Skip to content

An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five)

June 1, 2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interviewer: Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Numbering: Issue 23.A, Idea: Outliers & Outsiders (Part Nineteen)

Place of Publication: Langley, British Columbia, Canada

Title: In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal

Web Domain: http://www.in-sightjournal.com

Individual Publication Date: June 1, 2020

Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020

Name of Publisher: In-Sight Publishing

Frequency: Three Times Per Year

Words: 9,903

ISSN 2369-6885

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.

Appendix II: Citation Style Listing

American Medical Association (AMA): Jacobsen S. An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five) [Online].June 2020; 23(A). Available from: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five.

American Psychological Association (APA, 6th Edition, 2010): Jacobsen, S.D. (2020, June 1). An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five)Retrieved from http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five.

Brazilian National Standards (ABNT): JACOBSEN, S. An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five). In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal. 23.A, June. 2020. <http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five>.

Chicago/Turabian, Author-Date (16th Edition): Jacobsen, Scott. 2020. “An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal. 23.A. http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five.

Chicago/Turabian, Humanities (16th Edition): Jacobsen, Scott “An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal. 23.A (June 2020). http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five.

Harvard: Jacobsen, S. 2020, ‘An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five)In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vol. 23.A. Available from: <http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five>.

Harvard, Australian: Jacobsen, S. 2020, ‘An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five)In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vol. 23.A., http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five.

Modern Language Association (MLA, 7th Edition, 2009): Scott D. Jacobsen. “An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 23.A (2020):June. 2020. Web. <http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five>.

Vancouver/ICMJE: Jacobsen S. An Interview with Christian Sorenson on Politics, Religion, and Psychology (Part Five) [Internet]. (2020, June 23(A). Available from: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sorenson-five.

License and Copyright

License

In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, and In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 2012-2020. 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 and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.  All interviewees co-copyright their interview material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: