William H. Tucker
Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2002
$34.95
286 pp.
Frank Miele
Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2002
$26
243 pp.
Reviewed by Kevin Lamb
Nothing stirs the ire of egalitarians more than discussions of genetic-based racial differences in intelligence. Just raising the point in a conversation during a coffee break at the office or over a backyard barbeque with neighbors can stoke inflamed passions and scornful fury, enraging even the most sedated egalitarian. The implications of genetic influences give credence to the idea that people (individuals, races, and sexes) are actually different, and that these differences are reflected in human nature, which completely undermines the entire raison d’être of egalitarianism.
Racial egalitarians generally adopt two approaches when confronting hereditarian arguments: Contest the empirical data by directly challenging the validity of behavioral genetic methodology, and undermine the credibility of researchers by leveling the charge of “racism.” Nearly a decade after the publication of Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s bestseller The Bell Curve, egalitarian critics of IQ research have aggressively tried to undermine both the empirical foundation of behavioral genetic studies and the efforts of researchers to pursue further analysis of the IQ gap between blacks and whites as measured by the most reliably administered IQ tests.1 Often, however, strident egalitarian critics simply sidestep empirical validity issues by “exposing” the alleged hidden political motivations of researchers who persist in probing the relationship between IQ, genetics, and racial differences.
Two recently published books highlight the contrast between a skeptically objective examination of the genetic hypothesis of racial disparities in intelligence and a neo-Marxian screed that presumably passes for social science scholarship. No two books could be more different in content and tone—one carefully probes the complex scientific frontier surrounding the empirical findings on intelligence, race, and genetics, while the other rakes the muck of innuendo and hearsay rumor in a flimsy attempt to undermine the credibility of leading IQ researchers by questioning the motives and objectives that inspired their scientific pursuits.
The title of William H. Tucker’s The Funding of Scientific Racism reveals a great deal about the ideological lens with which the author views research that investigates the genetic foundation of racial differences in intelligence. A foretaste of the author’s objectives is evident in his acknowledgments, where Tucker recognizes Barry Mehler as “the director and founder of the Institute for the Study of Academic Racism at Ferris State University,” who “generously opened both his files and his home to me,” and Keith Hurt, “who shared his encyclopedic knowledge of right-wing activists, as well as the transcripts of his interviews with a number of important sources of information.” (Tucker’s previous book, The Science and Politics of Racial Research, received the Ralph J. Bunche Award, which gives some indication of the author’s own ideological ax-grinding.) That a book purporting to expose the political bias of its subjects would rely upon the efforts of Marxist mudslingers like Mehler and Hurt—in effect employing witch doctors as witch hunters—brings the concept of chutzpah to new heights.
Still, Miele is to be commended for an otherwise thorough and comprehensive review of Jensen’s major contributions to the psychology of individual and group differences in general mental ability. If there is one aspect of Jensen’s life (both professional work and personal pursuits) that emerges from Miele’s book, it is that the caricature of Jensen (promoted by Tucker and other critics) as a man consumed by "racist" objectives could not be further from the truth. Jensen states unequivocally that he has never supported segregationist policies; believes that people should be treated as equals before the law; accepts the idea of equal opportunity (provided that academic standards of excellence apply even-handedly to everyone); and believes that the variation in IQ within families is as important as the differences that exist between blacks and whites in terms of understanding the latent problems in educational policies. His overarching goal is to pursue the truth wherever it leads and to let the truth win out, rather than to advance politically correct fallacies. The irony is that it is Jensen’s staunchest critics who have persisted in grinding an ideological ax and, in the process, have tossed any regard for the truth to the four winds.
1. Several books that attempt to directly or indirectly challenge the thesis of Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life (New York, NY: The Free Press, 1994) have been published since late 1994, including The Bell Curve Wars: Race, Intelligence, and the Future of America, ed. Steven Fraser (New York, NY: Basic Books, 1995), The Bell Curve Debate: History, Documents, Opinions, ed. Russell Jacoby and Naomi Glauberman (New York, NY: Times Books, 1995), Intelligence, Genes, & Success: Scientists Respond to the Bell Curve, ed. Bernie Devlin et al. (New York, NY: Copernicus, 1997), Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth, C. S. Fischer et al. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), The Rising Curve: Long-Term Gains in IQ and Related Measures, ed. Ulric Neisser (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1998), Race and Intelligence: Separating Science from Myth, ed. Jefferson M. Fish (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002). Although this body of criticism ranges from the serious to the absurd, most of it falls into the category of social and political commentary and fails to credibly refute Herrnstein and Murray’s analysis of the data presented in their study. For a detailed scrutiny of the issues raised in the criticisms of The Bell Curve, readers should consult the special issue of Intelligence 24, no. 1 (January-February 1997), ed. Linda Gottfredson.
2. Earnest Sevier Cox, White America (Richmond, VA: White America Society, 1923).
3. Carl N. Degler, In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of Darwinism in American Social Thought (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1991), and Ullica Segerstråle, Defenders of the Truth: The Battle for Science in the Sociobiology Debate and Beyond (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000).
4. Robert B. Joynson, The Burt Affair (New York, NY: Routledge, 1989), and Ronald Fletcher, Science, Ideology and the Media: The Cyril Burt Scandal (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1991).
5. Kenneth Minogue, Alien Powers: A Pure Theory of Ideology (New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1985), 227.
6. Richard Lynn, The Science of Human Diversity: A History of the Pioneer Fund (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2001). Lynn’s balanced description of the Pioneer Fund researchers leaves little doubt that these grantees rank among the elite of distinguished scholars in a number of professional disciplines. See also Louis Andrews’ review in The Occidental Quarterly 2:1 (Spring 2002), 73-79), or http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/. For a thorough critique of recent criticisms leveled against the Pioneer Fund, see J. Philippe Rushton’s "Commentary on The Pioneer Fund and the Scientific Study of Human Differences," Albany Law Review 66 (2002), 207-262.
7. The Essays of Montaigne, trans. George B. Ives (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1925), volume 1, 25).
8. Intelligence 26 (no. 3, 1998) and Helmuth Nyborg, ed. The Scientific Study of General Intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen (New York, NY: Pergamon, 2003).