Richard Lynn
Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 2001
$75 U.S.
lxii + 581pp.
Richard Lynn
Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2001
$67.50 U.S.
ix + 367pp.
Reviewed by Louis Andrews
Among today's egalitarian ideologues, the studies sponsored by the Pioneer Fund and the ideas of eugenics are perhaps the object of more hatred than the Second Amendment, patriarchy, and homophobia combined. In two recent books, Richard Lynn, a British psychologist, explores both the contributions of the Pioneer Fund and the promise of eugenics from the standpoint of reason, not political correctness. Lynn has published widely on psychological issues, especially on the worldwide variations in IQ based on ethnicity and race, for over thirty years. These two most recent of his books are the culmination of his career.
The Science of Human Diversity begins with a long introduction to Wickliffe Draper and the Pioneer Fund by the latter's president, Harry F. Wehyer. By all reasonable standards, Wickliffe Preston Draper was a memorable man. Born in New England in 1891 to a prominent and wealthy family, he had on his father's side an uncle who had been a congressman from Massachusetts and another who was governor of the state. On his mother's side, his grandfather had been a congressional representative from Kentucky as well as ambassador to Spain. After graduating cum laude from Harvard, Draper traveled throughout Mexico on horseback, personally witnessing the revolutionary environment of Emiliano Zapata and Pancho Villa. When war started in Europe, he joined the British Army and received both the 1914-1915 British Star Medal and the Belgian Croix de Guerre. He was wounded at Ypres, and after the U.S. entry into the war transferred to the U.S. Army.
Draper's private wealth enabled him to live the life of a gentleman philanthropist. In the 1920s he developed an interest in archaeology and anthropology, and during an expedition to the Southern Sahara helped discover the remains of "Asselar Man." For this he was made a fellow of the Royal Geographic Society and awarded the 1928 Gold Medal by the Societié de Geographie. Draper was a small aircraft pilot, a powerful swimmer, swordsman, and marksman, and hunted trophy class animals of most of the large game of the world. Besides his wide reading, as his interest in anthropology and human pre-history and history developed, he was able to hire private tutors to keep him up to date on the latest information in a variety of fields.
For much of his life, Draper gave large sums to charitable causes, including conservation, art education, and health. He refused at least three honorary degrees from universities in the U. S. and abroad and remained a very private man until his death in 1972 from prostate cancer.
In 1937, after privately supporting a number of research projects in biology and psychology, Draper and four others including John M. Harlan, later Supreme Court Justice, founded the Pioneer Fund. Draper was its primary benefactor and at his death left 3.3 million dollars to the Fund.
So why was this extraordinary man and the organization he created and funded vilified by ABC News (Peter Jennings) and other media such as The Wall Street Journal and The New York Review of Books as proto-Nazi and evil? The Wall Street Journal, that citadel of property rights and free enterprise, has even hinted that perhaps men such as Draper should not have control of their own assets, since they might use them for purposes of which presumably the Journal would not approve.
In addition to the lengthy introduction by Harry F. Weyher who has been president of the Pioneer Fund since 1958, The Science of Human Diversity consists of forty largely biographical chapters. Lynn notes that for the past sixty years the Fund has been "nearly the only non-profit foundation making grants for study and research into individual and group differences, and the hereditary basis of human nature... Over those 60 years, the research funded by Pioneer has helped change the face of social science."
The Pioneer Fund has been the primary funder of research into individual and group differences. It has made grants to organizations as diverse as the Sickle-Cell Anemia Foundation of New York, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center for Mental Retardation for a research program on Tay-Sachs disease, and the genetics department of Tel Aviv University. While the Fund has supported over 60 projects over its history of more-than-60 years, a few stand out above the rest. First, T. J. Bouchard, Jr. and others for the famous Minnesota Twins study discussed later in this review, J. Philippe Rushton at the University of Western Ontario for his ongoing study of race differences and the r-K continuum, Arthur Jensen at the University of California at Berkeley for his psychological research, especially into group differences in IQ and the nature of g, and Roger Pearson and the Institute for the Study of Man for continued publication of the journal The Mankind Quarterly have all been recipients of Pioneer grants. In addition, Pioneer funded Richard Lynn himself, for his decades-long study of group differences in intelligence as well as studies of dsygenics and eugenics, and Linda Gottfredson at the University of Delaware, whose work in employment testing and intelligence has been some of the most useful sociological research conducted in recent years. In addition the list includes many others who have made substantial contributions to our knowledge base such as Hans Eysenck, Lloyd Humphries, William Shockley, R. Travis Osborne, A. James Gregor, Bruno Chiarelli, Michael Levin, and Garrett Hardin. The latter was supported more for his emphasis on population issues than human diversity directly, though his views on human diversity and social issues are apparent in his last two major books, Living Within Limits and The Ostrich Factor.
