Rating: 
Summary: Science Contaminated by a Modern Worldview ?
Review: Quantitative studies emphasize the measurement and analysis of causal relationships between variables, not processes. Inquiry is purported to be within a value-free framework. But, is it? Using a typically positivist approach, Herrnstein and Murray used hard data to make a social point describing the intelligence of various groups of people as defined by their ethnicity. Their meta-analysis was rigorously structured, as we would expect. The researchers apparently followed all of the rules of empirical study.
The problem came when they tried to apply meaning to the data they saw. They attributed the differences they found to be a result of differences in the innate abilities of their subjects - ignoring 400 years of racism and oppression as possible confounding factors - and leading them to the erroneous conclusion that some races are inherently more or less capable than others. Clearly, quantitative research needs help when it comes to describing the human experiences behind the numbers. It needs qualitative analysis as well, and the two are not mutually exclusive.
Extracting meaning from numerical values is the major weakness of quantitative analysis. Its numbers provide clues to possible meaning. But, one's own perspectives and paradigms necessarily contaminate those clues. Herrnstein and Murray began their study with a thesis: There are substantial individual and group differences in intelligence; these differences profoundly influence the social structure and organization of work in modern industrial societies, and they defy easy remediation. Imbued with the scientific authority of their method, the book becomes the authors' 845-page effort to "prove" themselves correct. At the same time, Charles Murray acknowledges that other quantitative researchers structure their studies to show different results. He says, "There's a fellow named Harold Stevenson who's a well-known scholar, and very good, who says [about group differences in IQ scores], 'No, if you match carefully enough on all kinds of social and demographic variables, you can reduce the difference to zero." Undeterred, Murray persists in his analysis of group data to show our national dysgenesis.
Dysgenesis refers to the fact that if you have people with low IQs having more babies than people with high IQs, or having them at younger ages, you end up with a downward pressure on what you could call the human capital of the country.
It must be difficult for someone like Murray, well schooled in traditional academia, and "playing by the rules" as he understands them, being somewhat surprised by the rejection of his work by large numbers of people. In fact, he seems dismissive of the racism charges leveled against him casting himself as the one who had the courage to publish the truth.
He told Brian Lamb of Booknotes, "The [black] mean is about...15 points below the white mean. And that has created the huge controversy about IQ tests that persist. Again, take a look at the overlap. I mean, you've got lots and lots of blacks and whites in the same range. You also have tens of thousands of blacks at the very highest levels of IQ, which is another reason that insofar as we treat people as individuals in this society, the black-white difference should not cause a lot of anxiety."
I don't doubt his sincerity. But, that only leaves one to wonder if he really believes that America operates without regard to race and class and religious prejudices, and that everyone is treated as an individual. It is his worldview, the one underpinning his conclusions, which lacks credibility.
It is typically accepted that quantitative data is inherently more valid than qualitative data. However, as The Bell Curve demonstrated, it is ones underlying assumptions that shape the conclusions of both. Qualitative and quantitative researchers alike must be sensitive to the introduction of their own biases.
The old axiom, "The data doesn't lie," just isn't true. Misinterpretations based on faulty paradigms result in bad science. Bad science exists in all fields and it is highly susceptible to malignant political motives.
Herrenstein and Murray proceed as though we are all in agreement with the classicists, that intelligence can be measured by a single value, g, - a notion not shared by either the revisionists (like Piaget who believed that intelligence is much about process and IQ scores may camouflage more than they reveal) or the radicals (like Howard Gardner, who believes that intelligence is too complex and dependent on cultural context). As they point out, "Gardner's work is uniquely devoid of psychometric or other quantitative evidence. He dismisses factor analysis." His theory of Multiple Intelligences is, in fact, largely qualitative. He sees the notion of a 'g' factor as being an unsettled issue.
Given the same set of data, it is possible, using one set of factor-analytic procedures, to come up with a picture that supports the idea of a 'g' factor; using another equally valid method of statistical analysis, it is possible to support the notion of a family of relatively discrete mental abilities.
