result in a false impression.

2. Jacobsen: If you reflect on some aspects of family life, family dynamics and upbringing, were the memories warm or cold in general? 

Sepulveda: Both of my parents were bread winners. My father joined the military shortly after my birth and my mother started her own independent daycare for toddlers and newborns that she ran from the various homes we lived in. We moved from place to place quite often during my developing years, usually staying for a few years (three, on average) before we’d pack up and relocate. At the time, it was explained to me that this was caused by my father’s military career. So, the only consistency for me was the family dynamic and the organized chaos of having a half dozen toddlers to help manage.
Like any other lifestyle, this one had it’s pros and cons. While it was more or less warm, I believe that the general inconsistency of my upbringing stymied my social skills during a crucial period. As a result, I haven’t had many personal lasting relationships and I often approach them without any expectation of permanence. It wasn’t until just recently that I started thinking about social intelligence as a something you can actually study and develop. But I’m already feeling optimistic about that even subjective social problems have objective logical solutions.

3. Jacobsen: How was the experience with peers in elementary and high school for you? Was social life active for you? Or did you live a more isolated existence with books and hobbies? Looking at the upbringing in the home, what was the form of parenting? 

Sepulveda: As mentioned above, my social skills didn’t develop at the normal pace. Which resulted in me living a fairly isolated existence and caused me to find solace in books.

4. Jacobsen: When were early gifts discovered for you?

Sepulveda: Beyond a variety of subjective experiences, the only noteworthy event I can recall was during a math class in my early teens. Without warning, we were given a series of calculus problems dealing with simple projectile motion. Long story short, I was the only one to get all the questions right but nothing came of it.

5. Jacobsen: Were these nurtured by guardians/parents, teachers, friends, or community? If so, what were the benefits? If not, why not?

Sepulveda: I was left to my own devices, for the most part. Now that I’m an adult myself, I imagine that my parents were struggling enough just to keep the ship afloat and felt some relief knowing that I was relatively stable in my own little world.

6. Jacobsen: Did you pursue post-secondary education? If so, what were some of the more enjoyable parts of the experience for you? If not, why not?

Sepulveda: I did, but it didn’t last long and I probably won’t be pursuing it further. College is an almost completely ridiculous institution nowadays. And even if I were to successfully slog my way through it and earn a degree, there’s a very high probability that I still won’t make it into the field I was aiming for. Such is the case for about 70% of students worldwide and I can’t reasonably expect any other result for myself given my age and interests. So I’ve elected to carry on educating myself and doing what I can to benefit and entertain myself and anyone else interested in my work.

7. Jacobsen: What are memorable or pivotal moments in early life for you – the good and the bad?

Sepulveda: Two important experiences come to mind – Firstly, at one point during a vacation my father decided that he, I and a couple of others should explore Wind Cave in Bend, Oregon. It’s about 4 kilometres long and littered with large stones that have fallen from its roof a short way in. These stones remain where they fall, forming an unstable mess that completely covers the ground and often forms large walls of debris that you have to climb up and down to continue forward. I was a fat teen during this visit and barely managed to keep pace until we reached the end. This must have tested everyone else’s patience because they left me to fend for myself on the way back. I spent several exhaustive hours working my way through the most complete blackness I’d ever experienced, often losing my sense of direction due to the chaotic nature of my surroundings and my inability to see more than about a meter ahead of me as I only had a small, dull hand light with which to navigate. Eventually, I made it out. But since then I can’t bear to rely on others for anything important. Whatever goes wrong, I’ll do everything in my power to solve it on my own. It’s only after I’ve exhausted all my effort that I’ll ask for help. And even then, I’ll feel guilty about it.
Secondly, when I was in my late teens there was a night during which I simply couldn’t sleep. This wasn’t an uncommon event as I’ve lived with insomnia for most of my life. But on this particular night closed the book I’d usually spend nights reading and placed upon it a sheet of paper. Having never drawn anything before, I simply starred at the blank surface in the dim light of my room. After a while, lines seemed to reveal themselves just beyond the page. And I spent the next few hours tracing them, shading here and there until my first abstract drawing was complete. It wasn’t very good or aesthetically pleasing, but it was my first tentative step towards a place of experimental expression where I’ve developed a long-lasting love of art and potentially the most singularly unique experience of my life.

8. Jacobsen: What gives you meaning in life?

Sepulveda: I don’t know if there is any objective meaning to be gleaned from the evidence life provides. But I do believe that our purpose can be deduced by examining our physiology and, most tellingly, our biopsychology. From these, I’ve concluded that our intention is simply to survive, procreate, explore, have fun and be happy. Beyond that, I don’t know. All other evidence seems too ambiguous to work with.

9. Jacobsen: What are the memories of Christianity in the Pacific Northwest for you?

Sepulveda: My parents had faith in common and wanted to share it with their children. But it wasn’t and still isn’t the belief system for me. I stopped attending regular services during my early adolescence and only look back into the subject during the occasional debate.

10. Jacobsen: What is the etymology of the name Sepulveda, or Brown, depending on personal preference?

Sepulveda: Ah, you’re aware of that recent change. I made that decision to celebrate the ten year anniversary of my mother and step father.

11. Jacobsen: With your mother in the daycare and father in the military, this is quintessentially aligned with the aspects of the roles set forth for men and women in the United States, whether the Pacific Northwest or the Midwest.

Sepulveda: I suppose my parents fit their respective stereotypes well, yes.

12. Jacobsen: Did the consistent uprooting and displacement due to father’s military career carry over into adult life for you? Someone who moves, has to be on the go, and simply someone who wishes to explore the world.

Sepulveda: A bit. I’ve relocated seven times since I started living on my own. But that was primarily caused by personal financial struggles,

13. Jacobsen: With some of the mathematical talent indications, since both came of it, have there been micro-builds on top of it? In that, this is something that may not have paid huge dividends for you, but became useful in those small crucial moments in life.

Sepulveda: It’s been useful for the discovery and appreciation of abstract patterns. But has little practical use in my day to day life.

14. Jacobsen: What makes college “an almost completely ridiculous institution nowadays”?

Sepulveda: Where else can you go to pay copious sums of money to do someone else’s job for them? Aside from the necessary lab classes, most college courses are taken online. During which a professor’s job is limited to judging the quality of work that cannot be graded via automated system (like essays) and occasionally offering advice while everything else has been streamlined into required reading and multiple choice question tests. And given the aforementioned 70% failure rate of students trying to move on to their desired careers, the whole thing seems to be a bad joke.
To put things into perspective, my first college course was a computer class that was taught by an environmental science major. Needless to say, I didn’t learn much.

15. Jacobsen: What are the intellectual interests now? What are some examples of productions by you?

Sepulveda: Most recently, I’ve been studying the nature of problems and the methodologies necessary to solve or resolve them. It’s been interesting to find so many common factors among seemingly disparate subjects.
Previous projects include the development of a universally fair IQ test and a number of original abstract art pieces, photos and puzzles.

16. Jacobsen: Many men take upon themselves the defensive posture with not a single traumatic incident of being left alone to fend for themselves in a seemingly desperate circumstance; they do this in a context of repeated small slights and damages to the ego, their pride, in which this becomes an armoured personality. It comes internally and externally. It creates a lot of issues around the world and manifests in destructive patterns for oneself and for others. I am so sorry you had to go through that experience. Is this something that you would want to change?

Sepulveda: It’s okay. Many people often lose perspective after trauma, often expecting or fearing that similarly bad events will occur in the future. But if you can accept the experience and try to understand it, the payoff is incredible. It’s given me a reason and desire to empathize with others that I may have scoffed off otherwise.

17. Jacobsen: What is Christianity in particular for you, now? 

Sepulveda: The Christian faith has never been a foundation I could stand on. The arguments for it essentially fall down to an over-reliance on faith, hope and the selective interpretation of ambiguous evidence. In my opinion, it’s just a comforting con for those who want a sense of certainty to help them through life.

18. Jacobsen: What is religion or faith to you, now, in general? 

Sepulveda: Religion isa belief system in which you have a relationship with a transcendent being that judges you and your adherence to dogma. These relationships come in many forms and some aren’t as strict as others, but most can be summarized in that way.

19. Jacobsen: Do you believe in a god or gods?

Sepulveda: I haven’t worked out that problem yet. The arguments for or against the proof of God have never been conclusive or satisfactory. But if there is an omniscient being running the show, then free will cannot exist and it wouldn’t be logically consistent for it to care what we do. So, I accept the limitations of my understanding and try to be content with it. I can always reevaluate later if new evidence comes along.

20. Jacobsen: For the “nature of problems,” this reads as if “the fundamentals of problem-solving.” Can you expand on that, please?

Sepulveda: There are many problems that we can work on and examine individually that share many common features that may not be immediately obvious. For example, when one is driving along a freeway, the actions of you and everyone else may seem too emotional to analyze mathematically. But the same equations used to deduce the safest, most efficient speed, width and curvature of those highways came from observing fluid dynamics.

21. Jacobsen: What would comprise a “universally fair IQ test”? What was the outcome of the project?

Sepulveda: Most IQ tests have fundamental flaws the skew the data they gather. Multiple choice problems give someone the chance to boost their scores by guessing and many problems rely on personal experience to understand (especially on verbal tests). Many test designers try to level the field by allowing the use of reference material. But this should not be allowed or required to do well on a valid test. After several relatively long conversations on the subject, I designed one that fit my harsh requirements – X’s and O’s (link provided here).

22. Jacobsen: Are reframing in a survivor and positive manner rarer than one in which an individual can become cynical and take an at-odds with the world stance?

Sepulveda: It’s hard to say. I can’t speak for others, especially those I don’t know. And statistics (which claim that one in two people live with some level of trauma) are only as reliable as the honesty of the reports they’re founded on. Given how many cases go unreported, this ratio is likely steeped out of our favor. And this implies that many of the people we see on a daily basis are living fairly civil lives despite the burden they carry. So it likely isn’t as rare at all.

23. Jacobsen: What is your step-father’s – not father’s – role in your life?

Sepulveda: You could think of us like coworkers with a shared goal of ensuring my mother’s happiness. We don’t spend much one-on-one time together, but we share a mutual respect and know that we can rely on each other in times of need. Which is all I could ask for.

24. Jacobsen: What other aspects of the university system make sense?

Sepulveda: It makes sense to charge someone for the opportunity to learn a practical skill or trade and it comes as no surprise that many colleges focus on medicine, business and criminal justice. Such things cannot be automated and produce much more valuable results than undergoing the same process to study subjects like poetry or music.

25. Jacobsen: What would be a healthy change for the university system?

Sepulveda: I believe that all necessary changes are already occurring naturally. Many people are reevaluating the value they place on secondary education and most are avoiding pointless degrees and most colleges focus.

26. Jacobsen: What is an alternative to the academic system for those who find this does not work for them financially, educationally, or organizationally?

Sepulveda: The best alternative that I’m aware of is Khan University. It’s a free online platform from which one can receive the exact same quality education offered by most colleges.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] World Genius Directory.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sepulveda-one; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/01

Abstract

Claus Volko is an Austrian computer and medical scientist who has conducted research on the treatment of cancer and severe mental disorders by conversion of stress hormones into immunity hormones. This research gave birth to a new scientific paradigm which he called “symbiont conversion theory”: methods to convert cells exhibiting parasitic behaviour to cells that act as symbionts. In 2013 Volko, obtained an IQ score of 172 on the Equally Normed Numerical Derivation Test. He is also the founder and president of Prudentia High IQ Society, a society for people with an IQ of 140 or higher, preferably academics. He discusses: Philosophy; ethical philosophy; non-religious or without religious affiliation in Austria; religions; Critical Rationalism; principle of Falsifiability; classical liberalism of John Stuart Mill; John Locke, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrick August von Hayek; strengths and weaknesses of classical liberalism, socialism, fascism, and conservatism; liberalism against Marxist socialism and Plato’s totalitarianism; a critical rationalist approaching a problem; John Locke; Ludwig von Mises; Friedrich August von Hayek; me counterexamples to the given existence statements and universal statements; classical liberal ideals; and moving the dial further towards classical liberal ideals.

Keywords: Claus Volko, Critical Rationalism, ethics, Friedrich Hayek, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Ludwig von Mises.

An Interview with Claus Volko, M.D. on Ethics and Critical Rationalism: Austrian Computer and Medical Scientist (Part Three)[1]^,[2]

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: This week’s session, I want to focus on the ending point of Part Two, which dealt with the metaphysical and philosophical questions important to so many in an informal way and salient to an extreme niche of studious people in a formal manner. To rake the leaves here, some softer questions to start us off: What philosophy makes the most sense to you?

