Race & IQ

Rating:
Summary: Ashley Montagu Is Drowning
Review: I give this book two stars because it is a usefull anthology of all of the scientific establishments arguments in support of egalitarian race theory. For the sake of brevity I will deal with Montagu's central contentions in list form.

1. There is no such thing as race.

This assertion rests upon the revelation that there is little genetic difference between the races and that a member of the Asiatic race, for example, may have more genetic similarity to a person of Negroid race than to a fellow member of the Asiatic race. It should be obvious that says more about the limitations of genetic science than about the existence of race. It would seem that using genetic evidence alone it is impossible to discern obvious extrinsic differences between humans, such as levels of melatonin in the skin or hair texture which in turn allow accurate predictions of geographical origin. In terms of predictive prowess genetic evidence comes a poor second best to simple visual observation. The argument is, essentialy, that because genetics cannot predict race, race does not exist. This is no more logical than to assert that because blind people cannot discern colour, colour does not exist.

2. There is no such thing as racial purity.

Absolute racial purity would demand that each race be a separate species, this is clearly not the case. No one has claimed that the races of man are seperate species. The human race diveded into three main groups around 40,000 years ago and remained largely separate throughout this period. Race is the sum total of the accumulated differences accrued throughout that period of separation.

3. IQ is determined by environment.

This is false. IQ is influenced by environment. IQ is determined by a combination of inherited potential and environment. No ammount of positive environmental influence will allow a person to exceed their inherited intellectual potential.

4. IQ tests are culturaly biased.

IQ tests measure problem solving skills. These tests require nothing more than a basic aquaintance with Western European culture. The most controversial studies of inter-racial IQ differences have involved non-immigrant Americans subscribing to a common culture in every important respect.

5. IQ tests only measure a narrow range of intelligence.

No one has ever been able to define the mysterious intelligences which are not measured by IQ tests. Even if these intelligences do exist, which I consider doubtful, they would seem to be of no obvious importance. IQ tests measure the types of intelligence required to succeed in, and to create, advanced technological societies. If we intend to continue to live in such societies we should learn to value IQ as a measure of essential intellectual skills. If IQ is not an accurate measure of generaly useful intelligence we should be able to find a decent selection of doctors and lawyers with low IQs. Does Montagu really think that this is likely?

Montagu is so fixated on the short term influences of environment that he has failed to percieve the far more important long term influences of environmental difference. The Eurasian biome required a human population with a need for enhanced planning and organisational skills. This in turn gave a survival advantage to individuals of superior intelligence. Eurasians have been selected for intelligence for 40,000 years. This is the real environmental solution to the IQ connundrum.

Rating:
Summary: Ashley Montagu Is Drowning
Review: I give this book two stars because it is a usefull anthology of all of the scientific establishments arguments in support of egalitarian race theory. For the sake of brevity I will deal with Montagu's central contentions in list form.

1. There is no such thing as race.

This assertion rests upon the revelation that there is little genetic difference between the races and that a member of the Asiatic race, for example, may have more genetic similarity to a person of Negroid race than to a fellow member of the Asiatic race. It should be obvious that says more about the limitations of genetic science than about the existence of race. It would seem that using genetic evidence alone it is impossible to discern obvious extrinsic differences between humans, such as levels of melatonin in the skin or hair texture which in turn allow accurate predictions of geographical origin. In terms of predictive prowess genetic evidence comes a poor second best to simple visual observation. The argument is, essentialy, that because genetics cannot predict race, race does not exist. This is no more logical than to assert that because blind people cannot discern colour, colour does not exist.

2. There is no such thing as racial purity.

Absolute racial purity would demand that each race be a separate species, this is clearly not the case. No one has claimed that the races of man are seperate species. The human race diveded into three main groups around 40,000 years ago and remained largely separate throughout this period. Race is the sum total of the accumulated differences accrued throughout that period of separation.

3. IQ is determined by environment.

This is false. IQ is influenced by environment. IQ is determined by a combination of inherited potential and environment. No ammount of positive environmental influence will allow a person to exceed their inherited intellectual potential.

4. IQ tests are culturaly biased.

IQ tests measure problem solving skills. These tests require nothing more than a basic aquaintance with Western European culture. The most controversial studies of inter-racial IQ differences have involved non-immigrant Americans subscribing to a common culture in every important respect.

5. IQ tests only measure a narrow range of intelligence.

No one has ever been able to define the mysterious intelligences which are not measured by IQ tests. Even if these intelligences do exist, which I consider doubtful, they would seem to be of no obvious importance. IQ tests measure the types of intelligence required to succeed in, and to create, advanced technological societies. If we intend to continue to live in such societies we should learn to value IQ as a measure of essential intellectual skills. If IQ is not an accurate measure of generaly useful intelligence we should be able to find a decent selection of doctors and lawyers with low IQs. Does Montagu really think that this is likely?

Montagu is so fixated on the short term influences of environment that he has failed to percieve the far more important long term influences of environmental difference. The Eurasian biome required a human population with a need for enhanced planning and organisational skills. This in turn gave a survival advantage to individuals of superior intelligence. Eurasians have been selected for intelligence for 40,000 years. This is the real environmental solution to the IQ connundrum.

Rating:
Summary: The Marxists have been reduced to name to stop science.
Review: When I first opened this book and started to read it, I expected the typical Marxist book that uses every deception, lie and distortion to try and turn back the massive amounts of evidence that genes do in fact determine the average intelligence in different racial or ethnic groups --- some great, some small. But reading the book, I realized some very strange deviations from other similar books.

First, there are 22 chapters with chapters 1 and 3 written by Ashley Montagu being identical with different headings. The second strange thing was that the dates of the articles and the academic affiliation of the contributors are not listed. However, the 13 articles that were written before 1974 had references to the original journal articles they came from, while the current articles did not --- you are left to guess where they were first published.

And it gets even stranger. The 13 articles included in the original publication of the book were all written between 1947 and 1974. And twelve of those articles apparently resulted as a reply to Arthur Jensen's 1969 article in the Harvard Educational Review entitled "How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?" They all dealt with the possibility of increasing the low Black average intelligence by means of intervention programs because they asserted, humans were infinitely malleable and intelligence was equally available to everyone if we just threw enough money at the problem. Today, all these earlier predictions have been shown to be colossal failures, and the current edition does not put forth any new data to show intervention can work, aside to beg for more money because obviously, "we just did not spend enough money on the earlier program," even though one program cost $23,000 per IQ increase per child (which was lost as the child grew up and genetic IQ took over). And they even admit now that they have no idea how to permanently increase the IQ of Blacks with intervention programs.

The other eight articles, all written apparently after 1994 with the publication of The Bell Curve, take a different approach at attacking scientific empiricism. These die-hard egalitarians are now relying on hate against anyone who is looking at the evidence from a scientific perspective rather than an ideological egalitarian/Marxist ideology. They rely on trying to destroy or impugn motives, rather than looking at the evidence. So it appears that this book was thrown together as a last ditch effort to hold back the incredible progress that has been made since 1970 with regards to the pendulum swinging from radical environmentalism back to a more balanced understanding of human nature from an evolutionary perspective. And their main tool is hate. They call all empirical scientists "racists." It is the same vicious malignancy of intolerance against what evolutionists call "the other" or the out-group. The Marxists are attacking scientists because the data conflicts with their goals --- as part of their group evolutionary strategy.