Gardner faults the current science as being too reliant on linguistic and logical facility arguing that people with spatial or musical abilities are "likely to be impaled on such standardized tests." Clearly, quantitative science has not settled the issue, but Herrenstein and Murray state the contrary as though the issue has been decided, stating, "Ethnic differences in cognitive ability are neither surprising nor in doubt."
Understanding this process, in all of its complex and various forms, requires more insight than can now be provided by numerical values. Herrenstein and Murray want us to believe that our ability to reason, understand our environment, analyze and solve problems and communicate solutions can be reduced to a single number. I seriously doubt it. If science ever advances to the point where a number can describe human intellectual capacity, in all of its genetic complexity, including environmental impact on intelligence, it's not likely to be a single three-digit figure.
Overzealous and exclusive dedication to hard data reveals issues of control and threatens to lead us away from an understanding of the meaning behind the very data we collect.
Rating: 
Summary: Do your own IQ Study, IQ Analysis. Test the IQ theses
Review: Have all the reviewers fully read the book and have they actually seen a copy of the book. In 1994, accusations were flying fast and furious about the book. BUT, no one has actually read the book from cover to cover. Please buy the book, read it cover to cover and let the book speak for itself. I have read several Charles Murray books, "Losing Ground" "Good Government". Murray interests are in poverty and crime. This is his first book on intelligence and class. In a 1991 NYT article, he was quoted as having interests in the causes of wealth and poverty among groups and individuals. Who is not interested in why some people like Bill Gates can have wealth of $30-$40 billion dollars whereas others are living from paycheck to paycheck working at Wal-Mart. Does having equal opportunity end in equal results? The answer is of course NOT. Look at any NFL, NBA, MLB, NCAA, pro or college sports. Do all teams play equally well and do all players play at the equal level. Of course NOT, Some teams are better and some players are better. Otherwise, all of us can get a baseball contract like Alex Rodriquez for $250 million with the Texas Rangers. Can all of us be Michael Jordan, Barry Bond, Kurt Warner etc. The book is not about race, only chapter #13 deals with race. The chief concern is about class and how IQ affects ones place in society. The main theses can be summarize easily. 1. There is Intelligence (IQ) among individuals. IQ exists and can be tested. IQ can be design to be race, culture neutral. IQ can be anywhere from 50%-75% genetically determined.
2. IQ determines an individual success in education, jobs, crime, welfare dependence, citizenship etc. Simply, one's journey through life.
3. The median IQ as exemplified by the Bell Curve is centered at 100 IQ for whites. Blacks IQ is at 85, a gap of 15 points. Jews and East Asians tests higher than whites. Hispanics IQ and black IQ is about a standard deviation, 15 IQ points below whites.
4. Due to the gap in IQ, colleges and jobs have had to compensate for differences in IQ. Jews and East Asians have complained they needed higher scores for college admission whereas blacks and Hispanics have lower hurdles for colleges. Berkeley has a gap of SAT 300 points between blacks and whites.