Dr. Claus Volko: My father was a fan of Karl Popper and thought that Popper’s philosophy was the only one worth spending time with. I share a similar preference for Popper over other philosophers. Popper tried to come up with a rational epistemic methodology that follows the laws of logic, and he also applied it to political philosophy.

2. Jacobsen: What ethical philosophy makes the most sense to you?

Volko: I have dealt quite a bit with political philosophy during my student years and I prefer the political philosophy of classical liberalism over others such as socialism, conservatism and fascism. Classical liberalism is about freedom from force enacted by the government. The
government shall be minimal and only take care of the protection of life and property. Karl Popper was also a liberal philosopher. He wrote “The Open Society and Its Enemies” in which he defended liberalism against Marxist socialism and Plato’s totalitarianism.

3. Jacobsen: You are non-religious or without religious affiliation in Austria. Do you believe in a god or gods? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Volko: For me god is a metaphor for laws governing the universe that we know or do not know of. So if I write “Thank God” it is not that I am thinking of a person but it is a phrase to signify that something good happened, perhaps by chance, perhaps by reason.

4. Jacobsen: As a non-religious person, why be non-religious when so many religions offer sustenance for so many in their emotional, ethical, social, and intellectual lives?

Volko: For me religions do not offer anything but restriction in my thinking.

5. Jacobsen: What relates the social, political, economic, and ethical philosophies for you?

Volko: Karl Popper called his philosophy “Critical Rationalism”. I would also say that my approach is a rationalist one. I try to investigate everything analytically and back up my stances with reason.

6. Jacobsen: Your emphasis on Karl Popper is interesting to me. It’s important for a number of reasons. One of those is the principle of Falsifiability. If something can be proposed as a theory about the world, then it should provide a means by which to show a condition under which the theory would fail. What kinds of hypotheses would fall under this? What types of theories would not?

Volko: From a strictly logical point of view only universal statements fall under this, but not existence statements. Existence statements can be proven by providing an example, while it is extremely difficult to disprove them. By contrast, to universal statements Popper’s principle applies. You cannot prove a universal statement, but it is enough to provide a single counterexample to disprove a universal statement. Popper was of the opinion that scientific knowledge is preliminary and therefore science should restrain itself to making only statements that can be falsified if a counterexample is found.

7. Jacobsen: Are we speaking of the classical liberalism of John Stuart Mill? If others, who?

Volko: John Locke, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrick August von Hayek – there are several big names.

8. Jacobsen: What seem like the inherent strengths and weaknesses of classical liberalism, socialism, fascism, and conservatism?

Volko: These ideologies have different goals. Classical liberalism wants to maximize freedom from force by the state, socialism emphasizes equality, fascism tries to create a totalitarian state that controls everything (the opposite of classical liberalism), and conservatism is about stability and keeping up societal hierarchies.

9. Jacobsen: In Popper’s text mentioned, what were some of the defences put forward for liberalism against Marxist socialism and Plato’s totalitarianism?

Volko: The open society welcomes foreigners and integrates them into society. By means of democratic elections the government can be ousted and replaced by a more capable government. Popper essentially criticizes Marx and Plato for being enemies of freedom.

10. Jacobsen: In a Critical Rationalism, what is the mode of thinking there? In that, what is the process of a critical rationalist approaching a problem?

Volko: In general the approach is rational, based on facts and logical thinking rather than sentiments. However, the critical rationalist is also aware that rationalism is limited and that it is itself based on the irrational assumption that rational thinking is superior to emotional feeling.

11. Jacobsen: Naturally, I am lead to ask in succession. Why John Locke?

Volko: He is the author of Two Treatises of Government and generally considered the father of classical liberalism.

12. Jacobsen: Why Ludwig von Mises?

Volko: He is the author of Human Action and very influential in the libertarian community.

13. Jacobsen: Why Friedrich August von Hayek?

Volko: He was a Nobel Prize winning economist who wrote The Road to Serfdom. Like with Mises, many in the libertarian community identify with him.

14. Jacobsen: What some counterexamples to the given existence statements and universal statements, so as to show how this process works?

Volko: A universal statement is: “All ravens are black”. An existential statement is: “There is a white raven”. These two statements contradict each other. By proving the existential statement, the universal statement is disproven, and vice versa, though proving the universal statement and disproving the existential statement is very difficult.

15. Jacobsen: What states best represent classical liberal ideals now?

Volko: This question is difficult to answer, mostly because of my limited experience. Economically, small principalities such as Liechtenstein might come close to classical liberalism. Regarding personal freedom, there are limitations to it all around the world, but of course in the Western democracies people enjoy more personal freedom than in the People’s Republic of China and other dictatorships.

16. Jacobsen: Following from the last question, how could those states move the dial further towards classical liberal ideals of Mill, von Mises, von Hayek, Locke, and others?

Volko: By adopting laws that grant freedom and abolishing laws that limit it.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1]  Austrian Computer and Medical Scientist.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/volko-three; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/06/01

Abstract

Guillermo Alejandro Escárcega Pliego is the Founder of the Hall of Sophia. He discusses: economics; capitalism; monarchy; god; science; God’s law; meaning in life; making sense of the worldview; absolute monarchy; “turbo capitalism”; Matthew 22:37 and Mark 12:31; insufficiency of science for the truth; definition of God; God’s law some more; being in peace with the Creator of the universe; belief in individuals going against God as angry at God; religion as the only way to understand God; all positive religions leading to God; Moses as the one reflecting God’s law; intelligence as disconnected from belief, or not, in a god; and the ease of Facebook as a platform.

Keywords: capitalism, economics, God, Guillermo Alejandro Escárcega Pliego, religion.

An Interview with Guillermo Alejandro Escárcega Pliego on Philosophies, Religion, and God: Founder, Hall of Sophia (Part Three)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What economic system makes the most sense to you? Why?

Guillermo Alejandro Escarcega Pliego: Capitalism because is the only economic system in which someone can prosper.

2. Jacobsen: What social system makes the most sense to you? Why?

Pliego: Capitalism, since is the only social system in which everyone has the same opportunity to exchange goods.

3. Jacobsen: What political system makes the most sense to you? Why?

Pliego: Monarchy, it’s the only way to get rid of the corruption of democracy.

4. Jacobsen: Do you believe in a God, gods, or not, or remain uncertain about the matter entirely?

Pliego: Yes, I do.

5. Jacobsen: What scientific topic remains the most exciting to you?

Pliego: I don’t find science interesting at all to be honest.

6. Jacobsen: What ethical system makes the most sense to you? Why?

Pliego: I believe in God so I try to follow his law even though I sometimes fail.

7. Jacobsen: What is the meaning of life to you? Or what are the meanings of life to you?

Pliego: Life has several meanings, the most important meaning of all is to be in peace with God.

8. Jacobsen: How do these various points of contact – “makes the most sense” – come together into a knit blanket of worldview? A way to make sense of the world in a way that, to you, “makes the most sense.”

Pliego: I think that it would be hard for the readers of this interview to understand my worldview with the few things I wrote but I will say that it makes sense a lot.

9. Jacobsen: Any particular form of monarchy as a replacement for “the corruption of democracy” that appeals more than others to you?

Pliego: Absolute Monarchy.

10. Jacobsen: What styles or forms of Capitalism make the most sense socially and economically to you, as various flavours have been proposed of it?

Pliego: Turbo Capitalism.

11. Jacobsen: What other meanings of life – well – mean the most to you?

Pliego: “Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’”

Matthew 22:37

And

‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’

Mark 12:31

12. Jacobsen: Why isn’t science interesting to you?

Pliego: Because the paradigm that proposes has nothing to do with the truth.

13. Jacobsen: How do you define God?

Pliego: As the creator of the Universe and everything in it.

14. Jacobsen: How do you – or how does he – define “his law”?

Pliego: Basically his law are the rules he give us to live a good life.

15. Jacobsen: How do you fail to follow God’s law, whether on principle or in practice?

Pliego: It’s simple when you commit a sin – such as gluttony you are failing to follow his law.

16. Jacobsen: Why is “the most important meaning of all… to be in peace with God”?

Pliego: It’s simple if you are in peace with the creator of the universe you are in peace with you and the rest of the world.

17. Jacobsen: Any other principles or premises in its presentation so far to provide for framework or contextualization of it?

Pliego: I believe most people are mad at God because they don’t have the life they want so the only way to live a happy life is to being in peace with what he decided.

18. Jacobsen: Any thoughts on religion?

Pliego: Religion no matter which is the way to understand what God want from us and his plan for us. 

19. Jacobsen: Of the religions on offer, what ones seem most in alignment with the presentation of the belief in God and his law stated before to you?

Pliego: All religions lead to God except for the negative one of course.

20. Jacobsen: Do any particular holy figures, prophets, or religious texts help elucidate the mind and morality of this God for you? (And thank you for sharing personal beliefs, here, by the way.)

Pliego: Moses.

21. Jacobsen: For many within the high-IQ communities, they have a wide array of belief systems from atheism to agnosticism to monotheism, polytheism, and the like. Any speculations on the correlations between different standard segmentations of the high-IQ communities and various forms of religious and non-religious, theistic and non-theistic, beliefs held by them?

Pliego: I don’t think having a higher or lower I.Q. dictates if you are a theist or an atheist. 

I think that being a theist or an atheist depends of the personal experiences one has had in his life.

22. Jacobsen: Facebook can give an easy platform for the communities if one wants to join them, as in the Hall of Sophia – as so many use social media and allowing the shy or introverted smart to more readily engage on these platforms. What makes Hall of Sophia a good platform for easy engagement?

Pliego:  The reason is simple, almost everyone already uses Facebook running the Hall of Sophia through Facebook allows me and allows the rest of the members of the society to interact without any platform problems.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Founder, Hall of Sophia.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 1, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/pliego-three; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/05/22

Abstract

Christian is a Philosopher that comes from Belgium. What identifies him the most and above all is simplicity, for everything is better with “vanilla flavour.” Perhaps, for this reason, his intellectual passion is criticism and irony, in the sense of trying to reveal what “hides behind the mask,” and give birth to the true. For him, ignorance and knowledge never “cross paths.” What he likes the most in his leisure time, is to go for a walk with his wife. He discusses: love; meaning of life; love as part of the meaning of life; emotional version of hell; psychopaths, narcissists, and sociopaths in love; differentiation of a psychopath from a sociopath; differentiation of ordinary notions of narcissist from formal Narcissistic Personality Disorder; definition of the West; definition of the East; cultures in the East flourishing; nations mixing values; a show of love; more on “seeking death”; the “pink feeling”; more on love; mimicking of moral behaviour by psychopaths and sociopaths; a narcissistic age; Babylon and Persia; the flourishing of some nations compared to others in the 21^st century; the extreme form of love leading to hatred exemplified in some of the extreme loves of the young; secondary narcissism; nonconformity and defiant nonconformity differing from regular isolationism of an ordinary unsocial person or a similarly in-isolation genius who requires said isolation to pursue their intellectual or artistic work; something most likely missing from the brain for a complete absence of conscience; the pathology of the psychopath and the pathology and the sociopath; a primary narcissistic age; theatrical examples of the “strictly moralistics” oriented individual;  more differences between the sociopath and the psychopath; “spiritualist wisdom”; resisting the pull for the desire of ourselves; other important characteristics feed into high performance or higher probability of achievement; moral repressions; the lack of remorse as a key indicator of psychopaths; Nietzsche Ubermensch in contrast to Untermensch; the primary narcissism idea reflecting an age of infantilism as opposed to immaturity; the reasons for the higher stature given to religious figures; abuse of women by men; simple behavourial, speech, or emotional cues/proxies of psychopaths and sociopaths; delay of gratification and other mental skills; first love extensions; the roaring lion as the child; and the collapse of Nietzsche.

Keywords: Christian Sorenson, life, love, psychopaths, sociopaths.

An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Life, Love, Psychopaths, and Sociopaths (Part Four)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Let’s talk more about love and life. What is love?

Christian Sorenson: I feel, that if there is no greater “show of love,” than giving until you don’t have anything else to give, and therefore to get to give what you “do not have.” Then if this is right, and to love is to “donate” something or ourselves, it could be said that love is a “gift,” in the sense of “nothing.”

