What do you think?
Rate this book
Genius Explained
The cherished view of genius is that it is a special inborn something mysterious, even miraculous. In Genius Explained, psychologist Michael Howe traces the lives of some exceptionally creative men and women, including Charles Darwin, the Brontë sisters, George Eliot, Michael Faraday, Albert Einstein and the railway inventor George Stephenson. Their biographies reveal how the extraordinary capabilities of these people were clearly rooted in the experiences and opportunities that forged their characters. Eschewing mysticism, Howe's study shows that to be a genius demands a strong sense of direction and an extraordinary degree of commitment, focus, practice, ardous training and drive. Michael J.A. Howe is professor of psychology at the University of Exeter. He is the author of A Teacher's Guide to the Psychology of Learning (Blackwell, 1999) and The Psychology of High Abilities (New York University Press, 1999). Previous paperback edition (1999) 0-521-64968-4
236 pages, Paperback
First published October 27, 1995
8 people are currently reading
992 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
October 3, 2016
Genius Explained by Michael Howe is an attempted refutation of commonly held beliefs about the origins of what our society refers to as “genius” by studying the lives of eminent individuals such as Mozart, Darwin, Newton, George Stevenson, George Eliot, The Bronte sisters, Faraday, Einstein, William Sidis, Norbert Weiner, John Stuart Mill, and many others.
Much like Cradles of Eminence by Mildred George Goertzel, this book is more of a series of biographies of famous individuals than it is an exhaustive study of the meaning and origins of the term “genius". The biographies are meant to serve as examples to bolster the author’s claim that genius is not an innate and unchanging feature but is actually the result of hard work, timing, curiosity, tenacity or what some authors refer to as “grit”. While the biographies are entertaining, they are also hand-picked by Howe to fit into and strengthen a particular narrative which leaves doubts as to their value in discovering an underlying truth about “genius”.
Part of the issue with the chosen biographies is there is no accepted definition for the term “genius”. The author equates “genius” with mastery of a skill or impressive achievements which would exclude high I.Q. individuals who do not go on to achieve any major successes in life such as William Sidis. While Sidis was clearly a genius, the author labels him as only a prodigy that failed to live up to the potential promise of early precociousness that could have led to genius.
The most controversial and confusing comments by Howe are saved for the final chapter of the book. Howe seems to question whether genetics play any role whatsoever in creation of genius even though intelligence is highly inheritable and I.Q. scores are highly correlated to future success. The author even goes so far as to say, “…it might still be reasonable to ask whether or not genetic differences between people invariably lead to differences in their psychological functioning.” While Howe’s central premise is compelling, denying the genetic role of intelligence and mental functioning weakens his overall argument by not giving proper weight to the role of genetics in human intelligence.
Similar to pop-psych writer Malcolm Gladwell, Howe uses the example of 10,000 hours of deliberate practice being a stronger indicator of success and mastery of a particular skill than is innate ability. While hard work and practice are essential to great achievements, using 10,000 hours as a universal rule for creating “genius” ignores important individual natural abilities and differences, overly simplifying what is a complex process. Howe’s arguments are compelling, such as drawing a distinction between environment and experience of environment, but he falls short of convincingly addressing obvious counterarguments that can be made.
I can recommend Genius Explained as an insightful and entertaining look into the lives of many eminent individuals sprinkled with what is essentially a discussion of what role nature vs. nurture plays in people’s lives, but if you are looking for an in-depth discussion of the meaning of the term “genius” or a well-balanced discussion of the origins of genius, then it is best to skip this book and look for something else.
Much like Cradles of Eminence by Mildred George Goertzel, this book is more of a series of biographies of famous individuals than it is an exhaustive study of the meaning and origins of the term “genius". The biographies are meant to serve as examples to bolster the author’s claim that genius is not an innate and unchanging feature but is actually the result of hard work, timing, curiosity, tenacity or what some authors refer to as “grit”. While the biographies are entertaining, they are also hand-picked by Howe to fit into and strengthen a particular narrative which leaves doubts as to their value in discovering an underlying truth about “genius”.
Part of the issue with the chosen biographies is there is no accepted definition for the term “genius”. The author equates “genius” with mastery of a skill or impressive achievements which would exclude high I.Q. individuals who do not go on to achieve any major successes in life such as William Sidis. While Sidis was clearly a genius, the author labels him as only a prodigy that failed to live up to the potential promise of early precociousness that could have led to genius.
