THE PSYCHOLOGY OF GENIUS, 393 



be regarded by a psycliiatrist as a well-recognized symptom of 

 insanity. 



A further explanation of many peculiarities of men of genius 

 is to be sought in their relations to the society in which they live. 

 A man with a reputation for high talents, distinguished from his 

 youth for his superiority and genius, always has his circle of 

 admirers with its proportion of flatterers. If he had the misfor- 

 tune to be a precocious child, he will have been accustomed from 

 his earliest youth to the idea that his genius is far above ordinary 

 men and above the rules that apply to those men. If such a man 

 is, in later years, attacked by a competent critic upon this or that 

 point, or if schools and parties are formed unfavorable to his 

 method, whether in art or in science, he will, of course, react 

 otherwi ;e than a man would do who was accustomed to opposi- 

 tion of every description. He will, perhaps, regard his just critic 

 as a personal enemy ; he will complain that he is misunderstood 

 by his contemjDoraries, and his passion may go so far that the 

 public at large and superficial observers among psychiatrists may 

 consider him to be the victim of a delusion of persecution. 



Peculiar inclinations and other mental idiosyncrasies of men 

 of genius can mostly be very readily explained. Everybody 

 accustomed psychologically to study and dissect those whom he 

 meets, so far as opportunity is afforded, is familiar with the 

 remark that each individual of the human race has his peculiari- 

 ties, more or less odd, his " weaknesses."*^ The ordinary man, if 

 he has the least breeding, has been accustomed from his youth 

 up to hold in check one inclination or another which violates 

 the usages of society, or even perhaps of good morals. He has 

 learned to attend sufficiently to his own conduct not to allow 

 habits to take root which might appear unusual or be disagree- 

 able to others. But the man of genius is far too much governed 

 by his inward processes, his fancy, and his work to pay attention 

 to trifling details of manner. He therefore appears what he 

 really is, while the average man would not do this. Conse- 

 quently, chance peculiarities and special inclinations appear in 

 the former more than in the latter. 



Thus it is that the behavior of great men is not to be meas- 

 ured by the same standard as that of others, that we have to take 

 account of the motives of their actions, and that the psychical 

 conditions must be kept in view if we are to draw any trust- 

 worthy inferences from their behavior. Those mighty natures 

 must be judged from their own organization, and not from, the 

 Philistine point of view of the so-called average man. 



As a further proof of the aflBnity of genius to insanity, it has 

 been alleged that a great number of eminent men have actually 

 had attacks of insanity. But the question is not whether there 



