Capitalism and the myth of genius Author. Doctor Terence Rajivan Edward (or 0161__Rajivan, if that helps) Abstract. Some individuals are regarded as geniuses, others as not, but critics write of "the myth of genius," implying that any attribution of individual genius is somehow a misrepresentation. This paper examines two familiar criticisms: that attributions of individual genius place too much weight on inspiration, as opposed to other individual factors, such as ambition and hard work; and that attributions of individual genius place too much weight on the individual, as opposed to groups or communities. I want to introduce a third criticism, which I am sympathetic to at present. It is part of our mythology of geniuses that geniuses are very rare, but the impression of rareness probably assumes a merit-based system for recording the achievements of people of a certain level. How did all these businesses get going and flourish without people within them of the level of much-admired individuals, but whose names will probably not figure in any academic history? Draft version: version 3 (29th June, minor edits; v2 15th February 2026, very minor corrections; version 1 12th January 2026) PDF at: https://www.academia.edu/145923945/Capitalism_and_the_myth_of_genius For a God he was mistook Till he said, "I'm Captain Cook"? Introduction Myths: do technologically advanced liberal democracies have myths? It is a question that is asked, with one scholar affirming that they do, in a currently well-known debate. We are tempted to answer "Maybe they do, but you will not find myths amongst educated people. These societies have some people who have not progressed with the rest and it is sensible, if you are looking for myths, to focus on them." (At this point, many readers think of their relatives?) However, do not even the highly educated have myths? The scholar already referred to says, "Yes." (Obeyesekere 1992: 20) I shall leave aside his example here. What about these statues and other celebrations of individual achievement in universities? Is there not a myth of genius in these societies? "What exactly do you mean by 'myth'?" it makes sense to ask at this point, if not before: "A mere falsehood?" I shall skip past the question. I want to delve into an examination of the myth of genius, or set of myths if that is more accurate. The term "the myth of genius" is used to imply that any attribution of genius to an individual involves falsehood, involves misrepresentation. What exactly is the problem though, the misrepresentation? In the next part of this paper, I examine one familiar objection, or type of objection: attributions of individual genius place too much weight on inspiration and too little weight on other factors to do with the individual, such as ambition and hard work. In the third part, I examine another objection: attributions of individual genius place too much weight on the individual as opposed to groups or communities. In the fourth part, I introduce an objection that is less familiar, though it has surely occurred to others: when we say that someone is a genius, we are implying that they have a very rare quality, but this appearance of such rareness seems an illusion. There are more who have that quality, but they do not have the opportunity to work in professions, fields, areas where they can achieve enduring recognition, or the opportunity available is not a reasonable one. I have some sympathy with this objection. Myth of inspiration When we think of inspiration literally, we think of something received from a divine agent: from God or a god. But if we think of an individual as inspired in this way, an Isaac Newton say, it is more rational to build a statue to the god rather than to the inspired. It was the god's ideas, after all, which by divine power he put into the Newton's mind. However, the description of someone as inspired is also used by people who don't believe in god or do not put the creation of something down to a god. It is used, roughly, when something is produced or done which is valued and when we think there is no formula for how to produce that and no way of teaching how to produce that and few would. That poets mysteriously produce a poem in a fit of inspiration was attacked as a myth by Edgar Allan Poe, but is Poe's attack to be taken seriously? At least one fellow poet thinks not, namely T.S. Eliot. People who want to attack the portrait of inspired individuals but not deny the significance of individual qualities are likely to emphasize ambition and hard work. In my own experience, if I may share it, these qualities are important. ("Yes, do share it, because we are Trinity Hall and have expert psychologists to share with us what they know, so personal experience is really all you have that is not covered"?) It must have been around 2016. I have a friend, insofar as I have friends, who was then intent on writing a novel and I challenged him to a joke-writing competition. We would meet and share one-line jokes we had written. Many of the jokes which I wrote then were really awful and I have not kept a record of them. In 2018, I went to watch some stand up comedy in the city in which I live. I had some better jokes by then, but I was not ready to perform. In late 2024 I started performing, though I took a break of some months in April 2025. The jokes I devise now are so much better than when I started. One thinks, "This is not good enough, this is not good enough," and with time one's mind seems to move to a desired level: whatever processes lead one to realize jokes, they start producing more jokes at that level and fewer at a lesser level. (Is this a good thing though? Missing ingredients from a lower level?) From my experience, ambition and practice are important (and presumably at higher levels than mine and in many other matters). But I don't know how easy it is to find someone who can reach a comparable level in one line jokes, even with these two factors. I have been to lots of stand-up comedy events and I think not extremely difficult. From 238 members of a WhatsApp Manchester group for comedians, 6 are regular one-liner comedians? Anyway, recalling Poe and his unwholesome focus on murder, here is one I devised and told online earlier this year: "Why do some serial killers eat their victims? It solves the problem of what to do with the body." But has this occurred to someone before?! Myth of individual There is a criticism of attributions of genius which