The Nature Of Genius — IELTS Reading Answers

“In the mythology of giftedness, it is popularly believed that if people are talented in one area, they must be defective in another, that intellectuals are impractical, that prodigies burn too brightly too soon and burn out, that gifted people are eccentric, that they are physical weaklings,”

The opening paragraph lists popular myths: talent in one area implying defects, prodigies burning out, genius going unrewarded. B, C, F, H and J name five of these beliefs.

Nineteenth-century studies of the nature of genius failed to take into account the uniqueness of the person's upbringing.

“However, the difficulty with the evidence produced by these studies, fascinating as they are in collecting together anecdotes and apparent similarities and exceptions, is that they are not what we would today call norm-referenced.”

Studies collected details of 'methods of upbringing' but were not norm-referenced: they never checked how common or exceptional each upbringing was. That failure to weigh uniqueness makes the claim TRUE.

Nineteenth-century studies of genius lacked both objectivity and a proper scientific approach.

“It was only with the growth of paediatrics and psychology in the twentieth century that studies could be carried out on a more objective, if still not always very scientific, basis”

Only twentieth-century paediatrics and psychology allowed studies on 'a more objective, if still not always very scientific, basis', implying earlier nineteenth-century work had neither objectivity nor scientific method.

A true genius has general powers capable of excellence in any area.

“We may disagree with the ‘general’, for we doubt if all musicians of genius could have become scientists of genius or vice versa, but there is no doubting the accidental determination which nurtured or triggered their gifts into those channels into which they have poured their powers so successfully”

The writer doubts 'all musicians of genius could have become scientists of genius or vice versa', directly denying that genius is a general power transferable to any field. Hence FALSE.

The skills of ordinary individuals are in essence the same as the skills of prodigies.

“What we appreciate, enjoy or marvel at in the works of genius or the achievements of prodigies are the manifestations of skills or abilities which are similar to, but so much superior to, our own”

'Similar to, but so much superior to, our own' makes prodigy skills the same in kind as ordinary skills, differing only in degree. That confirms the statement is TRUE.

The ease with which truly great ideas are accepted and taken for granted fails to lessen their significance.

“But that their minds are not different from our own is demonstrated by the fact that the hard-won discoveries of scientists like Kepler or Einstein become the commonplace knowledge of schoolchildren and the once outrageous shapes and colours of an artist like Paul Klee so soon appear on the fabrics we wear.”

Discoveries becoming 'commonplace knowledge' might seem to shrink them, yet the text says this 'does not minimise the supremacy of their achievements', so familiarity does not reduce their significance.

Giftedness and genius deserve proper scientific research into their true nature so that all talent may be retained for the human race.

“It was only with the growth of paediatrics and psychology in the twentieth century that studies could be carried out on a more objective, if still not always very scientific, basis”

The passage notes twentieth-century studies were 'more objective' but never argues that genius deserves research funding or that talent must be retained for humanity. That recommendation is simply absent.

Geniuses often pay a high price to achieve greatness.

“We may envy their achievements and fame, but we should also recognise the price they may have paid in terms of perseverance, single-mindedness, dedication, restrictions on their personal lives, the demands upon their energies and time,”

The text explicitly asks us to 'recognise the price they may have paid' — restrictions on personal lives, demands on energy and time — so high personal cost is affirmed.

To be a genius is worth the high personal cost.

“We may envy their achievements and fame, but we should also recognise the price they may have paid in terms of perseverance, single-mindedness, dedication, restrictions on their personal lives, the demands upon their energies and time,”

The passage records the price geniuses 'may have paid' but never weighs that cost against the rewards, so whether genius is worth it is never addressed.