Krzysztof Zawisza, Joanna Święcka
February 22, 2022
Introduction
We are currently dealing with a crisis of human thought, as a consequence of the ideology of egalitarianism that has been developing for hundreds of years now [i]. This ideology – in addition to the undoubtedly positive effects on human development – led to a significant decline in the average intelligence of both scientists and decision-makers in the world of culture and politics [ii]. The crisis that is increasingly being noticed by the same representatives of the world of science [L. Smolin, A. Unzicker, S. Hossenfelder], techniques [H.P. Dietz, N. Carlson, M. Hanlon] but also culture and mass media. As Tomasz Ulanowski recently argued (mainly referring to WHO executives), “the coronavirus pandemic has exposed the idiot dictatorship” and bluntly stated:
“We live in a system that not only could not prepare us for the black clouds gathering on the horizon, but even pulled them on our heads. SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic is evidence of this. It’s also the prologue of the catastrophe that will come if we continue to let dark men rule the world.” [iii].
As writes in turn Edmund Morawiec:
“All crises in the broadly understood human activity can be regarded as phenomena more or less directly related to the crisis of human reason and attitude towards it as a creative force. It is worth emphasizing that the phenomenon of crisis is noticeable in the history of cultural development. The reasons for this crisis should in principle be seen in the crisis of understanding the human mind, especially reason and its function, in the undervaluation of the mind or its complete elimination from the managerial function of human theoretical and practical activities, as well as in the undervaluation of reason ” [iv].
The undoubted consequences of the current undervaluation of reason can be divided into mental (continuous increase in the percentage of mentally ill persons – especially in the USA and Europe – threatening the proper functioning of individuals and societies) and material. First (but not foremost) the crisis in the development of science (basic research) and techniques (applications) caused by the undervaluation (or rejection) of reason results in a decrease in innovation and a gradual stunting of economic growth. As Leon Lederman noted:
“Astonishingly, over the 200 years since Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations, the simple question ‘What makes economies grow?’ had not been answered. Why had the seething misery of the 1820s Dickensian London given way to the hustling, bustling world center of prosperity in the Victorian London of the 1890s? Even the first modern Nobel Prize–winning economist, the great Paul Samuelson—with whose world-renowned textbook many of us slugged out Economics 101—had predicted that after World War II the Great Depression would return. But it didn’t. Why not? The opposite happened, as we entered a time of growth and prosperity that lasted to the end of the twentieth century. Why?
Using a modern mathematical theory developed in the 1950s by the Nobel economist Robert Solow, it became possible to calibrate the spectacular growth of the global post–World War II economy. It was found that the spectacular growth was not due to the usual economic activity of bank lending and gambling on commodities futures. There was something else most definitely driving the boom. Some sort of “exogenous input,” as Solow called it, was driving the creation of new businesses and new high-quality jobs aplenty. In fact, using Solow’s sophisticated mathematical economic model, one could calculate that 80 percent of the postwar growth was coming from this mysterious exogenous input. But what exactly was the exogenous input? The answer came in the 1990s, just as the SSC was being terminated, largely by the efforts a young and somewhat maverick member of the priesthood of economists named Paul Romer. The answer is almost obvious, yet it took more than 200 years from Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations to figure it out. The answer is (drumroll): economies grow because of investment in science! Basic science, applied science, all science. All scientific research pays a handsome dividend, and the more science the better. One should invest in all sciences at once, from green science to hard cutting-steel science, from biology to physics. One should invest in a diversified portfolio. If you want to have a great economy, with jobs and prosperity for all, then you must spend your money on basic science. In fact, there is virtually no limit to the return on your investment. And, there is virtually no other way to do it. If you must practice austerity, whatever you do, don’t cut the science budgets. And if you really spend enough money on science, you won’t need to have austerity!
The fact that science drives economic growth is almost obvious to most people (certainly obvious to physicists and their neighbours)”[v].