The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart is perhaps the best known of Pioneer-supported studies. In fact, Pioneer has been the primary funder of the study since its inception in 1979. The study has two parts. First, the twins (who were all separated early in life) were brought in for a psychological and medical assessment, which lasted for a week. Monozygotic and dizygotic twins were identified. The testing included IQ, interests, psychomotor skills, personality, and academic skills. The medical portion of the assessment was a complete workup including dental examination. The second portion was a longitudinal study of aging that lasted for 10 years. The investigators were led by Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr. and included such luminaries as Nancy Segal, Matt McGue, and David Lykken. The Minnesota investigators have published about 130 papers detailing their findings, and the study is generally considered the most important twin study ever done. Even so, the University of Minnesota, which hosted the center that is carrying out the study, has come under attack by egalitarians because of the support of the Pioneer Fund. Thankfully, they have stood their ground and the research project, which has lasted fro more than 20 years, is now near completion.
Thus despite the attacks and the opposition of radical egalitarians, the Pioneer Fund has been able to support the work of many prominent scholars. As Lynn notes, grantees and directors "have been elected as presidents of the American Psychological Association, the British Psychological Association the Behavior Genetics Association, the Psychonomic Society, the Society for Psychophysiological Research, the Psychometric Society and the National Council on Measurement of Education." They have also included Guggenheim Fellows, Nobelists, and an American Supreme Court Justice.
Richard Lynn's production since his recent retirement from active teaching has been nothing short of phenomenal. Besides keeping up his steady stream of journal articles, he has produced this volume on the Pioneer Fund, a full treatment of eugenics (reviewed next in this essay) and in February 2002 released his latest, IQ and the Wealth of Nations, co-authored with Tatu Vanhanen of the University of Helsinki, Finland.
Like Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations, his 1996 work, Eugenics: A Reassessment is published by Praeger and is available at a price guaranteed to limit the number of copies sold. Eugenics is superbly written and well edited. It contains perhaps the finest statement of the nature and purposes of classical eugenics as well as a look at what Lynn calls "the new eugenics."
Any history of contemporary eugenics must begin with the English polymath Sir Francis Galton, cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton's lifetime output was prodigious, and his IQ has been estimated as about 190. (Gavan Tredoux has created a remarkable website that contains a number of the published works of Galton online at http://www.mugu.com/galton/). His contributions to statistical analysis alone would make him an extremely important figure in the history of science, but that was only one part of his contribution to the social sciences. Even though much of his research and output in eugenics occurred prior to the rediscovery of the work of Gregor Mendel in genetics, it has, for the most part, stood the test of time. But this should not surprise us, for animal breeders have been able to direct and improve the nature of their stock for thousands of years without the microscope or even a concept of genes.
Galton divided the population of a country into three groups for the purposes of eugenic activities. First there were the "desirables," who would be encouraged to have a number of children because of the value they added to society. Second were the "passables," who were about 80 percent of the population and were just that and should be left alone. Lastly were the "undesirables," whose reproduction should be limited by social controls. Lynn notes that this approach, which was called eugenics at the time, elicited the support from intellectuals across the political spectrum. Of course this was in the years pre-dating the conquest of the social sciences by Boasian egalitarianism that divided the world morally into evil racists and good non-racists (i.e., Boasian egalitarians). The linking of eugenics and Nazism by these egalitarians was such that the intellectual leaders of the Western world now almost universally see eugenics as evil, thus completing this propaganda conquest. But Lynn shows that this view of eugenics is merely leftist egalitarian propaganda. The Nazis' eugenics program was actually a pale shadow of that of other European countries, such as Sweden and even many of the individual states in the U.S.
Lynn's first book on eugenics, Dysgenics, resulted in an invitation to present two papers at a conference sponsored by the American Psychological Association. The proceedings of this conference were later published by the APA as The Rising Curve, edited by Ulrich Neisser. If one had to choose between Lynn's volumes on eugenics, then Eugenics is the one to buy. Not only is it better edited, but also what it offers concerning the probable future of mankind is more important.
