Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, 14193 Berlin, Germany.
Genetics. 2009 Nov;183(3):773-7. doi: 10.1534/genetics.109.110452.
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.
查尔斯·达尔文对科学的贡献无疑是巨大的。然而，关于他的聪明才智，一直存在着长期的争论。他的这种智力显然与被认为是天才的伟大物理学家不同。在这里，根据达尔文的实际工作方式，考察了达尔文智力的本质。令人惊讶的是，文学界和神经生物学领域可能比传统的科学史提供更多的线索来解决这个难题。这些线索表明，达尔文的成就与他看似平庸的思维方式之间的明显差异，并没有给他带来任何耻辱，而是对“天才”的标准过于狭隘和不恰当。简要讨论了达尔文的特殊创造性天赋对一般科学天才发展的影响。