Unfortunately, the current increasingly investment in research has not lead to further basic research – and as well as the technical and economic progress. In the face of the rapidly growing number of scientists (according to reliable estimates, currently about 90% of all scientists who have lived on Earth so far) are experiencing their average intelligence, and thus – their cognitive abilities. The illustration of this process is the well-known (and described by L. Mlodinow in his book Drunkard’s Walk) story of the polemic of the extremely intelligent American journalist Marilyn vos Savant (IQ 186 SD 15) with mathematicians from leading American universities on the Monty Hall paradox [vi]. Current scientific methods – which are always adapting to the (increasingly lowering) average cognitive abilities of scientists – have reduced their quality and are no longer effective enough to lead to the creation of new, correct theories and to discover scientific truth. The huge doubts raised by recent – alleged – scientific discoveries (Higgs boson, alleged detection of gravitational waves in LIGO) are only illustrations of the above mentioned state of affairs.
This is the reason for stopping the progress of civilization, which will no longer be able to successfully face the upcoming threats, which include climate change and depletion of fossil fuels. If we fail to counteract the abovementioned trends and tendencies will lead to the destruction of civilization and probably – to the end of human existence.
Under these conditions, it is necessary to include people of the highest intelligence again in the sphere of scientific and cognitive activity.
This objective is to serve the establishment of foundations, which, in turn, the goal must be the creation of the Syncritic Institute, focusing its activities in the most outstanding and creative individuals.
We present the initial outline of the project in the attached book. Below we will develop the basic details.
1. Justification of the necessity to establish the Institute
Therefore, the aim of the Syncritic Institute is to create timeless science, ie. science, the aim of which is to understand the reality and the pursuit of truth. Due to the fact of reaching the truth and presenting the truth, we are talking today of timeless literature (such as the tragedies of Sophocles or Shakespeare’s plays), timeless art (sculpture by Michelangelo, van Gogh’s painting); We do not currently have the concept of timeless science. Due to the removal of the very concept of truth outside science (A. Tarski), today’s science – instead of reaching the timeless truth and satisfying the supreme human need to understand the world – constructs only temporary models of that world (which was already stated by CG Jung in Rebis) .
The above goal of the Institute will determine its character and nature.
2. The very Nature of the Institute
The Syncritic Institute (i.e. “representing the reasonal approach”) – hereinafter referred to as the Institute – is designed to bring together the most intelligent people (IQ 175+ SD15), whose cognitive abilities allow for logical and abstract thinking and for making logical concepts. Assuming the Gaussian distribution of intelligence in the human population, there are probably several thousand such people in the world (the statistical incidence of intelligence 175+ is about 1/3.5 million). It can therefore be estimated that – after rejecting children and very young people, the elderly and those who are simply not interested in science – we can count on the cooperation of at least several hundred people with mental abilities significantly exceeding the average abilities of today’s Nobel Prize winners in physics (IQ ca. 150).
People with an intelligence quotient of 175+ (SD15) are able – at least once they have mastered their mental abilities – to move in a logical-conceptual (abstract) area, i.e. in a purely rational one. This level is the same as the syncritical, i.e. self-critical cognition (this is the level of self-awareness). Such people are able to correctly assess the logical value of their own constructs of thought and the achievements of others and – in this connection – they can improve and develop important scientific theories and create new theories that are necessary at the moment for the development of science. The creative possibilities of entities with IQ> = 175 proved themselves at the time of creating science in general (Pythagoras, IQ 180+), and modern science (Kepler, IQ 175+; Leibniz, IQ 182+; Euler, IQ 180+). Meanwhile, scholars with lower cognitive abilities (A. Einstein, IQ 160; S. Hawking, IQ 160), even if they function in social consciousness as very outstanding individuals, in addition to their undoubted achievements, they also often create scientifically and logically erroneous constructs (e.g. Einstein’s works on Unified Field Theory, the late works of Stephen Hawking, etc.) and require in their scientific activity correction and help from more intelligent persons.
Meanwhile, such people are today (due to the mechanisms of egalitarization of the scientific community) excluded from the global science institution. Christopher Michael Langan (creator of the Cognitive-Theoretical Model of the Universe, answering the so-called basic questions as the source and purpose of the Universe), Richard Gilligan Rosner (creator of Informal Cosmology concept based on complementary thinking), Marilyn vos Savant (who drew attention to important logical gaps in contemporary mathematics), publish their innovative works in the second circulation. Meanwhile, these works draw attention to the methodological deficiencies and factual white spots existing in today’s science and try to supplement them and make (extremely important today) acceleration of scientific progress.