5. In the demography of IQ, high IQ parents tend to have children late and less. The number of children are less as education goes up. 6. The data on IQ is "not new". The IQ data has been known and debated among educators and academics for decades and centuries now. Murray's book is in fact a review of the literature. All the data, studies, researches have published in peer-review journals for decades now. The works of professor Arthur Jensen, Richard Lynn, etc, etc have been published and debated in academic journals for decades. The book is really a review and analysis of the IQ research that has been going on for decades now. Moreover, there is now "mainstream consensus" about IQ by professional IQ researchers and academics. The last point-"consensus by academics" on IQ is perhaps most important. Most of us do not read academics journals but the data on IQ presented in the book has been known for decades now. In fact, in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, 50 professor-academics signed a letter supporting the theses of the book. Folks, the ideas on IQ are not new nor in fact being contested by professional academics. The bell curve of IQ have been known for decades now. Since 1969 when Arthur Jensen published his comments on IQ and education, hundreds of articles have published to refutes his ideas. Yet, no one has been able to do and he defines the mainstream on the IQ debate. Readers may want to see Jensen's The G factor. Look at the International tests scores of students on science and math done on a global level. It not arts or literature tests, "math" and "science" is the same everywhere. Year after year, American students are at or near the bottom of the tests. Who is always at the top, the children of East Asia, nations like Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. European children are in the middle. Is math and science "bias" so that children of East Asia always scores the highest. Is algebra, geometry, chemistry "bias". Probably NOT and tests after tests produce the same results. Again, if anyone disagrees, "prove it" Science is based on "experiment" and the publishing of data for the world to see and review. Anyone, who disagrees with the IQ data, just go and develop your own IQ tests, perform the IQ tests and report the IQ data in journals for the world to see. The only way to refute science is with more science. Many books have been written denouncing the book but not a single one has presented their own set of data. For example, the gap of 15 points between whites and blacks. If anyone can provide a legit test that show the gap does NOT exists, please present it. Millions are waiting for the test and the results of the test. In short, there is nothing "new" in The Bell Curve. For example, the gap of 15 points have been known for decades now. In college admissions, public universities have "admitted" that they have a two-tier admissions process. Whites-Asians applicants are thrown into one pile and blacks-Hispanics are thrown into another pile. Gaps can be between 100-300 SAT points between the two groups. IQ exists, IQ differs among groups, IQ affects performance in schools and jobs. This well know and accepted by academics for decades now. People should not feel "surprise" at the findings of this book. Name-calling adds nothing to the debate. If anyone disagrees, create your own IQ tests and publish the results for the world to see. However, unless new IQ data comes forth, the 1994 Murray book is at this point the best summation of the known knowledge on IQ and how IQ affects performance in jobs and schools. If you disagree, stop name-calling, "prove it" "show us the facts". First, buy the book, read it, and "know" the arguments of The Bell Curve first.
Rating: 
Summary: Historical Context Please
Review: Read this if you're actually interested in the truth:
Here's something that bothers me: this book is actually evil, in the truest sense of the word, but the worst part about it is that certain people simply dismissed the book without learning its central arguments or taking the time to systematically or effectively refute them. All they did was to make people believe the books message had to be supressed...or the truth get out. We have to have an open dialogue about these types of issues or else people will be suspicious, and rightfully so.
As a History Professor I know the context. The IQ test was actually developed in order to prove that Jews were, despite popular belief, intellectually inferior. And, at the time, the poor Eastern European Jews flooding into the United States did in fact score lower on the tests! Now, this book asserts Jews are "smarter" than everyone else. Even when there is a clear historical example of how this idea changed according to time as well. Just like in the past when "scientists" were convinced that Eastern Europeans were racially inferior, that the Irish were as well. Nothing is new about this book, and there isn't anything "brave" about it. People who observed Africans in travel dialogues commented that they were smarter than Europeans-only after color became associated with slavery in Early Modern Europe's global systems of exploitation did black come to equal "inferior". Africans from Africa score higher on IQ tests than African Americans....and African Americans have more European ancestry! The fact is that people score higher on the test, point by point, according to how much money their familes make, regardless of race. And in fact this is the central argument of the book: the rich "deserve" to be where they are, not because of historical advantages given to whites or males (men earn signficantly more than women) but because they are smarter. The book also presumes that everything about human capability can be discerned through one standarized test, and that race is something clearly defined, that is self-evident. All of us are of mixed ethnicity-there is no such thing as racial "purity". Furthermore, genetics supports this fact, as any biologist will tell you. There is no genetic difference between the races: dark skin does not "equal" an immediate connection to low test scores. The fact that we think we can connect visual messages with ability shows how flawed our logic is as a society. Anyone who does not see this book for what it is: an excuse to cut all social programs and allow the poor to become poorer, is not thinking critically. How can anyone believe in this day and age, while the powerless and people of color become poorer by the second and all power resides in the hands of a very few white people, believe that this is nothing other than an evil lie? Some people seem to think some wishy-washy liberal PC conspiracy forces people to go underground when they believe in the concepts put forward by this book-nothing could be further from the truth! The truth is, and anyone paying attention to world events knows, and anyone who knows history knows, things are getting worse and worse for everyone, not just minorities, but the poor white people that the authors of this book affectionately refer to as "poor white trash". This is book against poverty and humanity, and if you believe in any kind of religion or any system of ethics you cannot possibly help but dismiss it as one of the most obscene gestures of the ruling elite in the past ten years.