2. Jacobsen: What is the meaning of life?

Sorenson: I believe, that is equivalent to the opposite of a state of perfect equilibrium that would be equal to “zero.” In turn, it is an insistent search to “return” towards an original state, that previously existed, and that is synonymous with “inert.” In this sense, it would be a “force of compulsion,” that tends to repeat, and therefore “seeks death.”

3. Jacobsen: What makes love part of the meaning of life for most?

Sorenson: I feel, it is the desire to live a “pink feeling,” that strictly speaking, seeks to complete the “ideal statue” of ourselves, “through pieces” that are “swallowed” inside, from “partial identifications” with others.

4. Jacobsen: Is an emotional version of hell quintessentially the inability to love?

Sorenson: The emotional version of hell has nothing to do with the inability to love, but rather with not “feeling loved,” and the consequences of “not being reciprocated” or even worse, “abandonment” by the loved object, which is lived as an experience of “mourning.” I think that love as such, and realistically speaking, is “conditional” on something, and therefore, it is more further from romanticism than from aggression, and if within a vital context, is “never eternal,” then it always will be intrinsically linked to “suffering.”

5. Jacobsen: What do you make of the ‘love’ of psychopaths and narcissists and sociopaths?

Sorenson: Psychopaths and narcissists, and sometimes sociopaths, dispense with love, since they only establish “symbiotic” relationships of “dependency” towards them, for “profit-utilitarian” purposes.

6. Jacobsen: What differentiates a psychopath from a sociopath?

Sorenson: The psychopath, unlike the sociopath who is “anomic,” draws attention because he appears as someone “too normal.” In this sense, the second openly and oppositionally, defies the “law,” with the clear intention of violating it and staying out of it, regardless of the damage this may cause to “others” and to “society.” The former, on the other hand, feels in a certain way that he “represents the law,” and therefore who has the right, discerns between “good” and “bad,” and therefore tries to “challenge” the established norms, by demonstrating that he is able to benefit of it, by staying within their limits, but without suffering any sanction for his conduct.

7. Jacobsen: What differentiates ordinary notions of a narcissist from formal Narcissistic Personality Disorder?

Sorenson: They differ, because “ordinary” notions, are generally related to “narcissistic traits,” that fundamentally have to do with “self-recognition” needs and to “attract the attention”of others. While in “formal” notions, what exists is the absence of “remorse” and “empathy,” the “lack of control” for violent behavior, and the inability to establish “lasting emotional” relationships.

8. Jacobsen: I live in North America. We both live in what is deemed – without current geographic considerations anymore – “the West,” as in Greek Humanism through Western European Enlightenment into North American techno-capitalist freedom culture, including offshoots in Israel – save me Tel Aviv! What defines the West?

Sorenson: It is determined by the “Judeo-Christian” religious values, ​​and the “cultural” development, that emerged from the “Greek” and “Roman” empires.

9. Jacobsen: By comparison and contrast, naturally, what defines the East?

Sorenson: In my opinion, it is mainly defined by the Babylonian, Neo-Babylonian and Persian empires.

10. Jacobsen: Why have some cultures in the East flourished when taking on the West’s values and not when sitting purely on the East’s values?

Sorenson: Due to the “anthropological” vision that they had of man, especially in relation to “liberalism,” to the development of some sciences such as “mathematics,” and because of the “cosmogonic” conception they had of the universe.

11. Jacobsen: Why have some, as Singapore, flourished, as under Lee Kuan Yew, Goh Chok Tong (briefly), and currently under Lee Hsien Loong, when mixing and matching values of East and West (as represented by the United States and China) as appropriate?

Sorenson: I feel that from the point of view of historical origin, prevailing values ​​and the development achieved there is a close analogy between Singapore and Israel. Both fought to become independent from English colonialism, with founding prime ministers such as Lee Kuan Yew and Ben Gurion with stories of similar lives and coming to lead in both cases the development of high technology worldwide in addition to other achievements. Both states have the peculiarity of representing “models of democracy,” since they have managed to integrate different ethnic groups and cultures of the West and East, from the idiomatic to the religious, being the common factor that has articulated it and enabled this, the strong investment they have made in education, and strengthening citizen values ​​such as respect for the law and diversity.

12. Jacobsen: Is a show of love truly love or merely an adornment on a tree for presentation, admiration, rather than true instinct, true feeling, of the utter giving of oneself?

Sorenson: From my point of view, “instinct,” in a human context, goes beyond the “biological,” and therefore is analogous to an extremely variable “force” regarding the “object” as such, and the “behavioral process.” In this sense, “true love” is not equivalent to a “feeling,” but rather to a certain way of relating to a “particular object,” and consequently to a form of “human drive.”

13. Jacobsen: Some philosophical systems preach denial self. Others instruct self-annihilationism. Is this part of the ‘seeking death’? A differentiation of a common pathway for the meaning of lie to seek death.

Sorenson: I believe, that it is neither “one” nor the “other,” by itself but rather “both,” since in human beings, these represents two tendencies that are contrary, but coexisting. Meanwhile one of them “struggles to live,” the other “seeks death.” Therefore “one” and the “other,” leads us to live in a “continuous conflict” with ourselves, that finally to be worse, doesn’t allows to know for what reason this happens.

14. Jacobsen: Can you expand on the “pink feeling”?

Sorenson: “Pink feeling” or “pink love,” is to suppose that love is similar to a romantic idyll of “twin souls,” who “unite” for “eternity.” Or an “unconditional surrender” of oneself, in order to seek the “good of another,” when “deep down,” is neither a “feeling” nor one “altruistic oblation” for another. As well, at the same time, it is not something eternal, nor a romantic or disinterested motion towards someone. Paradoxically, with love we generally do not understand, “why our right hand, knows what the left does,” or for what reason does it “translate into violence,” rather than being an “expression of sweetness.” And lastly, why sometimes it becomes into the “other side of the coin of hatred” or vice versa. Therefore if what love means, is taken to the extreme, I feel that sometimes “true love, will end in hatred.”

15. Jacobsen: Is love fundamentally internal hope for extrinsic reciprocation, where the external reciprocation is received (or perceived as received) in like kind? If so, this may help clarify individuals who marry apartment complexes, or some such thing.

Sorenson: I would rather say, that love is an “internal ideal” to be “internally reciprocated.” In my opinion, love is “phantasmatic,” since what is “sought” generally is not real, and it is not even “fulfilled” on that plane, and therefore it is an “ideal,” because it’s always an “unsatisfied desire.” Its frustration, is “intrinsic,” due to the fact that the “object” being pursued is “a mirage,” that does “not exist.” And in consequence, is “not even real” in an imaginary dimension.Nevertheless, in turn, this is the “great surprise” of love, that thanks to the “failure” for fulfilling its desire, it “exists” and is “so longed” by everyone.

16. Jacobsen: Can psychopaths and sociopaths be moral, or only mimic that which is intrinsically moral? In this sense, a parrot can simulate human statements without corresponding comprehension, i.e., a psychopath or a sociopath can enact a moral act, which is play-acted without comprehension of the importance of the consideration and intent behind the act, and the outcome of the act.

Sorenson: In fact I would say, that what they both do is a “morality role play” or even a “staging of it” more than something else.Paying attention to some subtleties, it could be said that what differentiates them, is the way of how psychopaths, unlike sociopaths, are “strictly moralistics,” since the know perfectly norm’s meanings, nevertheless, “acted-out” hypocriticallythem in an “exemplary way.” While the second ones, in this sense are “defiantly” more opened and franks, “leaving clear” their lack of interest and “nonconformity” towards any social conventionalism. The essential point in here regarding the formers more than the last ones, is the absolute absence of real “conviction of conscience,” that is ethically aggravated by its “life motive” to “deceive” and “pervert” others.

17. Jacobsen: Do we live in an informally-defined narcissistic age?

Sorenson: In some way yes, since I consider that our age lives in what I would denominate “state of primary narcissism,” due to the fact that to a certain extent it could be classified as “infantilist.” Similar to that of the child, when as a “little beast” felt himself to be the “center” of the world, and wanted to “capture” the full attention of its mother or substitute, at the same time he intended to “devour,” without being able to “postpone” the immediacy of its needs, everything within his reach, as if “everything” and “everyone,” was “disposable,” and had to “prostrate” at his feet.

18. Jacobsen: Why Babylon and Persia as representative of the East?

Sorenson: Since in Babylon, “occult knowledge systems” were developed, who in turn promoted the emerging of certain sciences, that after its fall as an empire, they separated from each other, for passing towards Persia first and then to the East, as a part of these, and through becoming into “spiritualists wisdoms.”

19. Jacobsen: Why will some nations flourish and dominate in the 21st century compared to others?

Sorenson: Because they will be able to “integrate” existing polarities, with “emotional maturity,” overcoming all kinds of “totalitarianisms” and “fundamentalisms,” and by managing to postpone the “desire for oneself” satisfying the “desire of the other.” Reaching to understand, in a certain way, that by the exercise of “alienating ourselves,” the “cycle of life” is going to gives us back, that energy transformed into “good.”

20. Jacobsen: Is the extreme form of love leading to hatred exemplified in some of the extreme loves of the young?

Sorenson: Not only, because it also sometimes occurs in adults. When I refer to the term “extreme,” rather than wanting to say something that is of the order of “intensity,” what I intend is to allude to a “logical consequence,” in relation to what is expected of love after analyzing its parts. Therefore, hatred can arise regardless of the “depth,” with which love has been lived. However, there exists a condition whose antecedent as “necessary presence” for the manifestation of love, and in consequence probably also for hate, will be fundamental. This, is the “feeling of infatuation” which in my opinion, refers to an “experience of identification,” that is not “consciously perceived,” with part of the “object” of the loved one. And which ultimately, has a character of “appropriation,” and therefore, when it is not possible to be “possessed” is experienced as a “non-correspondence.” Lastly this may befelt as a “rejection,” and in consequence can easily trigger “aggressive feelings” that may end in “hatred.”

21. Jacobsen: What would be secondary narcissism?

Sorenson: It would properly be known as “pathological narcissism,” in contrast to the “primary” one, that would necessarily constitute part of the child’s “normal” psychological development. It’s named “secondary,” because “evolutionarily” speaking, always appears from early adulthood, and since it would derive from a “personality disorder,” that therefore, “psychodynamically” regards a “psychic structure,” which would be able to explained it.

22. Jacobsen: How does this nonconformity and defiant nonconformity differ from regular isolationism of an ordinary unsocial person or a similarly in-isolation genius who requires said isolation to pursue their intellectual or artistic work?

Sorenson: They are different, since first of all antisocials are usually “not geniuses.” Besides, the latters in general are mobilized by high “universal ethical canons.” Also they differentiate each other regarding their goals, because meanwhile one pursues an “intellectually productive matter,” the other tries to challenge and destroy “moral conventions,” that are necessary for the proper functioning of society, and in many cases are valuable and fundamental. And on the other hand, both are far from each other, due to the fact that geniuses seek isolation, as something similar to a “facilitating space” for what they search. While sociopaths, pursues it by following an “empty sense,” that doesn’t have anything else beyond the simple fact of “marginality.”

23. Jacobsen: What would most likely be missing from the brain for a complete absence of conscience?

Sorenson: I believe, it’s likely to a sort of “lobotomy” with hereditary or congenital etiology, and therefore, it may be represented bysome kind of failure, at “neurochemical conductivity,” or “anatomical neurostructures” levels, either in the frontal sector as well as the hippocampus.

24. Jacobsen: From a philosophical standpoint on the psychological condition, what best represents the pathology of the psychopath and the pathology and the sociopath?

Sorenson: In my opinion, by the concepts in Nietzsche, of “rebellion,” represented by the figure of a “roaring lion” trying to free himself from all the moral restraints imposed, in the case of the sociopaths. And that of “super-man,” in psychopaths, embodied by a “child,” who simply plays with everything, without measuring the consequences of anything regarding its acts.

25. Jacobsen: Is a primary narcissistic age one of immaturity reflected in socioemotional and intellectual age? In more precise terms, what would be the approximate emotional and intellectual age of the general population of the planet to produce such a primary narcissism?

Sorenson: “Primary narcissism” in the context of individual evolutionary development, “does not reflects” psycho-social or intellectual immaturity. Nevertheless, analogically speaking, society could be said that rather to be considered as immatured, it could be more seeing as “infantile,” since its state is of “evolutionary fixation.” Equivalent, to the most primitive or basic stage of individuals development. In this sense, from a “symbolical perspective,” what represents its maturity level, is “orality,” because is not capable of “integrating” into a “single object,” both positives and negatives aspects, regarding “mother’s images” of good and bad breasts. At the same time, “eagerly devours” everything around, with the sole purpose of satiating itself, and “aggressively bites” the object, if its perceived as “threatening,” when does not meets the expectations of needs.

