Rating: 
Summary: Well documented but may be missing the target a little
Review: I really liked the book, and thought that it was well documented. However, I have to agree with some that the idea of arriving at a number to represent IQ is very vague at best. I have met some really uneducated folks in my life who perhaps had a better propensity to learn than I do. I, however, saw more value in eduacation for the simple statistics laid out in this book. Education, generally means greater success, with some left up to IQ.Yes, there have been extremely successful geniuses with little to no post secondary educations, however, these have seemed to be the exceptions to the rule. Is it not true that many thiefs, white-collar criminals, con-artists and computer hackers come up with completely ingenius plans that nearly baffle the common lay-person? Some may not end up successful in our society for a variety of reasons, but nontheless I think some of their "intelligence" is above that of more "successful" persons. I think that the only flaw in coming to an accurate conclusion is the whole concept of measuring IQ. However, I do believe that in general, if intelligence could be accurately measured, we would find that most successful persons in today's society have above average intelligence. I think by far in our techno-crazed society, the intelligent populace perhaps better realize that legitimate monetary success relies a great deal on completing higher education now more so than historically speaking. As far as genetic links, I think that the jury is still out until such a time that we can accurately measure intelligence which is independent of the methodology.
Rating:
Summary: Not the monstrous book you've heard about
Review: Everyone who hasn't read this book thinks it's about race. Actually, it's about intelligence, and only a fraction of the book has anything to do with race. The Bell Curve makes the case that a person's adult socio-economic status is better predicted by his or her IQ score than by any other factor, including race, sex, childhood socio-economic status, and even educational attainment. A black person with an IQ of X would have about the same lifestyle as a white person or an Asian with the same IQ. When the book does get around to discussing race, they never claim that racial differences in IQ scores are entirely genetic. For any individual of any race, they posit a range of 40-60 to 60-40 for genetic versus environmental influences on IQ, which is hardly radical in any way, and it would be hard for anyone to find that controversial. I do take exception to their attempt to make public policy recommendations based on their research. For example, they worry about the "cognitive elite" making political decisions for the lower classes, which they know little about. I'd agree that that's a problem, but their solution is to encourage the elite to socialize more with the lower classes, so they could make better-informed decisions for the poor. My solution would be to keep the elite from passing legislation that's class-specific to begin with. But don't worry about the authors; they never advocate shooting minorities, and they don't take an elitist view on race at all. The Bell Curve is an important book... not because it's controversial, or because the cognoscenti will praise you if you scorn it, but because it has some good common sense that's needed in our debates about intelligence, class and race. It got four stars because the public policy recommendations don't really follow logically from their research, but that's not really what the book is for, anyway. Try not to prejudice yourself against it before you read it, and you might be pleasantly surprised.
Rating: 
Summary: A Real Eye Opener
Review: Wow. This book is not for those low on the bell curve. Sophisticated language, piles of data, and important and complex issues make this a read only for a minority of educated readers capable of comprehending its message and handling the truths. There-in lies its problem. And truth it does contain. The authors convince beyond all reasonable doubt the affect of IQ level on society. Reading the book produces 2-by-4-to-the-head realization. Criticism of The Bell Curve wells from ignorance, racism, defensiveness, an inability to handle the truth, and an unwillingness to actually read the whole book. It's about so much more than race. The sad thing about the book is that it was written before its time. The authors took a chance, stepped to the plate, and created a stir. But already the topic has fallen back into taboo status. The Bell Curve should be mandatory reading for all government officials and policy makers. But alas, its enormous potential is being lost on a dumbed-down society of politically correct bureaucrats who don't understand the science of statistics. Decades from now this book will probably make a resurgence as society takes another hard look at itself. Let's hope it's not too late. --Christopher Bonn Jonnes, author of Wake Up Dead.
Rating: 
Summary: conservative, elitist garbage
Review: a student coming out of sociology 101 could disprove the so-called truths contained in this book... highly entertaining, but not much more.
Rating: 
Summary: Raises Interesting Points
Review: Aside from all the controversial racism issues, the book makes some other valid, troubling points, the first of which is the fact that the lower classes in our society are reproducing at a far greater rate than the upper classes. The book asserts that we are breeding ourselves into stupidity, and the point is hard to argue. Amazing that you can get a book published these days whose sole point is to call the authors of The Bell Curve stupid or racist. Whether they are racist or not- who cares? Let the reader form his or her own opinion as to the value of the work. While I may not agree with some of the author's points, I respect their courage in publishing them in the face of political correctness.
