Black Plague
05-23-2008, 09:10 PM
http://www.cognitiveevolution.com/blog/
As the pendulum swings, public response has been telling. While there was vociferous outrage over James Watson’s views as expressed to The Times, few editorials have lined up in support of the realism of Neil Turok’s quest for the African Einstein. To be fair, the bar has been set quite high. Nevertheless, Turok’s aim squarely brings to the discussion forum the issue of universal Homo sapien cognitive capacity. Both Turok and Watson suggest that within our lifetimes in the next decade or so, scientific discoveries and technological measures will provide support for their divergent predictions. Who is correct?
The subject of universal Homo sapien cognitive capacity has become such an explosive and thorny topic that even psychologist Arthur Jensen who started the public debate in a 1969 issue of the Harvard Educational Review states that following increasing difficulty in getting his new work published, he no longer addresses racial implications of his research. The consensus seems to be that silence is golden.
Reams of data exist. Most of the data have been interpreted to mean that measured IQ differences exist globally among racial and ethnic groups and that these differences are reflected in standardized achievement test scores and other social indicia. This was echoed by geneticist James Watson. The position was memorialized by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray in The Bell Curve, and their recommendation that society brace itself for the ramifications of such a reality.
While no one can excuse James Watson’s intemperate public comments about the genetic quality of African minds, many live in similar glass houses. It is significant that the Cold Harbor Laboratories under his leadership grew to become one of the most respected molecular biology research institutions in the world. He is not alone in thinking his, now withdrawn, utterances to The Times. And there is plenty of guilt to go around. For the past forty years much of the significant cognitive research and compilations of data have been conducted by followers of Jensenism, Eugenics and others whose stated intent often has been to confirm immutable cognitive differences among racial and ethic groups. When the studies are disseminated the usual outcries of racism follow. Volumes are written, courses are taught, and discussion panels are convened to refute the validity of the latest findings. What is arguably missing are serious new research efforts to analyze and explain hard data. What is the brain science behind the numbers? Where are the research voices of black sub Saharan African scholars? Black American and Black European scholars? Identification of miniscule errors in the compilation of data is not the needed scientific research. Suggestions that the motivations of the researchers are less than pure are useless babble. The gigantic, enormous, foreboding elephant is still in the room.
As the pendulum swings, public response has been telling. While there was vociferous outrage over James Watson’s views as expressed to The Times, few editorials have lined up in support of the realism of Neil Turok’s quest for the African Einstein. To be fair, the bar has been set quite high. Nevertheless, Turok’s aim squarely brings to the discussion forum the issue of universal Homo sapien cognitive capacity. Both Turok and Watson suggest that within our lifetimes in the next decade or so, scientific discoveries and technological measures will provide support for their divergent predictions. Who is correct?
The subject of universal Homo sapien cognitive capacity has become such an explosive and thorny topic that even psychologist Arthur Jensen who started the public debate in a 1969 issue of the Harvard Educational Review states that following increasing difficulty in getting his new work published, he no longer addresses racial implications of his research. The consensus seems to be that silence is golden.
Reams of data exist. Most of the data have been interpreted to mean that measured IQ differences exist globally among racial and ethnic groups and that these differences are reflected in standardized achievement test scores and other social indicia. This was echoed by geneticist James Watson. The position was memorialized by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray in The Bell Curve, and their recommendation that society brace itself for the ramifications of such a reality.
While no one can excuse James Watson’s intemperate public comments about the genetic quality of African minds, many live in similar glass houses. It is significant that the Cold Harbor Laboratories under his leadership grew to become one of the most respected molecular biology research institutions in the world. He is not alone in thinking his, now withdrawn, utterances to The Times. And there is plenty of guilt to go around. For the past forty years much of the significant cognitive research and compilations of data have been conducted by followers of Jensenism, Eugenics and others whose stated intent often has been to confirm immutable cognitive differences among racial and ethic groups. When the studies are disseminated the usual outcries of racism follow. Volumes are written, courses are taught, and discussion panels are convened to refute the validity of the latest findings. What is arguably missing are serious new research efforts to analyze and explain hard data. What is the brain science behind the numbers? Where are the research voices of black sub Saharan African scholars? Black American and Black European scholars? Identification of miniscule errors in the compilation of data is not the needed scientific research. Suggestions that the motivations of the researchers are less than pure are useless babble. The gigantic, enormous, foreboding elephant is still in the room.