26. Jacobsen: Any theatrical examples of the “strictly moralistics” oriented individual?

Sorenson: Leaving aside the examples of “moral repressions,” that obey a different nature, in my opinion the best “graphed examples,” on the one hand are the cases of pedophilia, “veiled” by supposedly “asexual clergy figures” invested with “sacred holiness.” And on the other side, the “swindlers of neck and tie,” and the men who psychologically and physically “violates women,” maintaining the “status quo” of normality and happy couples.

27. Jacobsen: I heard one casual differentiation, between the psychopath and the sociopath, is the sociopath in a bar room who is insulted and then will react and punch. Whereas, the psychopath will wait until three days later and then disrepute the individual, subsequently murdering them. It is much more impulsive in the former and calculated in the latter. Any thoughts on simple thought experiments or examples to make the point as clear as possible with a mental image?

Sorenson: Not necessarily. It is easier to find sociopaths with a base of psychopathy, than psychopaths with antisocial behaviours. One of the characteristics that stands out the most in the latter’s profile, is the importance they gives to their “self-images,” arriving almost to an obsessive concern about it, since has an outstanding importance, the fact of “projecting” it positively in order to reach a “favorable impression” of themselves on others. Linked to this last, lacks of “moral conscience,” in the sense of not having a “feeling of conviction” or conviction regarding why they choose good instead of evil, all though paradoxically “know” that they “know it.” Their “maxim,” will always be “to pass the traffic light with a yellow light,” and therefore will know better than anyone their “underlying motivations,” and the reason because they have an absence of conscience about the “existence” of some kind of “good” independent from themselves, has nothing to do with a “condition of impossibility.”

28. Jacobsen: What makes “spiritualist wisdom” spiritual and wisdom?

Sorenson: I feel, that the fact of “constituting complex knowledge” that’s capable of being “rationally explained,” on what regards not only the origin, but the functioning and destination as well of everything that exists, and therefore in what the “cycle of life” means.

29. Jacobsen: Will this resisting the pull for the desire of ourselves require more trainable skills like postponement of gratification?

Sorenson: I believe, that this “simple principle” covers everything, and in turn translates into the need to “re-do” the path backwards, from creation until now. In other words, by “returning” to our origin, as if we were “climbing” the steps of a ladder, in which each stage poses a “challenge” with an additional difficult. The fact of “overcoming” it, allows us to “achieve knowledge” at that level. In consequence, if it is done successively, it will facilitate everyone to reach the “head” from where everything was “emerged.” In this way, what “renunciation of oneself” means, is “progressive,” since it is acquired depending on each stage, and therefore it is “not possible” to know it “a priori,” before having passed each state of “spiritual evolution.”

30. Jacobsen: Aside from global characteristics of intelligence, what other important characteristics feed into high performance or higher probability of achievement?

Sorenson: I feel, that both, the “emotional” and “intellectual” capacities, for “desiring” to put ourselves in the other’s place, after having understood the other as deeply as possible, And simultaneously with the last, the capacity, that I will name of “ambiguity” and “ambivalence,” in order to be able of “refraining ourselves” from making a “premature closure,” in relation to the “meaning” of things.

31. Jacobsen: What characterizes moral repressions?

Sorenson: I would say that’s a “psychic conflict,” originated by the “conscious effort” to stifle the “sexual impulse” without success, that is experienced with “displeasure,” through some “symbolic representative” of the paternal law that generates “guilt” and threatens with “punishment.” This internal trouble, “conversively” moves towards the body, provoking some kind of “suffering,” that’s expressed by “symptoms” of functional nature.

32. Jacobsen: What characterizes, philosophically speaking, the lack of remorse as a key indicator of psychopaths?

Sorenson: For who lacks of “remorse,” the “end pursued,” justifies the use of any type of “means” necessary to achieve it. In other words, transforms the person into a “resourse” who’s destiny is to satisfy its “utilitarian goals,” through the “indolent” use of “seduction” and “violence,” and therefore “alienating” its individual “dignity.”

33. Jacobsen: What was Nietzsche intending when he spoke of an Ubermensch, in contrast to an Untermensch? Is it the eternal child who plays with everything without a sense of remorse for immoral and unjust acts?

Sorenson: In my opinion, to understand both concepts well, it is necessary to analyze the works “Also sprach Zarathustra,” “Ecce Homo,” and “Der Antichrist” of Nietzsche. Regarding the image of the child who plays, is related more to the übermensch since he should be carried away by its “feelings” and “passions,” and in that way represent what the “super-man” really means. Nevertheless, at the same time, this child must be able to control himself, and therefore not only “seek pleasure,” because that would express a “weakness,” typical of the “last man,” but that in turn is quite different from acting with “moral remorse.” Respect the untermensch, I understand it rather with the meaning that I will denominate “infra-human,” which is very well reflected in the use that Nazi ideology gave through the term of “inferior people,” that ended up linked fundamentally with the Jewish people.

34. Jacobsen: What separates the primary narcissism idea reflecting an age of infantilism as opposed to immaturity, as infantilism can be seen as a cross-section of immaturity?

Sorenson: From my point of view, ”infantilism” is always synonymous with “immaturity,” nevertheless “immaturity” doesn’t mean necessarily the same as “infantilism.” In turn, “primary narcissism,” is not equivalent to “immaturity,” since one is a natural stage in development and the other not, however it may be analogous to “infantilism” in the context of an era. Therefore, if the latter is defined as a “condition of immaturity,” which it also could be “chronic”and “asymmetric,” since it is “not overcome” with the simple passage of time, and is “disharmonious” between parts that are adult and others that are not. Then it is possible, to talk about “primary narcissism” in an era, that is “immature,” and “childish” in that context.

35. Jacobsen: Why are clergy – religious authority figures – given such mythology around them, e.g., the “sacred holiness,” the ‘asexuality,’ and an assumed authority on things only spoken and never seen? How can members of these religious groups leave them in order to find a healthier way of life or one of freedom from the constraints of living under the authority of clergy figures?

Sorenson: Since in my opinion, they are “representations” of a “representative who represents” in the “symbolizing process” of what for me is the “name of the father,” which would establishes the “duty of being,” as moral conscience. Religion, is one of the possible ways but not the only to get there. If it’s the option chosen, I feel that the only manner to find a healthier way of life, is to adopt a religion, “but without becoming religious.”

36. Jacobsen: For the other category given, of the men who psychologically and physically violate, or abuse, women, what drives them? What draws some women to them? How can people get out of those kinds of relationships?

Sorenson: What leads many men to that, is something they cannot avoid, and in that sense the weight of their “psychic constellation” weighs more than anything else. They are subjects “who know,” and what is worse, “they know what is good for one woman,” which is already “violent” as such. Afterwards usually comes the “seduction process,” in which she may succumb, but sooner or later will wake up, to realize in the best of cases, that has lived in captivity “inside a golden cage,” without really having conscience of what she was doing. The outcome is her “rebellion,” and the search of breathable space. This triggers the “second moment of violence,” through “imposition” and the spiral of aggression that follows it. These type of subjects don’t have the option of being different, and its pattern will be identical regardless of who is involved, since invariably needs to “seduce” and after to “convince” their victims, in order to “pervert” them through “deception,” and therefore are “hardly treatable.” They are generally “dialectical” and “mutually symbiotic” relationships, where there are women who look without really knowing, this pattern, because in some way they tend to “repeat” by an “acting-out” mechanism, of the ancient relationships with their father, who used to become “idealized,” when they have being too “authoritarian” and “punishing” figures. To get out of these “vicious circles,” it must be she who puts the “brakes” first, since it is difficult that he does it. And in turn, it is necessary to do so by “applying zero tolerance” criterion against the minimum abuse, being aware at the same time, that it depends directly on her, “that no other woman is going to be aggressed.”

37. Jacobsen: When you come across sociopaths or psychopaths, what are simple behavourial, speech, or emotional cues/proxies of them? We can tell a sick person based on a persistent cough. We can avoid them. Similarly, there must be “coughs” of a like-kind in the behaviour, speech, and emotions (feigned or real-but-blunted).

Sorenson: Precisely, that’s the “mis-conception” about them, since these kind of subjects “aren’t sick persons.” In fact they do not have any disease, because they have a perfectly preserved “reality judgment,” and in addition in the broadest sense of the word.

They do not “suffer from anything,” as normal patients do. Rather it is the opposite, since it is a society that “suffers” because of them. If the above is correct, then it would not be appropriate to give them a “treatment” of something.

And therefore, the “environment” that should have them, it must be the prison and not the hospital. It seems to me, that the most “remarkable behavioural” characteristic of these individuals, is that they present themselves with a mixture of “excess seduction and goodness,” at the same time that it is possible to perceive them, as if they were “cold as ice,” and “sharp as a knife.”

38. Jacobsen: Matt Scillitani noted this “simple principle” covers everything about the core of intelligence too. There is research on Executive Function as a larger compilation of cognitive attributes. Does delay of gratification reflect the necessary function for the development of complex, sustainable social arrangements, including marriages and societies?

Sorenson: In some way yes, since the “delay of gratification,” requires to develops cognitive skills that allow “the source” or “object” of gratification to be symbolized, in the sense of “resignifying” it immaterially, in order to be able to satisfy the original need, through what I am going to name as “procuration” or “second intention.” As a “substitute,” that also allows to “cathectize” the energy that first triggered it. In turn, it would be possible to do something similar with “social dynamics,” which could improve the different levels of real interrelation in society.

39. Jacobsen: Our first love in the world is love of mother, as part of an integrated organism. Our second love is others. Our third love is the differentiation of self from mother. The lattermost as the process of individuation. How does this pattern of loves put constraints on types of loves and kinds of interpersonal arrangements for human beings?

Sorenson: I think that the different loves throughout life, are a sort of “reissue” of the “first or original love” with the mother. In a way, we also always “yearn to return” to maternal love, comparing all loved ones with that “first figure.” Something existed in our development, “symbolically” speaking, that did not allow us “to access” our mother, and forcing then to go out, and seek “substitute loves” throughout life. That “prohibition,” in my opinion is the one that enabled us to successfully enter the “symbolic world,” and “accept a law” that we carry within ourselves in order to discern with conviction, between the “morally” good and bad.

40. Jacobsen: Is the “roaring lion,” in terms of “rebellion,” more a child wailing than anything else?

Sorenson: I feel that he is a “self-centered” and “capricious” child, who plays with a “yo-yo,” expecting that the toy “goes and comes” back, nevertheless if that doesn’t happens, since he can’t pick it up with the string, he “cries but with rage,” because feels that the world, does not want to “follow his rules” of the game.

41. Jacobsen: What happened to Nietzsche’s thoughts over time? What was the symbolism of the moment that he collapsed and went insane? The purported moment of seeing the flogging of a horse, running over to it, and then holding its neck so as to protect it, followed by a collapse. A rather dramatic narrative of a mind unravelling over time with a climactic instant.

Sorenson: I am not sure if Nietzsche was really crazy or not, maybe he just felt so. In any case, I think that “no one can go crazy, even if he wants to.” He ends up being a “slave”to his beliefs, even though he tried to rebel from almost everything. In some way, it’s similar to what happened to Robinson Crusoe, when he “saw a mark”on the beach. Somehow, is a manner of finding “the presence” of something, that at the same time is “absent,” and therefore, when he wanted to “erase it,” its existence became even more evident for him.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Independent Philosopher.

[2] Individual Publication Date: May 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-four; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/05/22

Abstract

Justin Duplantis is a Member of the Triple Nine Society and the current Editor of its journal entitled Vidya. He discusses: nurturance of the young and gifted; differentiation based on learning styles; schooling and moral education; synchrony difficulties; the pervasively intelligent child; nutritional and health habits; social life; guidance in early relationships for boy-boy, girl-girl, or boy-girl time; and modelling healthy relationships by example. 

Keywords: gender, gifted, health, Justin Duplantis, nutrition, synchrony difficulties, Triple Nine Society, young.

An Interview with Justin Duplantis on the Gifted Young: Editor, Vidya (Part Four)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What about the nurturance of the young and highly intelligent? You have children. How should this be done and with the proper care of a benevolent parent or guardian?

Justin Duplantis: I would hardly consider myself an expert in this realm. I have three and four year old boys. Both are members of Mensa. They joined a year ago. For me, the key was identifying their giftedness early. This enables them to ascertain the proper resources during this critical developmental time. With that said, they are very different. Although they are both highly gifted, they have unique challenges and interests.

