J.—PSYCHOLOGY. 181 
would appear to be supported by the available definite evidence. Dr. 
McCrae, for instance, has recently examined the correlations between 
different tests that have been entitled those of Performance. These, even 
among persons of comparatively low status, proved to be, in fact, almost 
independent of each other. Still more striking has been the result of a 
very valuable investigation by Mr. Philpott. He undertook to test the 
discrimination of length, a power which obviously possesses great import- 
ance in many spheres of industry. But he wisely tested this discrimination 
in two different ways. First, he showed pairs of lines and made the subjects 
judge which was the longer. And then he gave them single lines and made 
them, in each case, draw another line of as nearly as possible the same 
length. As result, these two performances, that seemingly are but mani- 
festations of one and the same power, turned out to be almost entirely 
independent. Those who were best at judging between the two lines already 
_ drawn did not, to any appreciable extent, excel at making a second line 
equal to a given one. Quite similar results were obtained for the dis- 
crimination of angles, as also for perceiving whether a line is straight 
or not. 
Accepting, then, the conclusion that an immense number of abilities 
vary from one individual to another almost independently of each other, 
what is the practical result ? Let us try to get a notion how such abilities 
of any person must be distributed in respect of excellence. By all experience, 
and also by statistical theoryinto which we cannot enter here, the great bulk 
of his abilities will tend to be mediocre ; that is to say, they will be near 
the general average of his class. A fair number will be distinctly above 
this average, and a fair number below. A small number will be much 
above; and so also below. The whole frequency distribution will, in 
fact, have a bell-like shape similar to that which was shown by the curves 
of the tetrad-differences to be expected from sampling errors. At the 
extreme ends of the distribution will lie a very small number of performances 
for which the person is, on the one side a genius, and on the other an 
idiot. Every normal man, woman, and child is, then, a genius at some- 
thing as well as an idiot at something 
It remains to discover what—at any rate in respect of the genius. 
This must be a most difficult matter, owing to the very fact that it occurs 
in only a minute proportion out of all possible abilities. It certainly cannot 
be detected by any of the testing procedures at present in current usage. 
But these procedures are capable, I believe, of vast improvement. 
The preceding considerations have often appealed to me on looking 
at a procession of the Unemployed, and hearing someone whisper that 
they are mostly the Unemployable. That they are so actually I cannot 
help concurring. But need they be so necessarily ?, Remember that every 
one of these, too, is a genius at something—if we could only discover what. 
I cherish no illusion, indeed, that among them may be marching some 
“mute inglorious Milton, some Cromwell guiltless of his country’s blood.’ 
For these are walks in life that appear to involve a large amount of g. 
But I am quite confident that every one of them could do something that 
would make him a treasure in some great industrial concern. And I see 
no reason why some should not have even become famous, in such occupa- 
tions, for example, as those of dancers, jockeys, or players of popular 
games, 
