Note 12 — THE PSYCHOLOGY OF GENIUS.

An Essay on Genius, 1774. “Genius is properly the faculty of invention, by means of which a man is qualified for making new discoveries in science, or for producing original works of art. We may ascribe taste, judgment, or knowledge to a man who is incapable of invention, but we can not reckon him as a man of genius. In order to determine how far he merits this character (!) we must inquire whether he has discovered any new principle in science, or has invented any new art, or has carried those arts that are already practised to a higher degree of perfection than former masters; or whether, at least, he has, in matters of science, improved upon the discoveries of his predecessors, or reduced principles formerly known to a greater degree of simplicity and consistency, or traced them through a train of consequences hitherto unknown; or in the arts, whether he has designed some new work different from those of his predecessors, though not perhaps excelling them (!). Whatever falls short of this is servile imitation or a dull effort of plodding industry, which, as not implying invention, can be deemed no proof of genius, whatever capacity, skill, or diligence it may evidence. But if a man shows invention, no intellectual defects (!) which his performance may betray can forfeit his claim to genius. His invention may be irregular, wild, undisciplined; but still it is regarded as an infallible mark of real natural genius (!), and the degree of this faculty that we ascribe to him is always in proportion to the novelty, the difficulty, and the dignity of his inventions.”