Rating: 
Summary: Controversial rationale for conservative social ideas
Review: TBC is an interesting book and worth reading because: 1) It provides insight into the rationale behind a large component of conservative social philosophy, e.g. opposition to affirmative action; and 2) It discusses openly a highly taboo subject, the IQ differences between ethnic groups. In doing so, the authors explain competing viewpoints in a fair manner, and defend their own controversial view. The book starts with an impressive amount of data on psychometrics (measurement of IQ). They show that high IQ tends to increase the chance of socioeconomic success in the USA, and this is increasingly true since we are becoming a complex and technological society. Low IQ is correlated with a host of social problems, like crime, poverty, and unmarried motherhood. These data are objective facts and one cannot argue with them as far as they go. The most interesting part of the book was towards the latter chapters where the authors formulate several opinions about public policy and how to improve society. They oppose affirmative action in its present form, arguing that allowing too large an IQ gap in college admissions or hiring practices is unfair and leads to social problems. Another interesting argument is that government interventions like the 1964 Civil Rights Act are unecessary and misguided because they did not lead to large observed changes in the socioeconomic success of blacks. This seems a flawed argument to me, since the changes have been gradually positive along the same time as society's changes in attitudes, which culminate in and are reinforced by these government interventions. The authors also state that law enforcement should be simpler and less ambiguous (so that stupid people understand better how to obey the law), and they encourage family units (i.e. marriage). The single most controversial aspect of the science presented in TBC is the notion that IQ tests are not culturally biased. It is useful to read what OTHER scientists in a position to judge these results think. One might try to read Stephen Jay Gould's book "The Mismeasure of Man" (although I don't completely agree with that book either). TBC describes studies where the researchers separated "culturally loaded" IQ test questions from purely "g-loaded" questions based on the opinions of "independent judges". Is this data ? In a way yes, but it is data about opinions. It is partially subjective and understandably controversial. Even if we assume the book is mostly correct in its science, readers should question its advice on social policy. In a field like sociology it is impossible to prove scientifically that a particular policy is correct -- there is always a subjective component. Take affirmative action in colleges, for example. Standardized tests (which are correlated to IQ) are not the only criteria for admission. Also important are subjective criteria like extracurricular activities, leadership potential, and indeed racial diversity. The U.S. Supreme Court permits this goal of racial diversity in campuses, provided it is not based on quotas (Bakke vs U. Cal. 1978). In other words, political judgement is appropriate in deciding what is fair and we cannot weight the IQ too heavily.
Rating: 
Summary: midunderstood
Review: Those who have only read criticism of the Bell Curve may think it is about race/ethnicity and intelligence. In fact, the book's main argument is simply that intelligence translates into economic success. There is one chapter about race/ethnicity and intelligence. On this, I think Hernstein and Murray's argument would be much stronger if they said "caring about education is cultural," rather than some "races/ethnicities are smarter than others." I think the notion "Jews/Asians are smarter than the norm" is very difficult to accept. I think "Jews/Asians value education more than the norm" is, on the contrary, difficult to argue with.
Rating:
Summary: Facts are facts! Interesting, well thought out book!
Review: Those 2 guys from Sacramento sound like total utter morons... they obviously did not look at the hard evidence... they probably did not even read the book at all... The truth hurts, right?
