ArthurLidia

This essay by Arthur Jensen is from an old book . The genius has limits. A simple answer, and undoubtedly true. But my assignment here is to reflect on the much more complex difference between intellectual giftedness and genius, using the latter term in its original sense, as socially recognized, outstandingly creative achievement. In this think-piece (which is just that, rather than a comprehensive review of the literature), I will focus on factors, many intriguing in and of themselves, that are characteristic of genius. My primary thesis is that the emergence of genius is best described using a multiplicative model. I will argue that exceptional achievement is a multiplicative function of a number of different traits, each of which is normally distributed, but which in combination are so synergistic as to skew the resulting distribution of achieve­ ment. An extremely extended upper tail is thus produced, and it is within this tail that genius can be found. An interesting two-part question then arises: how many different traits are involved in producing extraordinary achievement, and what are they? The musings that follow provide some conjectures that can be drawn on to answer this critical question. As a subject for scientific study, the topic of genius, although immensely fascinating, is about as far from ideal as any phenom enon one can find. The literature on real genius can claim little besides biographical anecdotes and speculation, with this chapter contributing only more of the same. Whether the study of genius will ever evolve from a literary art form into a systematic science is itself highly speculative. The most promising efforts in this direction are those by Simonton (198 8 ) and Eysenck (1 9 9 5 ), with Eysenck’s monograph leaving little of potential scientific value that can be added to the subject at present, pending new empirical evidence. Intelligence Earlier I stated that genius has limits. But its upper limit, at least in some fields, s