- THIS ARTICLE
- Full Text
- Full Text (PDF)
- A corrigendum has been published
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Email this article to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Wilkins, A. S.
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Wilkins, A. S.
Genetics, Vol. 183, 773-777, November 2009, Copyright © 2009
doi:10.1534/genetics.109.110452
Charles Darwin: Genius or Plodder?
Adam S. Wilkins1
Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, 14193 Berlin, Germany
1 Address for correspondence: Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, Wallotstrasse 19, 14193 Berlin, Germany.
E-mail: wilkins316{at}btinternet.com
There is no doubt about the magnitude of Charles Darwin's contributions to science. There has, however, been a long-running debate about how brilliant he was. His kind of intelligence was clearly different from that of the great physicists who are deemed geniuses. Here, the nature of Darwin's intelligence is examined in the light of Darwin's actual style of working. Surprisingly, the world of literature and the field of neurobiology might supply more clues to resolving the puzzle than conventional scientific history. Those clues suggest that the apparent discrepancy between Darwin's achievements and his seemingly pedestrian way of thinking reveals nothing to Darwin's discredit but rather a too narrow and inappropriate set of criteria for "genius." The implications of Darwin's particular creative gifts with respect to the development of scientific genius in general are briefly discussed.