2. Jacobsen: For girls and boys, should there be gender differences in the style of the gifted education?

Duplantis: I do not feel as though it is so much as a question of gender, rather the necessity of differentiation based upon learning style. My oldest is able to hear information once and retain, as opposed to my youngest. He requires more tactical learning, to stay engaged. This may be due to the 18 month age separation, but I feel it is personality characteristics.

3. Jacobsen: For girls and boys, how should schooling and moral education in the home reflect the level of giftedness – highly, exceptionally, profoundly, etc.?

Duplantis: It is vital for parents to be well-informed regarding the characteristics of gifted youth. Generally speaking, the higher the intelligence, the more exaggerated the characteristics. My eldest, Anderson, is stereotypical. He is emotional sensitive, has a strong moral compass, and requires positive reinforcement. My younger boy, Crawford, does not share these. Although they may share a high level of intelligence, they are still very different.

4. Jacobsen: What are some of the synchrony difficulties gifted adolescents may experience as they travel through the turbulent and rapid changes of the teenage years?

Duplantis: Acceptance in society and social groups is tough for any adolescent, but when there is a significant variance in intelligence with your “peers”, it creates an additional challenge. Just as someone that has an IQ of 60 would have a difficulty in societal integration, an individual with an IQ of 140+ would face different, but similar issues. There are resources that aid the mentally challenged with these sort of difficulties, yet assistance for the exceptionally gifted is nonexistent. This is what I hope to change.

5. Jacobsen: For the pervasively intelligent child, how can adults in their lives help them form confidence based on real talents and competencies?

Duplantis: The key is acceptance and support. When a child shows interest in whatever it may be, the parents need to ensure they provide the proper resources to harness their potential. At the same time, pushing them into an area of disinterest is just as harmful as lacking support in areas that they would like to pursue.

6. Jacobsen: What about the nutritional and health habits for them? This one is probably more general. How can a parent assist the gifted child have appropriate nutrition to perform optimally in school and have the energy to do kid and teenager stuff throughout the day?

Duplantis: Health and nutrition habits are not intellectually dependent. Regardless of intelligence, proper nutrition is necessary for mental and physical development and maintenance.

7. Jacobsen: Social life may be a neglected part of the lives of the young gifted. Based on personal experience in the Triple Nine Society, or through reading and conversations with other gifted individuals, does this reflect a common problem? Is social life a concern for the gifted more than others because of a trend of isolation, or not?

Duplantis: The lacking of a traditional social life seems to absolutely be a common thread among the exceptionally gifted. The reason I say traditional, is because many times there are nontraditional relationships forged. At times socialization is between intellectual peers. Often times there is a substantial age differential, which creates its own challenges. The further from the mean an individual is in intelligence, the more difficult it is to have the traditional relationships.

8. Jacobsen: What about when it comes boy-boy, girl-girl, or boy-girl time for the gifted adolescent and young adult? How can a parent or a guardian guide and nurture healthy relations at those crucial periods of early life?

Duplantis: I have yet to enter that stage with my two boys, so I am unsure how we will aid in navigating our boys through those treacherous waters. With that said, I would recommend starting early with reiterating different is not damaged. Embracing the unique qualities of others aids in the establishment and maintaining of relationships, regardless of gender.

9. Jacobsen: Following from the previous question, how can parents model healthy relations?

Duplantis: Leading by example. If we call for our children to be accepting of the differences of others, we must practice what we preach. If our children see us judging others, they will follow suit and vice versa.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Editor, Vidya, Triple Nine Society; Member, Executive Committee, Triple Nine Society.

[2] Individual Publication Date: May 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/duplantis-four; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/05/22

Abstract

Tor Arne Jørgensen is a member of 50+ high IQ societies, including World Genius Directory, NOUS High IQ Society, 6N High IQ Society just to name a few. He has several IQ scores above 160+ sd15 among high range tests like Gift/Gene Verbal, Gift/Gene Numerical of Iakovos Koukas and Lexiq of Soulios. His further interests are related to intelligence, creativity, education developing regarding gifted students, and his love for history in general, mainly around the time period of the 19th century to the 20th century. Tor Arne works as a teacher at high school level with subjects as; History, Religion, and Social Studies. He discusses: interest in history; global governance; ethics; philosophy and ethics; governance as important in a modern world; fundamentalist religion; governance in the highly technological world; human beings in relation to one another and the institutions built by them; a digital world; and future human societies on the risks and promises of the 21st century.

Keywords: ethics, governance, history, religion, rights, technology, Tor Arne Jørgensen.

An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Background, Identity, Mentors, Education, and Interests (Part Two)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Let’s talk about history, your interest in it. Why this particular focused interest in history?

Tor Arne Jørgensen: My interest in history comes from an early stage around 10 years of age, and forward. Why? Well as it goes, it all started with movies of the old west, cowboys and Indians an such. This particular time period was very exciting to me, and by that fact started to dive myself into books about old western themes. As time went on, this fascination led me further into the time period as a whole from the early 19th century and up to the late 20th century. Then my interest shifted from the old west, to be more about history divided into sections within numerical fields. By that, I saw history as a big jigsaw puzzle to be solved.

Thus gaining a better understanding of terms and their reasons for why, within; politics, commercial interest, migration patterns, trade routes, and the transition into the industrial revolution, as both national and global interests alike. Specific to Norwegian democratic processes in the year of 1814, and thus paving the new way forward into today’s democracy, first influenced by the American Revolution, then followed by the French Revolution, is for me the chief field of interest as to the historical aspect in question.

2. Jacobsen: As with many gifted individuals, there persists a desire for fresh information. You mentioned Mark Mazower. What about his text provided a context for understanding global governance within a historical contextualization of the issue?

Jørgensen: Angle of reply is to look back at the time of The League of Nations, built on Woodrow Wilson’s initiative, and as I would like to point out, idealism in its most fragile state regarding utopianism. A failed project with horrible after-effects on a global scale within numerous fields, like economics, trade, state governance just to name a few. Hereby instigated by greedy state leader, built on the notion of world peace. We all know today how well that went, with reference to the tragic outcome of WWII. Forward into the days of the beginning of the United Nations. The UN then was more effective than today, the leaders of yesterday more robust than the leaders of today.

This organization, is built on the same idealism as regards utopianism, but in a more liberal way now the before. How well is it working, hereby agrees on a long debate on its own merits, but still. The outlines are evident within a structural notion as to the fundamental principles of Effective Altruism regards to global governance. The structural draft from the implementations of wars throughout the ages, the dividing of nations for a better and more understanding world of tomorrow, mirrored in the belief of global imprisonment of idealism within an altered state of mind, as to be debated on a later time.

3. Jacobsen: Peter Singer remains a controversial and important figure within the atheist and secular community, and within the professional ethicist class in Academia. How does Practical Ethics, and Effective Altruism, provide a basis for the advancement of a utilitarian ethic into the area of broader ideas of rights? A current era in which divinity of individual human rights and special privileges afforded to most royals, as in the Divine Right of Kings, collapsed and gave way to the democratization of rights as seen in documents including December 10, 1948, United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We can see this instantiated, even bolstered, by modern scientific findings with the discovery of the evolved nature of human beings in a tree of life and one species amongst a litany of others. Some philosophies, including Humanism, incorporate international human rights and modern science within a set of guiding principles of understanding the nature of the world and for orienting human life. 

Jørgensen: Peter Singer and his view on ethics as to the field of Academia, was and is of great importance for all students and scholars alike. His opinions of an ethical nature towards the utilitarianism of theocracy, as an aspect of divinity both on religious ground and an of the notion of constitutional royalism. The aspect of human rights for both humans and all life in general, hereby the equality of human/animal rights. The settlements of an endemic by the termination of these rights, to cross the religious implementations of preserving all life at all cost, but at what personal gain.

The fall of the superior rule of feudalism, to nothing else, then to be replaced by the democratic realism fueled by capitalism. To what aim is this to be understood as nothing else than a replacement of divine powers, driven by the notion of Darwinism. To bring about the understanding of and by the fact, that divinity is to the beholder, in terms of the notion of lust to rule as by personal intent. This thus understood as the implementation of ethics on both sides of the religious spectrum at the cost of democracy.

4. Jacobsen: What philosophies and ethics make the most sense to you?

Jørgensen: The moral and ethical aspect within a philosophical thought line, now when outline seeks to be debated as to the developing stages regarding its historical continuity. The conceptual fault-lines as a paradigm in its own right with regards to inequality across the political sphere. The social diversity of trade politics within the EU trade organization as to belittling the terms of agreement of the nation’s importance, is what I seek to speculate over as ethics of importance.

5. Jacobsen: When considering history and ethics, and the modern scientific world tied to technology, why is governance more important than ever?

Jørgensen: The importance of governance within the global society of today is indeed a nice angle of question. The technological imprint that is ever more evident, and by that as I see it, spinning more and more out of control. This is maybe one of the most important factors to be addressed in both present time and forward into the future. If one is to look at the present pandemic outbreak of the COVID-19 virus, governance for how to deal with this pandemic is needed now more then ever, as we will most surely be seeing a lot more of these types of outbreaks in the future. So hopefully in the next event, we will then be more prepared, as to how to contain or at least control its effect on a global scale more effectively.

As to both natural disasters and man-made disasters, the effect that the human race will further expose upon our planet as to an upscaling of global warming, marine pollution, overfishing, overpopulation, and more… What history has shown us if anything, is that the ethical aspect is seen as nothing more than a hindering obstacle to be tumbled over.

But even so, the most worrying factor of the ethical aspect is within economic politics, as the world is ever more seen as an interconnected unity to be profited upon as the cash cow for the greedy government powerhouses to fulfill their most vivid imaginations.

6. Jacobsen: How does fundamentalist religion work against modernist versions of ethics and governance?

Jørgensen: As an example, I would refer to the ancient religious rules of “hamarabi” in Judaism or “qisas” in Islam, or commonly what we refer to as “an eye for an eye,” these ancient religious rules fuel a tit-for-tat approach to justice, which then leads to escalation and further damage. Indeed, you could contend that much of the troubles in the Middle East are generated out of this single religious tenet of revenge. It directly conflicts with much of our more relatively recent International flora and fauna of conflict resolution from the United Nations and approaches to justice, etc.

7. Jacobsen: What kinds of governance make most sense for a highly advanced technological society now?

Jørgensen: Where do you start with a technological society? A “technological society” has been around since the industrial revolution – what we are moving to is a predominantly digital society, take for example a drone – a drone (a physical device but also driving digitization) can be used by the police to trace and catch criminals, they can carry food and essential items into inhospitable places, they are also arguably low emission means of carrying goods to peoples homes – yet is it right we see Amazon patenting the use of a ‘drone-zeppelin warehouse’ where drones literally pick up products from a zeppelin and bring them down to that areas houses based on the known demand for that area?

Drones are also now implements of war, controlled by a pilot sitting in a Nevada cave thousands of miles from where the drone is deployed – how do they fit in with the Geneva Convention? So, I would suggest refinement in the question posed. I would suggest the need for checks and balances to manage the issue between state control and individual freedom, and between international standards and national priorities. It is right that governments assess and govern those standards as mandated by that nation’s own standards of its people collectively, and as to what ‘de minimis’ standards and standards of international communications (but what about implements of war, e.g., drones?) – but also that governments themselves are held in check and do not ‘over-reach’ in tracking the populace for erstwhile means.

8. Jacobsen: How can the world of re-interpretations of ancient mythologies, i.e., religion, and newer ethics, i.e., Effective Altruism, come to bring about better understandings of the place of human beings in relation to one another and the institutions built by them?

Jørgensen: What could we learned from looking to the past, as to ground alone to further seeking answers to bring about a broader understanding of this principle. If one is to look at the religious content of understanding for a speculative better world, regards to redemption for the politics that your religious leaders fault themselves by. For reasons alone to seek guidance, is by that fact to rid themselves of their disciples wants and grievances. The effect that religion has had as to uphold this principle, is indeed lacking as to the content of ethical aspects for personal gain. Effective Altruism as a concept alone with the religion sided out, with that done, we can move forward in redefining ethics or maybe re-interpretation of a better way of an ethical route forward. Understanding how to implement a positive outlook in moulding a stronger and better world of tomorrow. What directions can we take, well in the use of the collaboration of stately institution, governments, support of donations to organizations that gives the biggest effect as to health, medicine support, and more…hereby as a possible suitable paradigm for explorations as an outlook for honourable intentions.

