How much brilliant are the genius Holmes Brothers? (2024)

How much brilliant are the genius Holmes Brothers?

Hallo dear!

I’m afraid that, to provide a proper answer to your question, we should have a look at Mycroft’s and Sherlock’s scores in an IQ test, which, unfortunately, we have no way of consulting, provided that they have ever taken one. ;-)

Now, joking aside, it’s certainly true that observation, memory, and logic are all skills that can be improved - and to some extent even built - through training. But there are differences in the degrees to which they depend on training, and in the maximum age till which a training can be effective in stimulating them. Also, we have at least one clue that Sherlock, at least, possessed one of these skills - logic - in a considerable degree when he was little more than a child. Plus, genius is probably something more than all these skills, even considered all together…

Let’s begin by saying that, after a certain age - let’s say middle age, and remember that I’m NOT a neurologist - it becomes harder and harder to improve these skills, till the margin of improvement becomes very narrow; on the contrary, the younger the age, the greater the positive effect of training in improving these abilities.

Memory can not only benefit form early - and then steady - training (our grandparents, who were accustomed to learn long pieces of poetry by heart since primary school, usually had better memory than us, who place everything we need to remember in computers, smartphones, and the like…), but can also be aided by a set of tricks and specific memory techniques.

Modern Sherlock, for instance, uses just one of this techniques - the now famous ‘mind palace’, best known as method of loci or memory palace - to store and recall when needed all the information he deems useful for his profession.
Thus, HIS excellent memory, too, appears mainly the result of a constant, committed training, on Sherlock’s part.

This, possibly, is also the case with Mycroft - or, at least, with canonical Mycroft, judging by his brother’s description of his extraordinary memory (BRUC):

Observation, too, can be learned, and generally IS an acquired habit, even if some kind of natural disposition to work upon is required: there ARE people who have no eye at all for details, just as there are tone-deaf or color-blind people.

Canonical Holmes himself clearly states that his ability at observation is mostly the result of a long and hard training (BLAN):

(And see also HOUN:)

Thus, as in many other things, there must be a certain natural attitude in a person, in order to become a good observer, but to reach professional levels, like Sherlock Holmes, training is not only necessary, but indispensable.

The third (but actually, in a way, the first, because, without it, all the rest would be almost useless, in their professions…) skill that makes Sherlock and Mycroft what they are is, as I’ve said,logic. It’s their ability at logical reasoning that makes possible for them to be soo good at drawing inferences, as any inference - deduction, abduction, induction, etc. - is a logic thought process.

Now, logic is the aspect of intelligence that is better measured through IQ tests - hence my opening joke. It’s NOT, by all means, the only component of human intelligence, and there are forms of intelligence - such as emotional intelligence, for instance - that are not measured at all by the standard IQ tests. Also, ability at logic reasoning is probably the aspect of intelligence that is less influenced by different languages and cultures (even if, as any other element of the human mind, it IS influenced by them, to some extent), so that, once again, it is the one better measured by existing standard tests:

Of course, this ability, too, is partly due to an inborn quality, and partly due to environmental factors - but exactly how much influence each of them has is still matter of passionate debate, as far as I know. What appears reasonably certain, is that how much a person will develop (or not develop) his/her potential in this field is strongly linked with the amount of intellectual stimulus she/he receives (or doesn’t receive) VERY early in his/her life; the older the age, the lesser the positive effect of exposure to even intensive stimuli. Thus, a person with an average potential at birth can turn out with a considerably high IQ in adulthood when exposed to high levels of intellectual stimulus during childhood, while a person with an ABOVE average potential at birth could turn out little better than an idiot if totally deprived of intellectual stimuli through childhood.

Which, by the way, is the reason why I consider CRIMINAL each policy of savage cuts to public expenditure for education: it’s not only a sure way to produce more ignorant people; it’s also an effective way to produce more stupid people (which, however, is exactly what many governments would like best).

Anyway, as I said above, Sherlock’s and Mycroft’s most prominent feature - the one which allows them to make the most of their highly trained memory and observation skills - is their exceptional ability at logic reasoning: an ability that both of them display to an above average degree, and that probably Mycroft possesses in an even greater degree than Sherlock, both according to what we are shown in ASiB, and according to Canon (GREE):

[…]

This passage, by the way, illustrates how the debate about the respective weight of inborn qualities and training was already very up-to-date for canonical Holmes and Watson! (It also shows a certain naive attitude on Holmes’ part, as he appears to underestimate the fact that Mycroft and him grew up in the same environment and were presumably exposed to the same stimuli for the most important part of their lives…).

That Sherlock was already very brilliant, with regard to his ability at logical inferences, before reaching adulthood, we are told for certain in tGG, when he remembers how he was himself “just a kid” when he managed to understand that Carl Powers had been murdered. And we might presume that Mycroft, too, has been a very brilliant youngster. That they came from a family that was able - and presumably willing - to provide them with the best education available, and that probably grew them in a stimulating environment, we can easily enough assume from a series of clues scattered through the series (their way of speaking, Sherlock’s mastery of violin, and of course their very brilliance). How much of their intelligence is due too pure natural, genetic endowment, and how much is the product of that stimulating environment, I’ll let for you to decide.

However, as the faculty of logical reasoning, once reached adulthood (meaning: once grown after the teens), is almost definitively set, what is apparent is that the Sherlock and Mycroft that we know today ARE individuals endowed with an above average intelligence - at least with respect to that kind of intelligence which appears as an ability at logic reasoning. What I mean, is that they cannot have trained for this kind of ability once chosen their professions and as a way to reach the peak of their jobs, like one trains for mountain climbing or even for strenghtening his/her memory and her/his skills at observation: whatever component of nurture there is in their brilliance, it acted in the first stages of their lives, implicitly, and with a general effect over their intellectual abilities; and it could not have been replaced, if not in a very minimal degree, by any kind of 'training’ in adulthood. In this sense - and only in this - Sherlock and Mycroft can be considered of above average intelligence - or 'geniuses’, if you prefer.

And now, as I’m sure that this whole question was arranged to hear me rattle crazy numbers (the pun will not work in English, alas! In Italian we say “dare i numeri” - literally “to give numbers” - to mean “to go crazy”, “to ramble senselessly”) because you know that I’ve a penchant for them, I’ll dutifully comply.

Considering that average IQ is 100, and that the majority of the population (about 95%) scores between 70 and 130, my headcanon (because this IS pure headcanon!) is that, when it comes to raw intelligence, Sherlock scores 140 and Mycroft scores 145.
Here, I’ve told you the numbers!

Cheers!