The reasonable control – carried out by persons with high intelligence – of the activities of current science is all the more important, because science, which is undoubtedly an extremely significant social power (as an ideological and opinion-forming institution, as well as an institution having a fundamental impact on the development of technology, and thus of the economy) – but unlike other social authorities (such as political authorities, health care or mass media) – todays’ science is de facto not a subject to any external control. This creates – especially in the current conditions of lowering the cognitive (and hence – also moral) level of scientists – a wide field for abuse. An example of such abuses are in recent years the alleged discoveries of the Higgs boson (CERN) and gravitational waves (LIGO), which raise more and more doubts in the environment of scientists themselves (Prof. Mieczysław Witold Krasny, Alexander Unzicker, Hilton Rathcliffe or physicists working in the so-called Danish Team[vii]).
Of course, only persons with the highest cognitive abilities, who are currently excluded from the area of science by individuals who are generally less intelligent, but much more numerous, can act as such the highest control scientific instance. Average IQ individuals – representing a not very high moral profile – are not able to take responsibility for the development of human consciousness and the progress of civilization that rests on the shoulders of science as an institution.
That is why the creation of the Syncritic Institute, bringing together people with the highest cognitive abilities (which are both logical and moral) is now necessary for the continuation and development of the human world.
The high IQ people rights. We live in a time of violent struggle for women’s rights, the rights of LGBT people, or animal rights. We live in a time when many groups are fighting for the right to dignified and equal treatment. However, no one is fighting for the rights of high IQ people – for their right to be themselves and therefore to be treated unequally. The most important quality of a person is intelligence. Therefore, people with high IQ differ from average people sometimes more than women from men, homosexuals from heterosexuals, or some people from animals. In order to be able to fully pursue their professional lives, women should in many cases (though not always) be treated in the professional sphere on an equal footing with men. However, high IQ people, to be able to pursue their professional and life goals, must be treated completely differently than average people – they must have their own, and not someone else’s, rights. Fair treatment is not the equal treatment of all people, but treating everyone according to who they really are. Accordingly, high IQ people must have the right to their own – according to their intelligence – education, to their own job (which is sometimes drastically different from the job of other people) and to their own development path. And also – and above all – to pursue one’s own vocation. For it is precisely through the realization of the vocation of geniuses that humanity develops, evolves and humanizes.
For starters, high IQ people must have the right to be educated according to their needs and abilities, by learning to think, not learning how to go around thinking through cognitive procedures. Such education is unattainable for people with an intelligence lower than IQ 170 SD 15. However, it is essential for high IQ people and for their mental integrity.
The implementation of the rights of high IQ people will be one of the main goals of the Institute’s activity and existence.
3. The most important fields of activity of the Syncritic Institute
Accordingly, the Institute should work primarily in the following fields.
a) Identification of people living today with IQ 175+ (especially those interested in science or making important mental reflection) and offering the cooperation to them.
b) Stimulating and supporting important work and mental reflection of people with the highest intelligence and supporting their intellectual and spiritual development.
c) Supporting and stimulating the development of so-called “Normal science”, currently existing, and the use of its results for making the generalizations unavailable to this science and achieving its impossible goals (such as a deeper understanding of the whole Universe and its particular physical laws).
d) Education of children and young people with IQ 175+ who today do not find a place in existing education systems, intended for average people and only slightly more capable than average, and whose abilities are most often wasted.
e) Revision of understanding of the history of human thought, culture and science to date. Rediscovering, reconstructing and develop the thought products of deceased geniuses (like R. Boskovitch, J. Wroński, the forgotten or misunderstood works of Pythagoreans).
f) The last and the most important goal of the Institute’s operation – to which the previous goals will be subordinated – is long-term development of human average intelligence by setting new important tasks and passionate destinations for humanity.
4. The mode of acting of the Institute for the above fields
a) Looking for a contact with the most intelligent people and verifying the real abilities of those among them who will be interested in working with the Institute.
b) Organizing material assistance for the above people. Organization of scientific discussions, symposia and other forms of mutual ideological and mental stimulation and cooperation. Systematic publication of their most important and useful work.
c) Systematic cooperation with universities and other institutions of modern dianetic (common sense) science in discovering and implementing new, important scientific ideas.
d) Identifying children and young people (from 13 years old) with IQ 175+ in cooperation with educational institutions of different countries. Providing such young people with the possibility of special education at the Institute or in cooperation with it. Incorporating into their curricula classic liberal arts (artes liberales, such as rhetoric or dialectics), which are the basis for acquiring high spiritual culture. Learning logical thinking and best ways of communicating the results of this thinking to other people. Providing individual learning. Enabling personal and spiritual development, which is suppressed (intentionally or not) in institutions of modern education for people with the highest intelligence. The goal of that development is to find the best way to serve human society and humanity.