9. Jacobsen: As we see now, the world of the digital comes to coincide with the world of the material. Digital information as algorithms and biological systems as entities working in unison for a modern form of political systems and ethics bringing about unfathomably complex, previously, forms of human society tied to digital computation with a modicum of intelligence with well-structured and narrow domains. What does this portend now?

Jørgensen: What it portends now is to what aim it seeks to be understood as, and by what intent it appears to the general public, this within a widespread of governing resolutions. What does this mean, well that the purpose of unison politics is now to be understood as a means to endemic widespread propaganda within the governing resolutions of policy. As formatted by its complexity regarding the ethical aspect of combination toward the regulatory system, thus for the sole purpose of bettering, and ultimately preface of consolidation of this structural integrity by alterations of intent, directed by progress within the shift of political alignment. Then the system is modified, as by the underlying legal understandings by the term «ethics of justice». Does the complexity in question as a medium of intelligence serves its general purpose, yes within the framework of contemporary consent, and to the degree of forward-looking intent by structural implementations of governing policy.

10. Jacobsen: Following from the previous question, what does this portend for the future of human societies into the rest of the 21st century as the promises and risks increase more and more for human societies and the realization of the best and worst aspects of human nature and proclivities bolstered and built upon the incredible power of modern mastery and power of silicon, metal, concrete, and the informational?

Jørgensen: If one is to look beyond our selves as an output of the previous line of question, I would like to point out the following. First on the positive side, that we will further our selves in a way of implementing the fundamentals with regards to structural alterations of the policymaker at the governance level.

The educational fundaments for development into tomorrow with regards to what has been pointed out will ensure and secure positive output throw positive input by these indicators as a countermeasure against ethical fading. Next, human nature is and always will be to seek more complex forms of knowledge, for a reason to evolve oneself to confront the unknown factors within his or her own state of mind. The negative side will start a downward spiral, as within the endemic of revelatory proclamations. For the reasoning of pathetic self-deplorations of content. We can secure the world of tomorrow through the implementations of personal interest through the terms of Effective Altruism, but also we can just as easily cause our own demise on these same terms.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Child and Youth Worker.

[2] Individual Publication Date: May 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jørgensen-two; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: 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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/05/22

Abstract

Matthew Scillitani, member of The Glia Society and The Giga Society, is a web developer and SEO specialist living in North Carolina. He is of Italian and British lineage, and is predominantly English-speaking. He earned his bachelor’s degree in psychology at East Carolina University, with a focus on neurobiology and a minor in business marketing. He’s previously worked as a research psychologist, data analyst, and writer, publishing over three hundred papers on topics such as nutrition, fitness, psychology, neuroscience, free will, and Greek history. You may contact him via e-mail at mattscil@gmail.com. He discusses: intelligence as a global character; gap in the research before; test reliability and validity; caution about highest scores, highest measured scores, and so on; and other things to keep in mind.

Keywords: Giga Society, Glia Society, high-IQ, high-range, intelligence, Matthew Scillitani.

An Interview with Matthew Scillitani on Cautionary Notes About the High-Range: Member, Giga Society; Member, Glia Society (Part Six)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: This is the final session before the release of the book. Let’s wrap some things up, about half or a teensy bit more of the known Giga Society membership agreed to and conducted interviews over the period of about 4-5 years. As always, interviewees co-copyright the materials and can distribute for their own independent purposes. Now, this period of research comes to a close, except for additional versions of e-books or new e-books. What makes intelligence a global character of human thought when measured in the relevant reliable ranges of 40 to 160 IQ at S.D.15?

Matthew Scillitani: Intelligence is a very important feature that, I.Q. tests aside, we can all determine by communication alone. I think everyone knows that qualities like beauty, intelligence, and athleticism are important. But, because intelligence is the only one of those that can’t be perceived with our eyes, it’s harder to find, and easier to fake.

When someone’s lacking positive qualities the instinct is to keep searching until they find one in themselves. Lots of people, especially young people, focus on their intelligence (or lack thereof) when that happens. It’s made easier that intelligence is quantifiable on a familiar scale from I.Q. tests.

2. Jacobsen: If anyone has recommendations of IQ 160+ people – get them in now, this is the time for the interviews in the Summer (ending August 22). In addition, if any have IQs less than 160 S.D.15 while having some unique or special quality, then, please, send appropriate recommendations of others or oneself, I want to have the voices presented here. By the way, on the high range testers, why was this such a huge gap in the research before?

Scillitani: Small sample size, both in the tests and participants. Not many mainstream tests attempt to measure above I.Q. 160 (15 S.D.) anymore, and few people are willing (or seek) to take high-range I.Q. tests from fear of not doing well. Finding high-quality I.Q. tests with good reliability along with the participants to take those tests is hard. Paul Cooijmans formed the Giga Society as an incentive for test candidates to take more tests and do their best.

3. Jacobsen: Some important lessons for everyone to bear in mind here. The mainstream IQ tests – WAIS-IV, Stanford-Binet, Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices, etc. – ranging IQ 40-160, depending on the test, (160 would be perfect verbal and quantitative scores on the GRE, for example, or near it accounting for margins of error) on S.D. 15 averaged on 100 are the most reliable by far and with a trained professional psychometrician present or administered by a professional psychologist. There are sincere and honest efforts for above 4-sigma. However, as I have placed as a cautionary note in most or all relevant contexts of interviews recently, there should be a consideration. Some base their entire identities on one, maybe two, test scores, or a few media reportages years ago, and then proclaim themselves greatest mind in the history of the human race, or simply lie. Several cases of this abound in the niche community. It’s on the documentary record. Any thoughts here? I am breaking questions here, as I believe more needs statement.

Scillitani: It’s not good when someone bases their entire identity on an I.Q. test score, especially when it’s a jackpot score or from an unreliable test. Unfortunately, I’ve come across a fair share of high-range I.Q. test constructors who charge an incredible amount of money and clearly give scores much higher than the test candidate’s true level. When someone’s identity is really weak, it’s dangerous for them to take I.Q. tests, especially from those test makers. If the mean I.Q. of a test is 150-160 (15 S.D.), there is little variance in scores, it’s self-scoring, or allows re-tests then it’s safe to assume that test should be ignored.

There’s not really a point in worrying about who has the highest I.Q. or not because, besides low accuracy in that range, we don’t know if or when there are diminishing returns with higher scores.

4. Jacobsen: One common example as I like to note: Only five societies make the cut based on Wikipedia: Mensa International, Intertel, Triple Nine Society, Prometheus Society, and Mega Society. That’s for a good reason. One reason came from members of the high-IQ communities, some, faking names/having pseudonyms and trying to warp the editorial record of Wikipedia in their favour. Some of them got caught and heavily penalized internally to Wikipedia. That’s publicly known, on the record, and most relevant people remain aware of this, or can be informed with some research. That’s well-known, and often lied about to their relevant constituencies. That’s nothing surprising, ordinary human behaviour. [Ed. It can get a lot worse – eyes wide-open folks.] With that covered, it becomes a sort of “move along, nothing to see here” phenomenon. Next! So, on another large trend, there are, for example, 84 active high-IQ societies listed in the World Intelligence Network of Dr. Evangelos Katsioulis (Founder and President) and Dr. Manahel Thabet (Vice-President) here: https://www.iqsociety.org/iq-societies/iq-societies-alphabetical-list/. Wikipedia deserves kudos for its public service and narrowing down the listing to the safer and reliable societies, including the Guinness Book of World Records, as Dr. Ronald Hoeflin noted, about the Guinness Book of World Records and some of the contexts of the high-IQ societies, to me:

The Guinness Book of World Records abandoned its “Highest IQ” entry in 1989 because the new editor thought (correctly) that it is impossible to compare people’s IQs successfully at world-record level…

..Leta Speyer and Marilyn vos Savant, both of whom I had dated for a time, had been listed in the Guinness Book of World Records as having world-record IQs of 196 and of 228, respectively, Marilyn having displaced Leta in the 1986 edition. Leta felt that the 228 IQ of Marilyn was fake, but I was aware that these childhood scores could go well beyond 200 IQ because they fail to conform to the normal curve that Francis Galton had hypothesized as the shape of the intelligence curve in his seminal book Hereditary Genius (first edition 1869, second edition 1892). I was unable to contact Alicia Witt to see if she would be interested in joining the Mega Society. I should note that the three key founders of the ultra-high-IQ societies (99.9 percentile or above) were Chris Harding, Kevin Langdon, and myself. Harding founded his first such society in 1974, Langdon in 1978, and myself in 1982. Mensa, the granddaddy of all high-IQ societies with a 98th percentile minimum requirement, was founded in 1945 or 1946 by Roland Berrill and L. L Ware, and Intertel, with a 99th percentile minimum requirement, was founded in 1966 or 1967 by Ralph Haines. I don’t care to quibble about the precise dates that Mensa and Intertel were founded, so I have given two adjacent dates for each. In its article “High IQ Societies” Wikipedia lists just 5 main high-IQ societies: Mensa, Intertel, the Triple Nine Society, the Prometheus Society, and the Mega Society (minimum percentile requirements: 98, 99, 99.9, 99.997, and 99.9999, respectively; or one-in 50, one-in-100, one-in-1,000, one-in-30,000, and one-in-1,000,000; dates founded: roughly 1945, 1966, 1979, 1982, and 1982; founders: Berrill and Ware, Haines, Kevin Langdon, Ronald K. Hoeflin, and Ronald K. Hoeflin, respectively.

In short, any “Highest IQ in the world” claim is highly dubious – never believe it – based on the aforementioned reasons. “Highest measured IQ” may be tolerable, but then look at the test validity and reliability while bearing in mind the golden mean range of 40 to 160 IQ on S.D.15 or 4-sigma in either direction from the average. However, as I have learned, and others, too, “among the highest” may be a reasonable claim if amongst the highest rigorous high-range tests known to date, e.g., the Titan Test, and only first attempts under a person’s real name. Any further thoughts come to mind here?

Scillitani: I think that’s a smart idea, saying “among the highest” instead of “the highest” when discussing high scorers. Regarding the highest measured I.Q.s, it’s also probably best to discuss the top score(s) on any particular test and not across all tests due to differences between high-range tests. So, something like, “he had a record score on the WAIS” instead of “he had the highest I.Q. ever recorded” would be better.

Jacobsen: As a public service, I put this on most interviews with these individuals in the high-range environments now, at least somewhere:

*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.*

Any thoughts on this? I would encourage others to do the same, as a public service or as a public service announcement.

Scillitani: That makes a lot of sense and is much better than stating matter-of-factly that I.Q. tests are either completely accurate or total bunk in the high-range.

5. Jacobsen: What else should be kept in mind about the communities here?

Scillitani: That they’re not perfect, there’s no or low standards for admission into most I.Q. societies, and we should continue to be skeptical about the validity of extremely high I.Q. claimants. I really do hope that, in the future, we’ll tighten up admission into these societies and focus on promoting collaboration and productivity.

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

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, Giga Society; Member, Glia Society. Bachelor’s Degree, Psychology, East Carolina University.

[2] Individual Publication Date: May 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/scillitani-six; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/. Image Credit: Matthew Scillitani.

*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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/05/22

Abstract

Dr. Herb Silverman is the Founder of the Secular Coalition for America, the Founder of the Secular Humanists of the Lowcountry, and the Founder of the Atheist/Humanist Alliance student group at the College of Charleston. He authored Complex variables (1975), Candidate Without a Prayer: An Autobiography of a Jewish Atheist in the Bible Belt (2012) and An Atheist Stranger in a Strange Religious Land: Selected Writings from the Bible Belt (2017). He co-authored The Fundamentals of Extremism: The Christian Right in America (2003) with Kimberley Blaker and Edward S. Buckner, Complex Variables with Applications (2007) with Saminathan Ponnusamy, and Short Reflections on Secularism (2019), Short Reflections on American Secularism’s History and Philosophy (2020), and Short Reflections on Age and Youth (2020). He discusses: Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the UDHR, and Article 19 of the UDHR as recognized by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); American Convention on Human Rights; and First Amendment to the American Constitution.

Keywords: freedom, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, Herb Silverman, human rights, rights.