is probably very popular in some fields, some specialisms, according to which it places too much weight on the individual, as opposed to the group or the community. Leslie Stephen, the father of Virginia Woolf, presents this as the scientific perspective: Carlyle used to tell us in my youth that everything was due to the hero; that the whole course of human history depended upon your Cromwell or Frederick. Our scientific teachers are inclined to reply that no single person had much importance, and that an ideal history could omit all names of individuals. (1903: chapter 1) What to make of this downplaying of the individual? I am not sure. If I may turn to my own life again - is it evidence excessive ego to do so? certainly not yours! - in my eyes, it has been greatly affected by my choice of city, Manchester, and initial course to study, namely anthropology, which is probably down largely to me. It would be much more normal for a person of my skills as a high schoolboy to choose law or computer science and study at one of the elite universities in the country, namely Cambridge or Oxford. Fees for studying at university had only just been introduced and were low at the time; if they were slightly higher, I would have probably taken the "square" path and studied law, as predicted by the headmaster at the time, who also warned my mother that Manchester was a dangerous city. My choices were unusual for my background. I guess I would have "gone insane" at Cambridge though, but assuming that did not happen, what would life be like as a Cambridge-educated lawyer? My sister is one! Married with a large London house and children? Probably not. I guess I would have taken an interest in jurisprudence, on which I have anyway written. I might have produced some helpful texts on H.L.A. Hart and Joseph Raz and maybe a book on some specialist area of law, as my friend, insofar as I have friends, Bo Xie (or Xie Bo) has done as academic researcher. (She thanks no one for this text of hers.) Perhaps it is not such a different life after all, or perhaps it is for realizing my ambitions: AREN'T THERE numerous lawyers who know lots about Hart and about Rawls's liberty principle, etc.? Individual choices long delayed psychiatric treatment and prevented entering into an overly competitive area? Myth of rarity When someone is described as a genius, the description implies or suggests that they are rare. They are one of the few, not the many. But how rare is this level of person really? Imagine you are setting up a university and you want it to do really well, but you are not very experienced in universities - you are a wealthy footballer perhaps? You take the people with the best grades you can, to begin with, what else? If you have doubts about the examination systems, you have your own exams. And the very best of the people you take have some chance of being remembered as geniuses in their field. But does anywhere actually work like this in its selection procedures? For some decades, we have lived through computer-based revolutions: first the revolution involving the spread of personal computers, then the Internet, and now artificial intelligence. A lot of this is down to private companies, it seems: household names such as IBM (International Business Machines), Apple, Microsoft, and Google. If universities are taking in the academically cleverest and giving them their best opportunities, should not some of the people involved be in comfortable university jobs? Surely it is not the case that every computer scientist or mathematician has more ability in their respective field than a Bill Gates? Perhaps Gates abandoned the comfortable university line for personal reasons - I recall hearing that he found that he was not the very best mathematician at Harvard, before dropping out, which suggests he wanted to be the very best at something - but one suspects that some suitably talented individuals are discouraged from continuing. There is no opportunity for them or no reasonable opportunity: a life of constant bullying, say, is not a reasonable opportunity. Our society is of course a capitalist one: one in which there are private businesses which are able to produce goods. In the language of Marxists, private individuals and businesses largely control the means of production. After one has made the observations about private companies, computer revolutions, and academic jobs, it is natural for us to cast an eye at all sorts of other businesses. How did this other kind of business get going and how did it come to flourish? Probably there are people involved of the level where, if they were in a university job, their place in history books would be more secure. They have no reasonable opportunity for such a place, I guess. I assume genius of the level of a Newton is extremely rare - contemplate: to how high a level does a Voltaire doff his cap? But there are all these lesser "geniuses," who figure in histories of their field, and it seems likely to me that there are many of that level, but who lack a reasonable opportunity to claim a canonical place. Some of them surely get businesses going, or help ensure their flourishing. References Edward, Terence Rajivan. 2026. A paradox of capitalism. Available at: https://philpapers.org/rec/EDWAPO-11 Eliot, T.S. 1949. From Poe to Valéry. The Hudson Review 2(3): 327-342. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3847788 Obeyesekere, Gananath. 1992. The Apotheosis of Captain Cook: European Mythmaking in the Pacific. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (The debate is with Marshall Sahlins.) Poe, Edgar Allan. 1846. The Philosophy of Composition. Available at: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55749/55749-h/55749-h.htm Rawls, John. 1999 (revised edition). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: the Belknap Press. Available at: https://www.cita.or.id/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/John-Rawls-A-Theory-of-Justice-Belknap-Press-1999.pdf Stephen, Leslie. 1903. English Literature and Society in the Eighteenth Century. London: Duckworth and Company. Available at: https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/21123/pg21123.txt Voltaire. 1733. Letters on the English Nation. Available at: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2445/2445-h/2445-h.htm Xie, Bo. 2016. Comparative Insolvency Law. The Pre-Pack Approach to Corporate Rescue. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.