Rating:
Summary: Bottom line--a fascinating book that rings true for me
Review: The other reviews of this book pretty much say it all--both positive and negative viewpoints. I would recommend reading this book (even though it is very heavy going) for the same reasons stated in the positive reviews. Here are some additional observations: The perception of many that the focus or central thrust of this book is that whites (and/or Asians) are smarter than blacks is totally overblown. Only one chapter out of 22 deals with the issue of ethnicity. I give credit to Murray and Hernstein for not ducking a volative issue, but at the same time they do NOT obsess on it. There is a TON of very interesting content in this book over and above this topic. In the introduction the authors very clearly lay out the core assumptions (there are six) upon which they base all of their subsequent analysis. I found it very refreshing that they were open and honest about these assumptions; if a reader doesn't buy them, that's the reader's choice. I have a technical education, but I am not an expert in assessment of cognitive ability, statistics, etc. However, my general subjective impression of the book as a whole is that it is well reasoned and and carefully researched. I have also read three other books by Charles Murray, and I would heartily recommend them all: Losing Ground, In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government, and What it Means to be a Libertarian. These books display the same traits of the Bell Curve; clear, careful reasoning and articulate expression of ideas and concepts. I always strive to be open minded and objective (although I don't always succeed). After reading all four of these books it is extremely hard for me to believe that Murray is engaged in anything more that the pursuit of the truth. I really don't believe that he has an ideological ax to grind, any deep, dark notions of white supremacy, etc. And here's an anecdote to think about. I was a big fan of the "McLaughlin Group" talking heads show in the mid 90's. At the end of each calendar year, the group did a special show on the "bests" and "worsts" of the year just past. In 1994 Eleanor Clift (a Newsweek columnist and at that time a regular on the show) stated that the "worst thing" that happened in 1994 was the publishing of the Bell Curve. A fascinating observation.
Rating:
Summary: Great Seminal Work. Book calls for additional Research.
Review: Science is based on Experiment, Observation, and Measurement. The results of science are published for the whole world to see and evaluate. The Bell Curve is an attempt to apply the scientific method to "intelligence" and "social life". Is "social life" like electricity or chemistry. No, so-called "social science" can be complicated, confusing and unreliable. Lots of reviewer have never read the book fully. I have read it fully several times. What the books has is lots of DATA, DATA, and more DATA. Before anyone can talk about it, they must look at the facts and the data. So, buy this book and read it first before making any comment on it please. Are the ideas on "intelligence" "race" "social achievement" true or proven. Can one book absoulutely prove all this? Absoulutely NO. Is this a good beginning? YES. It is a seminal book, a book that will color all books dealing with social issues. What the world needs is more research, testing, and collection of data. Anyone who wants to agree or disagree with the book needs to refute it with data and facts. If the the test are culturally bias, make your own test and publish the results. Polemics adds nothing to the discussion. The isssues raised by the Bell Curve on "intelligence" and "social achievement" will not go away. America sent a man to the Moon, probe to Mars and will soon build a Microprocessar with a billion transister. Yet, America has over a million people in prison, it cities are decaying slums and every international test show Americans last or next to last in Science and Math. Estimates range from 25-50% of population just cannot even read. How can this be the same nation. Great scientific achievement and abject ignorance and poverty. My friends, the answer may lie in The Bell Curve. This issue will not go away, intelligence is the foundation of the tech and computer economy. The sooner we come to terms, the better our society will be. However, before going into diatribe about this book, please buy a copy and read from cover to cover before commenting on it. Please comment based on facts and evidence only.
Rating:
Summary: Blacks are Smart!
Review: Black people are not stupid! That's the main point of this racist manifesto. All races have equal genetic endowments for intelligence; racism is what causes the different mean IQ scores.
Rating:
Summary: It represents a human fallacy !
Review: I can only advice anyone not to be blinded by the jargon and falsely executed statistics. Anyone who is seriously interested in the ongoing debate "Does intelligence as an enitiy that is inherited and unalterable exist ?" should read "The Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen Jay Gould. I can only express my deepest regret and resentment towards a book that represents a human fallacy that has encumbered our societies for over century and doesn't seem to vanish.
|