Rating:
Summary: The Truth is dangerous sometimes
Review: Though this book addresses controversial issues that are sure to ignite vehement debates, it manages to maintain its validity through the numerous studies. When Gallelio and Darwin published their works, they both suffered severe criticism from the Church. Now as science progresssed, we've come to accept Gallelio and Darwin's early discoveries. Its hard for people to accept truths that may not be in their best interest. This may unfortunately become dangerous and ignite racial tensions. I just have one question for those who refute this book. It is a known fact that the physical attributes vary from races. Asians have a generally lower stature than blacks and whites. And judging from the ethnic make up of sports events, blacks seem superior in athletic activities. Anyone who disagrees with this can simply turn on the TV and watch a basketball game on NBC. So if race plays a role in one's physical aspects, why not mental? It wouldn't make sense if we vary dramatically in the physical sense but mentally, we're all the same.
Rating:
Summary: Murray Is To Blame That Page 47 Did Not Dominate Debate
Review: The authors of "The Bell Curve" were disingenuous when complaining that the media unfairly focussed upon the controversial racial aspect of this study. They conveniently overlooked the fact that their publisher, The Free Press, did everything it could to highlight the issue. This substantially helped to sell a lot of books. Richard J. Herrnstein died soon after the release of this work. Thus, my following remarks will be directed towards Charles Murray. I wholehearted regret that the topics raised on page 47 did not instead dominate the debate. Page 47 alone is well worth the price of this book. I constantly refer to this page many time throughout a given year. Page 47 so aptly depicts the increasing social and cultural divide between the educated elite and the hoi polloi. The former often fail to realize how different they are from those less educated and economically well off. I will give the reader a sneak preview by directly quoting the following: "Think of your twelve closest friends or colleagues. For most readers of this book, a large majority will be college graduates. Does it surprise you to learn that the odds of having even half of them be college graduates are only six in a thousand, if people were randomly paired off. Many of you will not think it odd that half or more of the dozen have advanced degrees. But the odds against finding such a result among a randomly chosen group of twelve Americans are actually more than a million to one." I generally agree with just about everything that Charles Murray says concerning poverty issues and how best to address the problems of the permanent underclass. Murray is normally a superb thinker deserving of much respect. Nonetheless, in regards to "The Bell Curve," I find it necessary to take my hero to task. I cannot, for instance, accept Murray's bizarre assertion that a study of possible racial differences in I.Q. serves us well in devising viable social policies. How could this possibly occur? Let us for a moment, for the sake of argument, embrace the premise that Orientals place first in the overall intelligence curve, whites rank second, and blacks linger behind in third place. Do we therefore tacitly, if not explicitly, create regulations with this assumption in mind? How do politicians carry out this agenda? Will such thinking result in a presidential campaign platform resolution? Should Afro-Americans concede their supposed innate inferiority, and happily go along with plans directing them to employment and a life style more conducive to those with fewer qualities to offer a competitive world? Murray contends that these studies only indicate a general average of racial intelligence, and that a black individual per se may actually be the smartest person on this planet. So what? Social policies are primarily based on the majority of those under discussion, not the exceptions. Any governmental or social guidelines underpinned with the notion that black people are dumber than their fellow citizens will most certainly stigmatize everyone under that dubious racial classification. What is race anyway? The very definition is murky and confusing. Also, the very concept of human intelligence will remain forevermore intrinsically nebulous. Studies currently released are likely to be contradicted in the future. Test tubes and other artifacts of the hard sciences do not begin to exhaust this supreme mystery of homo sapien existence. A million years from now our progeny will still be debating these frustrating and puzzling matters. Murray has made a fool of himself. He has latched onto a band wagon inevitably doomed to crash and burn. Charles Murray, however, has this much going for himself: the man is still young enough to redirect his energies and I.Q. to other areas of study promising to be far more beneficial to the total human race.
Rating:
Summary: Curving the Myth of The Bell Curve
Review: The Bell Curve is a marvelous compilation of scientific theory, statistical data, and controversial convictions, one of the finest works in its genre. Charles Murray and the late Richard J. Herrnstein make claims that intelligence and IQ play a key role in the shaping of the framework of society, and use proven statistics and graphs to appropriately justify their thesis. From their perspective, the cognitive and social underclass is largely responsible for many of the social ills of society (crime, illegitimacy, substance abuse), while the 'cognitive elite' live in peace and prosperity while attending opera and orchestral concerts, detached from the average Joe of society. A small but significant portion of the book is dedicated to on racial and ethnic differences in intelligence and the consequences of these results - sure to ignite passionate debate. No doubt conservatives, Murray and Herrnstein make a variety of proposals to better this nation - they denounce welfare and affirmative action, believe that funding should be diverted away from the disadvantaged to the gifted, and praise the American school system in its success in streaming the 'cognitive elite', however poor, to top Ivy League schools. There is special resentment towards single mothers who, intellectually deficient themselves, give birth to 'dumb babies' at a high rate ('giving birth to violent criminals in boys and more single mothers in girls'), while the 'cognitive elite' continue to have low fertility rates, putting the nation at risk of dysgenesis. Such cries of doomsday are quite prominent throughout the book, but Murray and Herrnstein present utopian views of a future custodial state, in which the cognitive elite take care of the growing underclass, to keep the dumb 'happy' and the smart 'safe' from their hazard. However controversial, their claims are poignant and right-on-the-money, and this provocative work is a must read for those concerned about the present and future state of America.
