The Bell Curve
The Bell Curve is a controversial book published in 1994 by R. J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray examining the relationship between race and intelligence and exploring the role of intelligence in understanding social problems in America. The title is a reference to the shape of the bell-shaped graph of IQ scores (see normal distribution). Many have denounced the authors and their book, which claims to both document and explain substantial individual and group differences between the intelligence of separate 'racial groups' in America. Others suggest that the book is taking heat for exploring an American taboo. John C. Culbertson of the University of Kansas wrote:
Frank Miele, who interviewed Murray for a 1995 review of the book in The Skeptic, wrote:
Following in the footsteps of Harvard researcher Arthur Jensen, Murray and his co-author published reams of statistical data showing correlation between 'race' and the results of various intelligence (IQ) and aptitude tests. On this basis the authors conclude that intelligence is somewhere between 40% and 80% heritable and determined to a large degree by 'race'. See race and intelligence for a fuller discussion of the issues involved.
ResponsesDr. Herrnstein died before the book was released, leaving Charles Murray to do most of the public defense of the book. Murray has a Ph.D. in political science but no formal credentials in economics or psychometrics (the measurement of human characteristics), the two fields in which his books have sparked the most serious debate. None of his book's content or conclusions were ever submitted to any peer-reviewed journals, the standard mechanism for ensuring the accuracy of scientific work. Reviewing The Bell Curve in the peer-reviewed American Behavioral Scientist, professor Michael Nunley wrote "I believe this book is a fraud, that its authors must have known it was a fraud when they were writing it, and that Charles Murray must still know it's a fraud as he goes around defending it. ... After careful reading, I cannot believe its authors were not acutely aware of ... how they were distorting the material they did include." Professor Leon J. Kamin said the book did "a disservice to and abuse of science." Craig T. Ramey, a professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Alabama said "Within the sophisticated research community, the opinion has been virtually unanimous that The Bell Curve was a primitive, oversimplistic and flawed analysis." A special American Psychological Association task force set up to review the book concluded "The scientific basis of The Bell Curve is fraudulent."[3] (http://home.att.net/~Resurgence/L-bellcurvescience.htm) In an attempt to defend the book, 52 professors signed a notice, published in The Wall Street Journal, December 3, 1994, in support of some of the conclusions in The Bell Curve.[4] (http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/wsj_main.html) However, some signers, like Arthur Jensen and Linda Gottfredson, are funded by The Pioneer Fund, an avowedly white-supremacist organization. Stephen Jay Gould published a detailed scientific criticism of the science in The Bell Curve in the 1996 revised edition of his book The Mismeasure of Man, where he provides a point-by-point critique of its arguments. Murray claims that Gould misstated his claims; for instance, Gould says Murray boils down intelligence to a single factor while Murray denies that there is a single factor. Another critique of the book was that published by James Heckman in 1995, in which he points out serious shortcomings in the statistical techniques employed in the book. Murray responded to a shorter version of Heckman's critique in an August 1995 letter exchange in Commentary magazine. Another popular book written at least in part to refute some of The Bell Curve's claims is the Pulitzer Prize winning Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, by Jared Diamond. Diamond argues that the differences in technology produced by various races are the result of differences in factors like terrain or the availability of natural resources -- not on differences in intelligence. Bauer speaks in part to Diamond's thesis, saying:
But the most fundamental factor in technological development, according to Diamond, is a geographic location that allows easy exchange of technology with numerous and distant cultures. And according to Diamond, the regions of Africa that remained most technologically undeveloped were also the most isolated geographically. A recent paper in the Psychological Review, "Heritability Estimates Versus Large Environmental Effects: The IQ Paradox Resolved" presents a mechanism by which environmental effects on IQ may be magnified by feedback effects. This may provide a resolution of the contradiction between the viewpoint of The Bell Curve and its supporters, and the repeatedly observed 'nurture' effects observed by others. MiscellaniaFrom 1986 to 1989, Murray was given an annual grant by the Bradley Foundation of $90,000, rising to $113,000 by 1991, and then to $163,000 following publication of The Bell Curve. See also: Flynn effect
CitationsGottfredson, Linda S.; "Mainstream Science on Intelligence". Published in The Wall Street Journal, December 13, 1994, and also in Intelligence, January-February 1997. External links
External links moved from body of article (see /Talk):
sv:The Bell Curve Categories: 1994 books | Nonfiction books | Controversial books |
|||||||||||||
|
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from Wikipedia article. Browse Wikipedia for more information. |