Ensuring the possibility of completing studies at the Institute according to the standards of the classical Plato Academy or the Pythagorean Union.
e) Systematic examination by members of the Institute of works of known and less known historical thinkers (Pythagoras, Plato, R. Lullus, G.W. Leibniz, J.W. Goethe and others) in terms of their rational value and timeless scientific and thought-reflective content. Publishing the results of these studies.
5. Head of the Institute
a) Institutional and legal-administrative location of the Institute
Due to the global and supranational nature of its activities, the Syncritical Institute should be institutionally associated with the UN and empowered as an autonomous UNESCO Institute. His way of funding should instead be a hybrid, which will possibly far-reaching independence from the current crises and other political turmoil in the international politics and economics.
b) Geographical, i.e. the physical location of the Institute’s headquarters
Due to the need to ensure efficient cooperation with both state and administrative authorities, relevant UN agencies (especially UNESCO) and leading university and research institutes, we propose the Swiss Basel as the place of the physical seat of the Syncritic Institute. The Swiss authorities and the Swiss administration have relevant experience due to hosting in their area the headquarters and facilities of many international institutions. In addition, Basel is the birthplace of the most outstanding mathematician of the modern era – Leonard Euler – whose works (due to his outstanding intelligence) sometimes go beyond the possibility of understanding them by representatives of modern science. The city has an intimate but high university (Die Universität Basel). Within an hour’s drive by car / train from Basel there are institutions and institutions such as: founded by Rudolf Steiner Goetheanum (Dornach); the oldest German University in Fribourg, with the Raimundus Lullus Institute located within it (Lullus was the medieval precursor of our contemporary theory of artificial intelligence and much more); Zurich University of Technology (ETH Zurich), currently occupying leading positions in world university rankings; C.G. Institute Jung in Küssnacht; The University and the Astronomical Observatory in Strasbourg etc. Within 2.5 h away from Basel there are institutions such as CERN in Geneva or the University of Heidelberg. Paris (UNESCO headquarters) is located about 3 hours by rail from Basel.
Especially the relative proximity of CERN is important because of the need to experimentally test the Unified Field Theory we’ve discovered . Experimental confirmation and development of the above theory, in turn, will be essential to acquire – currently necessary – new energy sources and new, ecological types of propulsion.
Recapitulation
Directed by common-sense (detailed oriented) decision-makers with average intelligence egalitarian modern civilization (including today’s science), can temporarily react to emerging threats, events or new spiritual and mental currents that are still emerging. However, it does not have a far-reaching (or even more complete) vision of its development. The inclusion of people with the highest intelligence (big picture thinkers) in the sphere of human culture and science (currently excluded from it) will allow you to look at reality in a broader (mental and temporal) perspective. This will result in the possibility of creating not only common-sensical but also reasonable science and culture, capable of seeing far-reaching goals and reaching the full potential of humanity through new material (new scientific theories and their applications) as well as spiritual (new, important ideas).
Achieving this will serve projected above the Syncritic Institute, which will restore a positive concept of scientific and social authority and prepare the ground for the development of rational (i.e. reasonable) human culture and science.
[i] Cf. Fernández-Armesto, F. Truth: A History and a Guide for the Perplexed, St. Martin’s Press (1997).
[ii] vide K. Zawisza, Are Contemporary Scientists High IQ Persons or Low IQ People?, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/contemporary-scientists-high-iq-persons-low-people-krzysztof-zawisza/.
[iii] https://wyborcza.pl/7,75400,25841334,pandemia-koronawirusa-obnazyla-dyktature-idiotow.html.
[iv] Morawiec, E. Wybrane filozoficzne koncepcje rozumu ludzkiego i racjonalność, Wyd. Liberi Libri, 2014, p. 13 [own transl.]
[v] Hill, Ch.T., Lederman, L. Beyond the God Particle, Prometheus Publishing, 2013.
[vi] vos Savant, M. The Game Show Problem, https://parade.com/506669/marilynvossavant/the-game-show-problem/.
[vii] https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24032022-600-exclusive-grave-doubts-over-ligos-discovery-of-gravitational-waves/