The book is divided into four parts: History and Introduction, the Objects of Eugenics, the Implementation of Classical Eugenics, and the New Eugenics. Lynn argues that eugenics now consists of eight core propositions. These are
After his discussion of the origins of eugenics, Lynn briefly surveys the contributions of Hermann Muller, author of "The Geneticists' Manifesto," Carlos Blacker, author of Eugenics: Galton and After (1954), Cavalli-Sforza, and others. While they generally agreed with Galton's program, each emphasized or de-emphasized one or more of his ideas. Blacker, for example, believed that physical courage was the primary quality that should be promoted, with intelligence being second. Cavalli-Sforza argued that artistic talent and beauty were also quite important, and it seems reasonable that parents, if given the choice, would certainly opt for beauty in their offspring. Surprisingly, Lynn rejects the idea that beauty should be an objective of eugenics, but most will find this position unconvincing.
Lynn also notes that eugenics often had a nationalist flavor, such as with Blacker who naturally wanted the British to develop their level of physical courage and Lee Kuan Yeu who worked to improve the quality of the people of Singapore. Lynn contrasts this with the "universalist eugenics" of Raymond Cattell, whose Beyondism books encouraged "cooperative competition between competing nations" in developing eugenic programs. Interestingly though, this could also be considered an expanded form of "nationalist eugenics," since each program was nation-specific, even though it might be regulated by a supra-national entity like the United Nations, in Cattell's plan.
Lynn says that there are about 7,000 disorders and diseases that are genetic in origin. Despite the vocal public opposition to eugenic ideas, many of these are today being dealt with in a eugenic fashion. We live in the age of "stealth eugenics," and most seem happy with the positive programs as long as their eugenic nature is not explicitly mentioned and especially if the word itself is not used.
In terms of intelligence, Lynn shows that "if none of the mentally retarded were to reproduce, the frequency of mental retardation in the next generation would decline by about 25 percent." He also suggests that in the near future the IQ of a child could be raised about 15 points over that of the parents with embryo selection if countries are willing to allow it. If this were to continue for a number of generations Lynn seems to believe that the mean IQ of most groups could be raised to about 200 with substantial uniformity within the population, which seems to be the theoretical limit for the process. Frankly, this projected uniformity seems doubtful, and while the standard deviation might be reduced somewhat, it is more likely that it would remain substantial. Also it seems reasonable to assume that, if allowed, existing higher IQ groups would more often opt for genetic improvement; thus we could expect substantial group differences, whether national, ethnic, or racial, to continue.
Perhaps as important in terms of a benefit to society in Lynn's view is a reduction of psychopathology via eugenics. As H. G. Wells noted, "They soil the world for others." Nevertheless, here Lynn urges caution since with any attempt to limit psychopathology via eugenics "there might be some loss of creative achievement."
Lynn's wake-up call lies in the final section. Here he argues rather convincingly that the Western nations are about to exit their time on the stage of history, to be replaced by China, which will rule the world perhaps until the end of time. Why? Because the Chinese accept eugenics as a positive good and are not hampered by Western liberal ethical concerns about population control and genetic manipulation. Lynn does hedge a little, saying that some cataclysmic socio-political upheaval in the West might prevent it, but his bet is on China. It is clear that he sees the Western concern for individual rights vs. the Oriental tendency to think in terms of value to the group as the straw that will eventually break the back of the West.
Lynn's view of a world ruled by China seems idealistic in that he argues that they would achieve submission of the rest of the world and then behave much as the European colonial powers did from Rome to England and France. He thinks they would provide the top administrators and bring in locals for the balance of the governmental structure. In addition, he thinks they would encourage the genetic improvement of the non-Chinese world they would then rule, especially that of whites whose creative abilities they would recognize as greater than that of the Chinese. This seems much too idealistic. Why assume that the Chinese would suddenly adopt Western altruistic values instead of looking out for themselves first as historically they have done? More likely they would look instead to replacement policies, i.e. remove the birth control limitations they have placed on their own people and ship the surplus population to other areas of the world with the intent that the world population would eventually be largely Chinese.
Lynn's view of a future world ruled by China is rather dismal for the European peoples of the world, but as he notes,
this is not really the point. Rather, it should be regarded as the inevitable result of Francis Galton's (1909) prediction ... that "the nation which first subjects itself to a rational eugenical discipline is bound to inherit the earth."
Richard Lynn has sounded the clarion call. We in the West still have the opportunity to control our own destiny, but do we have the will to seize it? Will our dedication to individualism and egalitarianism allow our destruction or can we overcome these twin albatrosses? Time indeed is the "beast that killed Egypt," and it does not appear to be on our side.