Free of Charge 2 – Free to Think and Free to Speak[1]^,[2]

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Several documents governing international law and international human rights give endowments to human beings based on the premise of a global rights-based order and particular conceptualizations of the constituents of a human being and, therefore, human nature with the need for freedom of expression as a fundamental part of human life. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the UDHR states:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. (United Nations, 1948)

On the international law rather than the international right side, Article 19 of the UDHR is recognized by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): 

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. (UN General Assembly, 1966)

Indeed, this continues into the national level of the stipulation of rights and laws. The international community not only supports the freedom of speech, but goes much farther than the United States of America in the permission for the widest possible definition of freedom in the transmission of communication between two operators or citizens with the “Freedom of Expression” as opposed to the “Freedom of Speech” enshrined at a national level for America. Why are these international rights and laws important for the protection of individual Americans who may, for example, take a knee in protest of brutality against black Americans in front of the Vice President of the United States?

Dr. Herb Silverman: I think you are asking, in part, about the distinction between freedom of expression and freedom of speech. In the broad sense, I view “expression” as a form of “speech,” non-verbal communication. Taking a knee during the playing of the National Anthem is a non-verbal form of protest. Though it may be offensive to many, I support such a perfectly legitimate expression of dissent.

I also support the free-speech rights of those whose actions appall me. Many did not want to allow the Ku Klux Klan to march in my hometown of Charleston, South Carolina, some years ago. I felt the Klan does a thousand bad things, and I didn’t want to deny them the right to do the one good thing they do—exercise their free-speech right to march. I also disagreed with a local school board that prevented a student from wearing a Confederate flag shirt to school.

The question of free speech often arises in the context of how offensive you are permitted to be, and the extent to which you may be harming others. I support the right of the American Nazi Party to march, even though it might lead to violence. For the same reason, I supported civil rights marchers in the South, which did lead to violence.

However, I am not a free speech absolutist. I agree with the old cliché that you can’t yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater. I don’t support the right of anyone to purposely incite violence. Anti-abortion activists should not be allowed to publish addresses of doctors who perform abortions, with pictures of targets on their heads.

I don’t think any specific words should be censored. I was appalled when several schools banned the great American novel Huckleberry Finn because one of Mark Twain’s characters was “Nigger” Jim. Of course, the novel was anti-slavery. In one important scene, Huckleberry Finn helps free Nigger Jim from slavery, and says, “All right then, I’ll go to hell,” referring to the belief he was taught about the biblical correctness of owning slaves.

Interestingly, it’s considered OK for African Americans to use the word “nigger” when talking to other African Americans, but it is not considered OK for whites to use the N word. Similarly, it’s acceptable for Jews like me to tell anti-Semitic jokes to fellow Jews, but it is considered wrong for Gentiles to do so. Here is one of my favorite anti-Semitic jokes.

Two Jews see a sign in front of a church that says “$100 to convert.” One of the Jews asks, “Why not? It’s an easy way to make a quick buck,” and enters the church. The other Jew waits outside to see what happens. After forty-five minutes the first Jew comes out and the second Jew asks, “Well, did you get the $100?” The first responds, “Is that all you Jews ever think about, money?”

2. Jacobsen: The relevant regional documents – less commonly known – express many of the similar rights and values for the broad base of communication rights with the freedom of expression include the American Convention on Human Rights. A document for which, especially for a country so often ranting and raving about “freedom of speech,” the United States of America only signed and did not ratify (Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, 2020). Article 13 states:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right includes freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any other medium of one’s choice.
2. The exercise of the right provided for in the foregoing paragraph shall not be subject to prior censorship but shall be subject to subsequent imposition of liability, which shall be expressly established by law to the extent necessary to ensure:
3. respect for the rights or reputations of others; or
4. the protection of national security, public order, or public health or morals.
5. The right of expression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of government or private controls over newsprint, radio broadcasting frequencies, or equipment used in the dissemination of information, or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinions.
6. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2 above, public entertainments may be subject by law to prior censorship for the sole purpose of regulating access to them for the moral protection of childhood and adolescence.
7. Any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitute incitements to lawless violence or to any other similar action against any person or group of persons on any grounds including those of race, color, religion, language, or national origin shall be considered as offenses punishable by law.[Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, 1969)

How can Americans when “ranting and raving” about freedom of speech keep in mind the right of other Member States[3] to protest state violence against them by the United States without violent interference in this right to communication?

Silverman: Ranting and raving is protected speech in the United States, including ranting and raving against official U.S. policies. I’ve been known to rant and rave during protests about entering wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and other countries. Many supporters of Donald Trump rant and rave about a so-called “deep state” in America, and something Trump calls “Obamagate,” about which he fails to define or provide evidence. As we can see, ranters and ravers are often misguided and wrong—depending on your point of view.

I also support non-violent civil disobedience (breaking the law) as long as participants are willing to take the consequences of their lawbreaking while trying to change bad laws.

How should the United States engage with other countries? I would like human rights to be a core value, which, unfortunately, it is not under the present administration. We ignore human rights violations when dealing with so-called friends in countries like Saudi Arabia, Russia, and North Korea, blatant abusers of human rights. We should look for ways to encourage countries we deal with to protect its citizens and treat them fairly. Through the Internet or by other means, we should try to give people in some countries valuable information about basic human rights they deserve. We should also work with our allies on issues like climate change and other science-based information to help make the world a better place.

3. Jacobsen: The First Amendment to the American Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (Cornell Law School, 2020). A right to freedom from the abridgement of speech – an interesting framing – and the prevention of the creation of a religion by the state while not prohibiting religion at large. What do most Americans forget about this First Amendment regarding rights for speech? What do they always remember, and also forget, about the right to the establishment of religion and the separation of church and state?

Silverman: What many Americans forget about free speech in the First Amendment is that it is there to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech does not need protection.

As far as freedom of religion, many people don’t understand that you can’t have freedom of religion without also having freedom from religion. You are not free if you are forced to choose a deity to worship. Some people don’t understand that we have a secular Constitution with no mention of any gods. Its first three words are “We the People,” not “Thou the Deity.” Many Christian conservatives incorrectly claim that the United States was formed as a Christion nation. They also say that our country now discriminates against Christians, and favors Muslims and atheists. Losing some of the Christian privilege they once had does not constitute discrimination against Christians. Citizens must be treated the same, regardless of their religious beliefs or disbeliefs.

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

Silverman: Thank you.

References

Cornell Law School. (2020). U.S. Constitution: First Amendment. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment.

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. (2020). B-32: AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS “PACT OF SAN JOSE, COSTA RICA”. Retrieved from www.cidh.org/Basicos/English/Basic4.Amer.Conv.Ratif.htm.

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. (1969, November 22). American Convention on Human Rights. Retrieved from www.cidh.org/Basicos/English/Basic3.American%20Convention.htm.

United Nations General Assembly. (1966, December 16). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved from ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx.

United Nations. (1948, December 10). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/.

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Founder, Secular Coalition for America.

[2] Individual Publication Date: May 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/silverman-two; Full Issue Publication Date: May 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

[3] In this context, a “Member State” refers to a nation, country, or state with approved and formal status within the United Nations.

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.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

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

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/05/15

Abstract

Christian is a Philosopher that comes from Belgium. What identifies him the most and above all is simplicity, for everything is better with “vanilla flavour.” Perhaps, for this reason, his intellectual passion is criticism and irony, in the sense of trying to reveal what “hides behind the mask,” and give birth to the true. For him, ignorance and knowledge never “cross paths.” What he likes the most in his leisure time, is to go for a walk with his wife. He discusses: “mystical state,” “reminiscent” experience; other forms of anguish; comparative sense of everything else as slow; a cognitive generalist without cognitive singularism; a cognitive singularist without cognitive generalism; a healthier pivot than impatient and exasperated in awaiting others’ catching up; Greek culture, Humanism, and anthropomorphism; the things Christianity “demonizes” and “angelizes”; Humanism and Greek notions of life; belief in an afterlife; religious afterlives; understanding oppressor and oppressed; predatory systems; some killed to find the truths; noumenic identification; unbearable lightness of being; Hegelian synthesis thinking; Schelling’s obscurity; favourite Mozart piece; limits of human science; non-irrational postmodern position; the way empirical and rational hardly come together in this postmodern conceptualization; body with an idea about itself as the soul; the idea of the soul as “divine breath” or a “transcendent spirit”; this “floating condition”; the “staples” or the “parentheses” a spatio-temporal volume, so as to provide a theoretical object for study; “nothing” makes reality real; empirical and rational traditions represent modernity under the single banner rationalism; other externally induced internal factors besides guilt and notions of sin drive down the possibility of genius; more women in the middle range and more men at the lower and higher ranges of general intelligence; “higher value”; post-humanist sensibility as one extensive in its tensions and touches with the culture in which it embeds itself; propositions of trans-humanism; death; Hegelian notion of freedom; primary principles or ultimate principles; infinite intersect of knowledge and truth, or only first apprehension of the primary principles or ultimate principles; Schelling using such a hermetic language; Karl Popper; Kuhn; Lakatos and Feyerabend; extended meaning of the consciousness of being; post-modernism in a modified, extended and highly differentiated meaning of post-modernism; post-modernist Humanist; modern ‘religions’ or communal organizations; freedom of thought and expression; freedom of expression; a process of punishment of women and a reinforcement for men; meaning mostly directed sensibly in a communal sense; “trans-personal” values; differentiation of the egosyntonic from the common good; human beings as emds and as means; technology, the internal, the external, and the human being; techno-ethics; artificial intelligence; donkeys; Crowley and Thelemites; Jesus Christ/Yeshua Ben Josef and Satan/the Devil; theoretically defined constructs or study objects through delimits of spatiotemporal capacities, physics; biology; chemistry; ultimate principles or “principles of existence”; Verificationism and Falsificationism; Kuhnian notion of revolutions; simplify the linguistic landscape to make things less pompous, more accessible, and logically straightforward; to know that you know, to be in existence here-and-now; “rational post-rationalism”; a personalized post-modernist Humanist ethic; a theistic god; an atheistic absence of gods; an agnostic stance on gods; a deistic god; a pandeistic god; a pantheistic god; a panendeistic god; a panentheistic god; apatheism; henotheism; polytheism; monolatry; kathenotheism; omnism; transtheism; metaphysics; metaphysicalism differing from supernaturalism or extramaterialism; a world built on the metaphysical; a world built on the supernatural; a world built on the extramaterial; epistemology; ontology; knowledge; forms of knowledge; epistemology with ontology; aforementioned relation leading to different forms of knowledge; science grounded on metaphysical assumptions; theistic evolutionists, progressive creationists, Intelligent Design advocates, young earth creationists, and old earth creationists; pseudoscience and non science; medical quacks, guru charlatans, miracle men, or fringe cranks and crackpots; Lutheranism; and freedom of the will.

Keywords: Christian Sorenson, intelligence, genius, philosophy, traits.

An Interview with Christian Sorenson on God, Genius, and Intelligence (Part Three)[1]^,[2]*

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

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What makes a “mystical state” mystical? What marks the reason for the belief in the “supposed” condition of an existence with eternal beings? What would be a synonym for the “reminiscent” experience?

Christian Sorenson: It is the experience of having lived, or felt in a “mysterious way,” that is without knowing under what condition of “existence” was it possible, “the union” with the “divine subjectively defined,” in a framework of confinement, since the sensation lived, is that of an “exclusive relationship” with a “great other,” which leaves everything that exists outside of it. There isn’t any reason that marks that belief, since there are “reasons” that not even the reason itself understands. A synonym would be the “experience of shadows.”

2. Jacobsen: What are other forms of anguish involved here?

Sorenson: What I would denominate as “vital anguish,” which from my point of view, would be a type of anguish that has no “object,” and consequently, since it cannot be “invested” or “cathectized” in something, it is felt with different intensity but permanently, and is equivalent to the sensation of “vertigo” and “nausea.”

3. Jacobsen: For a comparative sense of everything as mostly “extremely slow,” how much slower – quantitatively and qualitatively?

Sorenson: As slow as in “slow-motion” but not as slow as “being paralyzed.” It is to feel that a part of the “vital breath” is lost, when it is not possible to express a response because timing makes it impossible.

4. Jacobsen: What would be a cognitive generalist without cognitive singularism?

Sorenson: The closest thing to what a “divine intuition” could be.

5. Jacobsen: What would be a cognitive singularist without cognitive generalism?

Sorenson: A “realistic” thinker without “idealism.”

6. Jacobsen: What would be a healthier pivot than impatient and exasperated in awaiting others’ catching up, as a means of emotionally coming to terms with the intellectual pace of much of the rest of the species?

Sorenson: I think that being able to “sublimate,” that is, to channel the attention and intellectual energy towards something else that I consider of “greater value.”