The most controversial and confusing comments by Howe are saved for the final chapter of the book. Howe seems to question whether genetics play any role whatsoever in creation of genius even though intelligence is highly inheritable and I.Q. scores are highly correlated to future success. The author even goes so far as to say, “…it might still be reasonable to ask whether or not genetic differences between people invariably lead to differences in their psychological functioning.” While Howe’s central premise is compelling, denying the genetic role of intelligence and mental functioning weakens his overall argument by not giving proper weight to the role of genetics in human intelligence.
Similar to pop-psych writer Malcolm Gladwell, Howe uses the example of 10,000 hours of deliberate practice being a stronger indicator of success and mastery of a particular skill than is innate ability. While hard work and practice are essential to great achievements, using 10,000 hours as a universal rule for creating “genius” ignores important individual natural abilities and differences, overly simplifying what is a complex process. Howe’s arguments are compelling, such as drawing a distinction between environment and experience of environment, but he falls short of convincingly addressing obvious counterarguments that can be made.
I can recommend Genius Explained as an insightful and entertaining look into the lives of many eminent individuals sprinkled with what is essentially a discussion of what role nature vs. nurture plays in people’s lives, but if you are looking for an in-depth discussion of the meaning of the term “genius” or a well-balanced discussion of the origins of genius, then it is best to skip this book and look for something else.
September 16, 2021
Genius in modern western civilization is often portrayed as a Demi-god. A phenotypic fluke in a human population whereby a person - often from unassuming origins- had a sort of exchange with the gods. Some handed a fire, others a literary work surpassing the norm of their generation, and others creating beautiful creations mental or physical which surpass the once assumed limits of human creativity. These historical luminaries are often coronated in our books with the regal title of genius They are often shrouded in mystery. But Howe wishes to show the threads, causality, and humanity in these characters. Did he succeed? not sure. I enjoyed the book Nonetheless...
Looking back to the history of 'genius studies' such as in the works of darwin's cousin, the famed creator of eugenics Francis Galton, in his work Hereditary genius (1869), attributes genius to one's hereditary lineage. A proposed naturalistic chaste, one day summoning the likes of Charles Murray...
For others, like some of the ancients, genius conveyed a more exogenous import- that being a gift from a certain guiding spirit. A sort of touch of god-like that portrayed between God and Adam as on Michelangelo’s famous ceiling work in the cistern chapel.
Howe does not like these claims. He sees these theories as lacking the time course. They are often the works of genius, but rather than the intense workout college where they emerged from.
He argues firstly, that many of these geniuses had fairly unimpressive intellectual origins. Darwin for example, while being part of an incredibly wealthy family did not show clear signs in his youth that he would be of the most consequential intellectuals in history, nor the case with George Stephenson, the father of Railways, Faraday, the obscure titan of electromagnetism, Einstein, the patent clerk who changed educated scientists to view the world. In short, the people we often call geniuses- so he contends - are often not prodigies.
His central contention is fairly simple: genius is not a born entity, this neonatal does not typically spring from chaos to genius rather they- having some natural proclivities toward their studies involve themselves in their works with a certain vigor, ardor, grit, perseverance, and passion which surpasses their comparative.
Through this intensity of focus these geniuses in the eyes of Howe, emerge as by-product of intense action and focus.
Genius from this outlook does not proclaim that is the child prodigy, nor the soul with exceedingly high Iq who impacts the world with a novel ontology, rather the genius is what they develop into. Maybe one can call it the Bildung (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildung) or labor theory of genius?
A critique comes to mind: that being that even if many of these intellectuals were not prodigies. That indeed some geniuses were. I recall for example reading a story about Euler in his youth.
that his ability to understand basic arithmetic was superior to that of his father when he was only a toddler. Noting his father's failure to do basic arithmetic on his balance sheets.
Nevertheless, Howe does not fixate on these prodigies. He, I imagine, would be unimpressed with the various headlines “child found with 160 Iq surpasses Hawking” - stating, sure. But what will they do with their life?
This book, in my view, is quite inspiring. It argues, a sort of democratic possibility, that perhaps genius can be accomplished with tieless work. By any among us who so dare to chase our interests and dreams with ardor.
But then again. These souls seem so sparsely scattered in history makes one may wonder perhaps something is mysterious about these people. One may wonder if it's not just about hard work, as we may ask ourselves: how specifically do the varied conditions life need to be for an expression of genius to come about e.g. finances, nutrition, character, personality, education, the needed of mentorship, the proper social conditions.
The reader is left wondering what they can do, and further, for the educator or the parent how they can mold their child to becoming the next Beethoven. Whether to surround their children with silly classical music, like in the days of the popularity of baby einstein or to consume whatever new fad of diet and supplement claims to make you a super-soldier of mind.
Either way. I have rambled enough.