Rating:
Summary: A Well-Reasoned Look at the Impact of Intelligence on Life
Review: When "The Bell Curve" first saw print some years ago, the Birkenstock Left pitched a fit as only they and teething toddlers can. They immediately took to the airwaves in droves to decry the "racism" of the authors, and put out a bunch of hastily-written garbage to refute the book which apparently none of them had read. Thus it may surprise you to learn that the section on ethnic differences in cognitive ability is but 70 pages out of 845 in the book, and that the most "controversial" finding within these 70 pages is that, historically, blacks on average have scored lower than whites on tests of cognitive ability, and that whites have scored lower on average than Asians. (Far from being white supremacists, the authors are apparently Asian supremacists, if we follow the Left's overwrought arguments.) But the attention paid to race and ethnicity is merely a strawman for the Ivory Tower Marxists. The actual thesis of the book, as proven by a plethora of empirical evidence, is this: that in analyzing America, intelligence is a far more accurate predictor of success than class origin, and that the current stratification of American society is due to differences in cognitive ability rather than in social class. The Left understands that this is the death nell for the Marxist dream, and has pulled out all the stops to suppress this book. Yet is this controversial? As we enter the Information Age, it is clear that the intellectual Haves have clear advantages over the Have Nots. Only 20% of Americans access the Internet regularly. Would it surprise anyone to see a positive correlation between Internet usage and scores on IQ tests? Is anyone amazed that criminals tend to be dumb, regardless of the social class they were born into? Or that stupid scions of wealthy families usually blow their money, while bright sons and daughters of poor families seem to do quite well? The thesis is a yawner. What is appaling is that in America, the Left has had such success in creating a culture of class envy that we now find the obvious connection between brains and success astounding. Herrnstein and Murray, to their lasting credit, have once again proven that the truth will out, no matter how inconvenient for some. For the record, my father was a bricklayer, I score quite well on cognitive tests, and I am doing very well in the corporate technology sector. I thus tend to sympathize with the authors' thesis and find the Birkenstock Bolsheviks of academia to lack credibility on this issue, as all others. Grab this book and give it a thorough read if you're at all interested in intelligence, statistics, sociology, or simply want to know what all the fuss was about in an unfiltered fashion. You won't be sorry, no matter where you fall on the Bell Curve.
Rating:
Summary: Bad Science
Review: To begin with, the concept of IQ is so contentious and unscientific that it cannot be used as proof for a certain, highly suspect, political stance. This book has recieved no acclaim from any internationally respected sources, it has, instead, come under constant criticism. There are thousands and thousands of books which draw upon statistics all 'proving' utterly contradictory viewpoints. I was impressed with the data that these two 'scientists' managed to dig up... nevertheless just as much data exists that utterly counters their argument. The unfortunate thing about this book is that the authors did not begin writing it from a neutral point of view, they had their racist hypothesis from the beginning and simply found the evidence to back it up. Not that I am discrediting ALL of the evidence. I am perfectly prepared to accept that the average IQ of an African-American is significantly lower than the average IQ of a white American. HOWEVER, they decline to mention the fact that the average IQ of an African-American is also significantly lower than the average IQ of educated native Africans, which is much closer to the white American average. The majority of American blacks classed as 'black' are actually of as much white or native american descent as they are of African descent, and of course their white blood would be that of the lowest class of whites. Similarly, out of the enormous populations of the Asian nations, the competition to get out of Asia and into the West is so fierce that only the most intelligent and successful Asians are able to do it. I don't believe that one has to refute the fact that different races in America have different IQ averages to not be a racialist. Having said that, there is nothing respectable about this book. The authors, quite obviously from a improminant and largely discredited school of thought, had their minds made up from the start, and were prepared to use the direct correllation between wealth and IQ to back up their redundant and racialist argument which has been out of favour for decades. In reality, IQ scores fluctuate wildly given the nature of the tests, and the education level of those taking the tests. The assumption that intelligence is the ONLY reason for social inquality is absurd and blatantly false enough, but coupled with the belief that genetics is the ONLY basis for intelligence it becomes dangerous, the type of tool that will be taken up by the evil racist extreme right-wing. And that is exactly what happened. You can find reviews of this book on Klan and Christian Identity websites. One hopes that providing these despicable movements with academic support is not what the authors intended, although one cannot be so sure. Very, very, very, very bad science. Everybody can remember civilization's last grand experiment in eugenics in the 1940s. Let's hope that it never rears its ugly head again, and that bad science like this is not used to give it respectability.
|