7. Jacobsen: Why did Greek culture exhibit more Humanism and anthropocentrism than Christian culture?

Sorenson: Because the Greek culture did not have the notion of “sin,” in the sense of “guilt and atonement” for a misconduct.

8. Jacobsen: Why did Christianity – well – “demonize” reason? What did Christianity – does Christianity – “angelize”?

Sorenson: They demonize it as a “defence mechanism” to protect its doctrine and dogmatism. “Angelizes” the “asexuality” of the sacred figures, since it was through “the flesh,” that the first sin entered into humanity, and therefore it is necessary to “retrace” that path, until an “immaculate woman” is able to “step on the head” of the snake that tries to “bite its heel.”

9. Jacobsen: How does a Humanism mix well with Greek notions of life and, probably, many notions of life for you?

Sorenson: I believe through a humanism “post-humanist,” capable of relativizing cultural principles and values in the sense of giving them a more “symbolic and interpretive” character, than of “univocal meanings,” and at the same time being able to reach more “eclectic and inclusive” elaborations with these.

10. Jacobsen: Do you believe in an afterlife? If so, why? If not, why not? What would comprise the content of this afterlife if any?

Sorenson: I “would like” to believe in an afterlife, because “I need to do it,” and I need it to be so, because I need to “perpetuate enjoyment” and the persons who I love, nevertheless, since my reason doesn’t always “understand my heart,” I am obliged to impose the “power of the will.”

11. Jacobsen: Any thoughts on proposed religious afterlives – hypotheses on the hereafter? 

Sorenson: I feel that in general, they are forms of evasion to “numb the suffering” in this life, which often consist of “land sold in green,” that nourish hope and faith.

12. Jacobsen: What is your framework for understanding oppressor and oppressed here?

Sorenson: The dialectic of the “master and the slave,” in the sense that both need each other to exist, but that nevertheless have feelings with different valence, since while one feels “contempt and annoyance” the other has “resentment and hatred.”

13. Jacobsen: When life on Earth is made into a hell here-and-now, does this explain many of the predatory aspects of some political systems, religious belief structures, and human relations? They want to relieve the anguish of the aforementioned oppression.

Sorenson: They want to alleviate from the “punishment” that awaits them in the afterlife, for the hell they make this world, and in this way reduce the amount of anguish they feel for knowing what “awaits” them later. In my opinion, the problem is that it is not understood that this, is a “conflict” that is not called to be resolved in a “supernatural” world, but on the contrary, it is a “critical instance or period,” of individual evolutionary development, and that of the species itself, which must be resolved in this earthly world.

14. Jacobsen: Why were some killed for finding the truth? What is the threat of the truth to the political and religious authorities?

Sorenson: Doing a “double reading” to put aside the “obvious reason,” and stay with the “underlying” one, I would say that this arrived, since they put “the survival” of the system at risk. It is the fact of denouncing the “deceit of conscience” in which they maintained the population, and consequently, the loss of power to “subdue and exploit” people.

15. Jacobsen: Please elaborate on the “noumenic identification.” First, the term “noumenic” and, second, the term “identification” in context; together, the meaning of “noumenic identification” for a unity with the whole. Is this truly a unity or simply apparent unity with the whole?

Sorenson: I believe that the noumenic or “noumenon” is like the “substance” of an existing being, that is to say that it is “now existing,” and that acts as a “representative-representing” of an “ideal form” or “idea,” that has its own subsistence. In this context, the identification of the “noumenon” with the “whole,” would be something similar to “capture” in a precise moment and instantly, that is “without reasoning,” the response “came out” of something, as if it was “floating” in front of us in space. It is an identification with the “whole” since, besides me having the “apoptiptic certainty” related to the validity of the answer, which in turn is verifiable through a verification process. I also have in this experience, “the sensation of union” between me as an individual self or subject, and an other as “great other.” The latter, although this “other” is in a different place than mine, I feel that he “encompasses” me, because of the “synchronicity” that I lived at that time. From a logical point of view, if it’s possible to sustain that the “whole” itself is “unique,” since nothing else exists outside it, then it could be said, that the “whole” is equivalent to “number one,” and if this is true, then I could affirm that “unity” with the “whole” exists, because at the same time the “number one” is a “numeric unit,” and a “unity” in the sense of union.

16. Jacobsen: Why is existence an unbearable lightness of being for most or all of us?

Sorenson: Because we feel that we are not able to “escape” from our “instinctual determinism,” that always brings us to the same point, that identifies with “death,” and therefore we “struggle striving” to live, as a way to “evade” from that end.

17. Jacobsen: Continually, I see the synthesis thinking for you. So, I observe the Hegelian influence on you. Any other crucial elements of Hegelian philosophy for you?

Sorenson: His concept of “freedom” has influenced me, since I think that from this, I can develop a “theory of conflict.”

18. Jacobsen: Why Schelling, too, especially with the apparent obscurity of the philosophy?

Sorenson: I am struck by his “idealism” and the way he brings concepts such as world, self and freedom, to a transcendent level, through a “symbolically hermetic” language.

19. Jacobsen: Mozart! Any favourite pieces? I happen to be listening to him.

Sorenson: Die “Zauberflöte.”

20. Jacobsen: What are the limits of human science? What are limits of human philosophy? What could extra-terrestrial superintelligences develop past possible human sciences and conceive beyond the categories considered axiomatic in human philosophy?

Sorenson: The limits of science are given by its “method” that is necessarily inductive, while that of philosophy is given by “natural theology.” I believe that this superintelligence, dispensed with any method, and was able to arrive at the “ultimate” or “primary principles,” that did not require any verification process, as they were “self-evident” and therefore impossible to be “refuted.”

21. Jacobsen: What is the non-irrational “postmodern” to you?

Sorenson: It is a “post modernism” that well postulates that “knowledge” and “truth,” are like “two asymptotes” that only intersect in a point at “infinity.” And therefore, questions the “belief” in an unlimited advance of science, as modernity does, and in consequence, postulates at the same time, the demand for “empirical refutations” of “hypothetical knowledges.”

22. Jacobsen: Why can the empirical and rational hardly come together in this postmodern conceptualization?

Sorenson: It is hard but “not impossible,” since, despite the regrets, it is feasible to continue working with the “scientific method.”

23. Jacobsen: A body with an idea about itself as the soul. Any extended meanings of a soul here?

Sorenson: The soul, is an “idea” that has an “object” as a “thing in itself,” which is the body, and since this last is an “object-thing,” it is possible to have an idea of it, “the soul.”

24. Jacobsen: Why reject the idea of the soul as “divine breath” or a “transcendent spirit”?

Sorenson: Because if I accept it, I have a limit, since, in the analysis, I cannot go beyond a “condition of possibility” from a logical point of view, and then regardless of whether it is true or not, it does not become in an “irrefutable hypothesis,” in the sense of “truth provided with certainty,” and therefore I cannot even prove its “falsehood.”

25. Jacobsen: Why do you think you live in this “floating condition”?

Sorenson: Since I need to “problematize” everything, as a way to activate my adrenergic mechanisms, and feel the emotion of “finding flaws” everywhere.

26. Jacobsen: What defines the “staples” or the “parentheses” of a spatio-temporal volume, so as to provide a theoretical object for study?

Sorenson: It is defined by the “nature” of the “phenomenon” under study, the development of the “theoretical model” with which it is boarded, and the “scientific status” of the discipline from which it is being studied.

27. Jacobsen: If “nothing” makes reality real, and if things need delimiting for study as theoretical constructs, what differentiates the inner from the outer, the delimited from the delimiter?

Sorenson: The “consciousness of being.”

28. Jacobsen: Why do empirical and rational traditions represent modernity under the single banner rationalism?

Sorenson: Due to a historical matter, they have “reduced” rationalism exclusively to that, when in reality, rationalism is more complex and comprehensive than this. A way to test it, is for example by demonstrating that “post modernism” is not necessarily equivalent to “post rationalism.”

29. Jacobsen: What other externally induced internal factors besides guilt and notions of sin drive down the possibility of genius?

Sorenson: Religions and all forms of authoritarianism and dogmatism, since they inhibit “freedom” of thought and expression, which is the fundamental necessary condition for the existence of genius. The opposite would be “fear,” which is the common and necessary condition that makes possible the existence of guilt and sin.

30. Jacobsen: Why do we see more women in the middle range and more men at the lower and higher ranges of general intelligence?

Sorenson: In the case of women middle range and men who are located in high ranks, it is due to the process of “natural selection” which selects the “fittest” during individual development, being the “sociocultural conditioning” the force who regulates this process, through the practice of positive and negative “punishment” in women, and positive and negative “reinforcement” in men, in order to maintain this trend. In the situation of men with low ranges, are genetic and biological characteristics as pre-existing “endogenous conditions,” who determines it. In this sense from an “ontogenetic” point of view, men would tend to have the worst scores than women in low levels of intelligence.

31. Jacobsen: What do you consider “higher value”? What internal energies can be best sublimated towards singular aims?

Sorenson: What I will denominate as “trans-personal” values, since they would allow us to leave our “egosyntonic sphere,” and in that way, go beyond the simple needs of individual “self-recognition” and “self-realization.” Therefore, if at the same time, they are directed towards the needs of the community and society, by the search for the “common good being,” which is what makes understandable the “meaning” and “for what” reason they must be pursued as “an end,” then they are susceptible of being channelled.

32. Jacobsen: I agree with the notions of a post-humanist sensibility as one extensive in its tensions and touches with the culture in which it embeds itself. Is this truly post-humanist or more adaptation of Humanism to a native culture, whether Latin American, Aboriginal, Native American, European, Asian, or African?

Sorenson: Both forms, place man at the center with its “self-worth,” and share aspects such as equality, freedom and dignity. However, post-humanism manages to make a “qualitative leap,” since, although this, it is capable of relativizing their concepts, to “clearly and distinctly” differentiate them. Due to this, I feel that post-humanism successfully reaches to establish categorically, that “man should never be treated as a means, but only as an end.”

33. Jacobsen: Any thoughts on the propositions of trans-humanism?

Sorenson: “Futurologically” speaking, the change of the human condition towards “trans and post-humanity,” seems to me that although it is a feasible possibility, it demands our attention in relation to “technoethics,” and particularly with respect to the development of “artificial intelligence,” and the purpose of its use, since it easily could turn against ourselves.

34. Jacobsen: Is death final?

Sorenson: I think that death is a “change of state” in an energetic sense, that is to say, that “it would not be destroyed but only transformed.” This doesn’t mean that energy would necessarily be transformed into a form or something similar to how we currently know living things. In this sense, death would be “half the way,” between the life that arises from “emanations” of “transmuting energy,” that comes from some type of “vessel,” that acts as a container, and the return of it to that place of origin, until another “emanating” process occurs again.

35. Jacobsen: Does this Hegelian notion of freedom itself produce its own conflict with a singular resolution in the “determinism” of the single point for all: death? In that, freedom while in the world to “struggle striving” while all paths lead to the single numeric unity of physical annihilation.

Sorenson: Although it is possible to deduce it in a Hegelian sense, I feel that freedom is “conflicting,” since it’s the “delusion” of the “neurotic,” and the “one who pursues it, is a donkey.” I do not believe that death solves anything, because the “conflict” expressed in that or in something else, will be “re-edited,” in this or another “dimension,” perhaps indefinitely.

36. Jacobsen: Any thoughts on primary principles or ultimate principles? Rosner and I call them principles of existence, in a similar manner of thinking.

Sorenson: The fact of being “principles,” makes them evident, and therefore “indisputable,” since it is not possible to go beyond them. In that way, I relate these to “natural theology,” that is to say, to the study of God in those properties, that are “accessible” to reason, in what could be understood as the “preambles of faith.”

37. Jacobsen: Is there ever a reaching of the infinite intersect of knowledge and truth, or only first apprehension of the primary principles or ultimate principles and then the asymptote towards infinity at knowledge-truth merely fills in the details deriving from the primary principles or ultimate principles?

Sorenson: If I assume that “knowledge” is not equivalent to “truth,” but nevertheless the “ultimate principles” are, then it could be affirmed that “knowledge” and “ultimate principles” are not equivalents, and therefore “knowledge” would never intersect at one point not even in infinity with the “truth.” The aforementioned its possible, since, in Popper’s terminology, some are “refutables,” while others aren’t. Ultimate principles don’t admit any “confrontation,” because in my opinion, if they weren’t “true,” then “formal logic” couldn’t be able to operate, and neither could our “thinking” do.