In conclusion: this book serves to be a wonderful study of the development of genius in history. Clearly, its stress is on modern male European history. (though he did make a nod to the Bronte sisters)Naturally, like many authors, he left out the many non-westerners and women of interest. Either way. The book is interesting and I recommend it.
Looking back to the history of 'genius studies' such as in the works of darwin's cousin, the famed creator of eugenics Francis Galton, in his work Hereditary genius (1869), attributes genius to one's hereditary lineage. A proposed naturalistic chaste, one day summoning the likes of Charles Murray...
For others, like some of the ancients, genius conveyed a more exogenous import- that being a gift from a certain guiding spirit. A sort of touch of god-like that portrayed between God and Adam as on Michelangelo’s famous ceiling work in the cistern chapel.
Howe does not like these claims. He sees these theories as lacking the time course. They are often the works of genius, but rather than the intense workout college where they emerged from.
He argues firstly, that many of these geniuses had fairly unimpressive intellectual origins. Darwin for example, while being part of an incredibly wealthy family did not show clear signs in his youth that he would be of the most consequential intellectuals in history, nor the case with George Stephenson, the father of Railways, Faraday, the obscure titan of electromagnetism, Einstein, the patent clerk who changed educated scientists to view the world. In short, the people we often call geniuses- so he contends - are often not prodigies.
His central contention is fairly simple: genius is not a born entity, this neonatal does not typically spring from chaos to genius rather they- having some natural proclivities toward their studies involve themselves in their works with a certain vigor, ardor, grit, perseverance, and passion which surpasses their comparative.
Through this intensity of focus these geniuses in the eyes of Howe, emerge as by-product of intense action and focus.
Genius from this outlook does not proclaim that is the child prodigy, nor the soul with exceedingly high Iq who impacts the world with a novel ontology, rather the genius is what they develop into. Maybe one can call it the Bildung (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildung) or labor theory of genius?
A critique comes to mind: that being that even if many of these intellectuals were not prodigies. That indeed some geniuses were. I recall for example reading a story about Euler in his youth.
that his ability to understand basic arithmetic was superior to that of his father when he was only a toddler. Noting his father's failure to do basic arithmetic on his balance sheets.
Nevertheless, Howe does not fixate on these prodigies. He, I imagine, would be unimpressed with the various headlines “child found with 160 Iq surpasses Hawking” - stating, sure. But what will they do with their life?
This book, in my view, is quite inspiring. It argues, a sort of democratic possibility, that perhaps genius can be accomplished with tieless work. By any among us who so dare to chase our interests and dreams with ardor.
But then again. These souls seem so sparsely scattered in history makes one may wonder perhaps something is mysterious about these people. One may wonder if it's not just about hard work, as we may ask ourselves: how specifically do the varied conditions life need to be for an expression of genius to come about e.g. finances, nutrition, character, personality, education, the needed of mentorship, the proper social conditions.
The reader is left wondering what they can do, and further, for the educator or the parent how they can mold their child to becoming the next Beethoven. Whether to surround their children with silly classical music, like in the days of the popularity of baby einstein or to consume whatever new fad of diet and supplement claims to make you a super-soldier of mind.
Either way. I have rambled enough.
In conclusion: this book serves to be a wonderful study of the development of genius in history. Clearly, its stress is on modern male European history. (though he did make a nod to the Bronte sisters)Naturally, like many authors, he left out the many non-westerners and women of interest. Either way. The book is interesting and I recommend it.
March 31, 2016
A good introduction to the debate between nature & nurture arguments surrounding 'genius' (giftedness)
Want to read
July 8, 2020Malcom Gladwell mentioned this book in Outliers. Looking at Goodreads comments, I believe I should read this inspiring book.
July 31, 2024
I enjoyed the stories behind the talents of the most amazing people in the worlds. Pictured out the image of their daily lives in my head while reading made me fall in love with the old lives in the western world.
March 1, 2016
A well researched topic in which the author presents a radical idea that genius is 'manufactured' rather than an innate trait that people are born with. The author has taken examples of famous personalities like Einstien, faraday, Darwin, Stevenson and dissected their childhood and the enviornment they were brought up in to list factors that contributed to them being a genius. These factors also seem to collaborate with some of the story of other scientists that I have read amount in other books as well.
Loved a cautionary advice "let those who carve a soul to their own measure be sure that they have a worth image after which to carve it, and let them know that the power of molding an emerging intellect is a power of death as well as the power of life". So profound !!!
Loved a cautionary advice "let those who carve a soul to their own measure be sure that they have a worth image after which to carve it, and let them know that the power of molding an emerging intellect is a power of death as well as the power of life". So profound !!!
September 24, 2012
The essence of this book is that genius is mainly achieved by hard work vs. some inborn abilities.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews