Howard Gardner, an American psychologist, is someone who does know the science behind Herrnstein and Murray’s “The Bell Curve” (1994). He found it to be a curious work:
The science in “The Bell Curve” is more like special pleading, based on a biased reading of the data, than a carefully balanced assessment of current knowledge.
On top of that, it almost seems as if it were written a hundred years ago.
Gardner, like Herrnstein, is a Harvard professor, a psychologist – and a Jewish American (his parents fled Nazi Germany).
Gardner is best known for the idea of multiple intelligences: that people have not just one kind of intelligence but at least eight: linguistic, logic-mathematical, musical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, naturalist, interpersonal and intrapersonal. IQ only measures a part of this and even that part cannot be boiled down to one number.
But that is hardly the only thing wrong with “The Bell Curve”.
It says that people with high IQs are rising to the top of American society while those with low IQs are sinking to the bottom – with no hope of escape.
Yet one’s IQ is 60% genetic while one’s success is 20% due to IQ. Other things like class, education and luck matter too. So success is only weakly genetic.
“The Bell Curve” itself admits that:
- IQs have gone up by 15 points in the 1900s and
- IQ is not fixed before the age of five.
So even IQ is not a fate written in one’s genes, as Herrnstein and Murray would lead you to believe (but never say straight out).
Herrnstein and Murray think of crime as being caused by low intelligence, yet that hardly accounts for how the crime rate goes up and down.
As to the difference between black and white IQ scores, Gardner says that Claude Steele has shown that it is caused by stereotype threat: blacks who believe they are taking a test of intelligence and who believe that blacks have less intelligence tend to do poorly on such tests.
Gardner says the part at the end of the book where they talk about government policy was like a children’s show following a war film: it did not follow from the science at all. And, instead of looking at what has helped those at the bottom, it would simply wall them off from the rest of society.
But most of all Gardner did not like the “us against them” rhetoric. Gardner:
High IQ doesn’t make a person one whit better than anybody else. And if we are to have any chance of a civil and humane society, we had better avoid the smug self-satisfaction of an elite that reeks of arrogance and condescension.
and:
High intelligence and high creativity are desirable. But unless they are linked to some kind of moral compass, their possessors might best be consigned to an island of glass-bead game players, with no access to the mainland.
See also:
I love Howard Gardner! I read part of the “Theory of Multiple Intelligences”, and it makes so much sense to me. I’m so glad to hear that someone else thinks that Howard Gardner is an extremely good person, both morally and intellectually.
LikeLike
The Bell Curve’s ideas were seriously floating around thirty years before and was came to be known as the Bell Curve when William Shockley was going around espousing them. I saw him interviewed on Firing Line in the early seventies.
Here a video with Tony Brown
LikeLike
“Herrnstein and Murray think of crime as being caused by low intelligence, yet that hardly accounts for how the crime rate goes up and down.”
That is all that is needed to reveal the truth about that. 😀
Of this is true, then those Wall Street guys who just recently pulled off the biggest heist in human history must be the dumbest guys in existence.
LikeLike
Exactly, I mean taking into conideration stereotype threat and the Flynn effect, IQ testing starts to look like a very inadequate measure of a persons worth, which is all this boils down to really. An attempt to create a social hierarchy based on IQ with blacks at the bottom.
LikeLike
It appears that the ‘Bell Curve’ is fixated upon by non-blacks as a reason for the world dominance off the European culture. How else do anglos account for their global dominance? Certainly guns, germs and steel, but the ability to successfully manipulate these raw materials to obtain the phenonmenal gains, these past 400 years begins somewhere. I’m not saying I agree with the ‘bell curve’ at all, but I’m thinking that is one of the rationales used.
LikeLike
@hathor
LOL at his little chart. I can’t believe that someone who could win the Nobel prize could be so scientifically lazy.
I think the writers at south part were inspired by the bell curve scientific method.
LikeLike
@ Oyan
In “Guns, Germs, and Steel” the explanation is that areas of the world better suited to highly productive agriculture and farming allowed vast population expansion and freed people to develop technologies like swords and guns.
That there is absolutely nothing special about white people except their access to the necessary resources.
In other words, it was simple chance that allowed whites to as you said…
“successfully manipulate these raw materials to obtain the phenonmenal gains”
If everyone in your area spends all their time farming or hunting your not going to be able to support a blacksmith, because the potential blacksmith is out there hunting and farming with everyone else.
LikeLike
Abagond, Everyone,
The central point of The Bell Curve is STILL being unadressed, with all due respect. Its been 16 years on from its initial publication and its critics are still attempting to foist strawmen arguments onto the rest of us. What TBC is saying is simply this:
Our society, American in particular and Western in general, has, over the past century or so, taken, to use Chairman Mao’s turn of phrase, a Great Leap Forward; we are no longer a society that was largely agrarian based. We are now a sophisticated society, built on the creation and transferrence of information technologies; of intellectual property and high abstract thinking. Simply put, not everyone will have the wherewithal to function in such a world. What are we to do about them? What is our public policy response? What do we do with the not so bright among us? That is a very real area of concern, that has nothing to do with Race, as TBC itself attests to; please note that the book itself deals very little with that topic.
TBC argues that we are approaching a time in our republic where there will be an ever increasing divide between the Cognitive Elite and everyone else – and that this directly threatens the American enterprise of democracy, representative government and free markets, to say nothing of social cohesion, national spirt, you name it. The social and political and ecnomic implications of such a bifurcation are severe – and the SJGs and Gardners of the world do none of us any good by strawmanning the issue. The simple truth of the matter is that everyone won’t be born Einsteins, people. Those of you who have been through college know this more than anyone else. Yet we keep tiptoeing around the topic as if it were Kryptonite or something.
Now to be sure, I have my own critiques of TBC, as well as those who take it up as their bible of sorts – the HBD crowd. But if I’m going to be honest – and I strive to be – then I have to say that TBC, whatever its flaws, real or perceived, does indeed have some salient arguments. We can gnash our teeth all we like, but the truth of the matter is that those of lower IQs do tend to commit more violent street crime. Satoshi Kanazawaa, no friend of harderned partisan Conservatives like Charles Murray, has noted this in his own work which can be seen over at the Psychology Today website. We all know that common criminals are none too bright. Why that should bother us to hear someone actually get up and say that is baffling to me.
It seems that we spend far too much time arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of actually grappling with the core arguments of the day, and this is deeply vexing to me. At some point we have to get over the fact that there are people in this world who won’t like Black folk and get on with the business of actually solving problems – of which TBC lays out quite a few as we advance into the 21st century.
Come on people. You’re smarter than this. How about actually addressing the argument, instead of attempting to divine yet another way to attack those who made it?
Holla back
The Obsidian
LikeLike
O,
What do you propose, Euthanasia?
LikeLike
@JasOnBurns..”That there is absolutely nothing special about white people except their access to the necessary resources…”
I agree with your point, but, Europeans DO think there is something especial, about who they are, how their global scope of hegemonic domination evolved, hence IQ. I am in no way playing ‘devils advocate’, but Africa is always being touted as super ‘resource rich’, but, ‘others’ have/are benefitting hugely from the people and the natural resources, I imagine, moresoe than many of the actual African countries. As such, non-African/Blacks do attribute this to imbalance of wealth distribution, control of economic largesse and monopoly over potential African wealth, recources etc., to IQ and some inherent ‘lack’ in the African, and ‘darker others’.
The Meaning of IQ Overview
Intelligence allows you to acquire information and gives you the capacity to learn. Intelligence also helps you apply information and use abstract reasoning. While many ways exist to define a level of intelligence, one of the oldest and most commonly known is the test that measures IQ, or intelligence quotient.
or,
person’s general ability to understand concepts and solve problems. This involves assessment of the person’s problem solving abilities, reasoning ability….
LikeLike
Obsidian…You seem to feel the need to continuously defend what you perceive to be genuine debates of concern highlighted in TBC which all its critics are either missing or intentionally avoiding:
“I have to say that TBC, whatever its flaws, real or perceived, does indeed have some salient arguments.
However, reading your last statement of the what you take the TBC to be about you have now actually laid bare some of your own unquestioned assumptions.
Look at your own uncritical analysis here. And I quote it here for you to see what I am particularly focusing on:
You probably don’t see it but there are so many unchallenged assumptions in there that it would take me an essay to just point out.
Instead I want to highlight what I considered to be the major one I would take issue with.
“… Our society, American in particular and Western in general, has, over the past century or so, taken, to use Chairman Mao’s turn of phrase, a Great Leap Forward; we are no longer a society that was largely agrarian based. We are now a sophisticated society, built on the creation and transferrence of information technologies; of intellectual property and high abstract thinking.
You have simply and unquestionable bought into the presumption that this type of society or civilization represents the pinnacle of westerner/European achievement? A model not before held or seen anywhere in our planets long history.
Even if this was true (And I know this not to be the case) its a very narrow view of the world which fails to weigh its so called successes against the myriad of negatives and abuses the planet and its people have had to endure for this to come about. This whole society, which you agree is so successful economically, is rapidly falling apart!!!
Its reached a point of unsustainability. Your own country the US being a prime example of this.
TBC may not need to consider this but why are you dodging or ignoring this issue of major global concern?
LikeLike
Kwamla,
How about you just lay out three dangerous assupmtions I have made? Perhaps we could start the conversation there, instead of you doing what everyone else has done TBC, which was to either completely distort its message and/or somehow attack its authors or those who wish to discuss what the book is saying and how we grapple with its message?
Listen, I am undoubtedly of African heritage, but I am a Child of the West in virtually every way; America is my home and I have no intention of going anywhere else. So I think having the kinds of talk you engage in here, is really counterproductive. Let’s actually grapple with The Bell Curve, please? Thanks!
O.
LikeLike
Hathor,
No; I’m not for putting people down or anything like that, LOL. And I think such talk by you or anyone else, ie reductio ad absudium, really makes a mockery of what could indeed be a very fruitful discussion.
I think we need to start out from the simple and profund premise that everyone won’t have the chops to make it in the world in which we live and the world to come, and go from there. All this handwringing over stuff like IQ and whatnot seems to be secondary to me. We all know everyone ain’t born Einsteins, and in times gone by that wasn’t that big a deal. Today though, it IS – and we have done NOTHING to address this. We need to. Honestly.
So – let’s start there, hmm?
O.
LikeLike
Claude Steele has shown that it is caused by stereotype threat: blacks who believe they are taking a test of intelligence and who believe that blacks have less intelligence tend to do poorly on such tests.
I think that is a little unfair, whilst I’ve no time for black folk who get educated and think that it is value/race free and look down on those who aren’t as somehow, empty headed
However, it is still hard for the mind to reject black (mental) inferiority when it is almost constantly re inforced to an almost hypnotic degree.
LikeLike
Obsidian.
everyone won’t have the chops to make it in the world in which we live and the world to come, and go from there.
1. That has nothing to do with race.
2. The world isn’t as sophisticated as TBC (according to you I haven’t read it) claims.
“oh we just want to help the poor Negroes get on in an vewy vewy scawy world”
It sounds like a device the authors can use to claim that their interest is altruistic. I call bullshit.
LikeLike
Jason,
Again, I have made clear my criticisms of TBC; that, however, is seperate and apart from the central premise of their book. I do think it is possible to hold two such ideas in one’s head at the same time.
So, with that having been said – how do we address the central premise of TBC?
Your thoughts?
O.
LikeLike
Could we let this whole IQ nonsense die already, please? It’s as scientific as astrology and really deserves no better treatment. ><
LikeLike
Zemo,
OK, since you brought up astrology…
I don’t think any of the notable astrologers in history have said that astrology was a science, and certainly, the millions of people down through the ages and in our time right now, certainly don’t turn to it because they think its some kind of verified scientific discipline. It matters.
The same can be said for IQ. Ok, so its not scientific? So what? Does that mean that it doesn’t matter, that it has no meaning, that there’s no such thing as differing people having differing rates of cognitive abilities, etc?
It seems to me that you want to toss out the The Bell Curve discussion because it just makes you uncomfortable. If so, that is regrettable. But it won’t change the state of affairs to duck our collective heads in the sand. We need to confront this.
What are we to do with all the dumb people? How can we get smart people to make whoopie more and have more kids?
Two simple questions. Two very difficult to get answers.
Holla back
O.
LikeLike
Obsidian:
I would be interested to hear what you think is so wrong with Gardner’s points against “The Bell Curve”. You just dismissed them as straw man arguments and then moved on. You are the one avoiding the issues in the post.
I was told that Stephen Jay Gould did not know what he was talking about because he is not a psychologist. Well, fine, here is psychologist, a Harvard one at that, like Herrnstein himself. I am not going to have him blown off that easily.
LikeLike
O,
What are we to do with all the dumb people?
You say this and you question my question?
LikeLike
LOVE the Glass Bead Game Hermann Hesse reference. Great post.
LikeLike
I’m sorry, but if you DO agree to liken IQ to astrology then the questions you posed hold absolutely no value. If you want answers to “What do we do with all the dumb people?” and ” How can we get smart people to make whoopie more and have more kids?” then you can’t find them with a “science” that has no value whatsoever than popularity. I.e.: both IQ and Astrology then matter because people amuse themselves with them. They are NO mean by which to determine the fate of humans (or anything at all).
But hey, even if the IQ was a valid scientific tool, then your questions still couldn’t be answered. If The Bell Curve is right, then dumb people will stay dumb no matter what anybody does, and the only way to increase humankind’s intelligence is to stop them from having children, while making the smartest people “whoopie”. Say hello to eugenics…except, they don’t work, as the oodles of aristocrats with hereditary disease can testament to.
In short: IQ is a toy, and The Bell Curve is a statistic and scientific exercise in shuffling the numbers until they fit with what you want them to say.
I am not uncomfortable about the book, or the principle. I don’t give a damn about racism per se. What I DO care about is stupidity. People choosing to ignore the truth to try and make the world fit to what they wish it would be is EXTREMELY stupid. Or: You can think whites are the direct descendants of God’s left testicle for all I care, if you start to carry out actions in real life based on this belief, I will not stand by silently.
LikeLike
“The same can be said for IQ. Ok, so its not scientific? So what? Does that mean that it doesn’t matter, that it has no meaning, that there’s no such thing as differing people having differing rates of cognitive abilities, etc?”
It’s means that it’s not testable.
It’s means that it’s not repeatable.
And therefore it’s not provable.
The fact that you have discovered that HBDers are hesitant to discuss their goals and intentions on the internet:
“What are we to do with all the dumb people?”
Doesn’t mean that you’ve won any significant battle. They still hold the same dangerous views and postulate the same dangerous and final solutions. They are simply unwilling to reveal their true intentions (at this time) while public opinion is likely to be against them. This is a small accomplishment that changes nothing.
LikeLike
didn’t you ever stop to think why the BellCurve was hardly, if ever criticised as ” racist ”
Not a peep from the usual quarter
LikeLike
gavin,
After forty years of hearing this crap, arguing to no avail, the illusions aren’t changing, so why bother. The only thing one can do is to react when one sees the beginning of genocidal policies.
LikeLike
in fairness to Shockley, he was considered one of the greats of his discipline, and I find more credibility from him than the Bell Curve crew
while it seems easy to say one racial group is more intelligent than another, there may be exceptions to the rule re individuals.
Asians and Jews are routinely promoted as highly intelligent. I get the impression to say otherwise would be ” antisemitic” in the eyes of the usual suspects
LikeLike
I remember Howard Gardner from my early days in college. His theory of multiple intelligences is quite an achievement, so much so that it seems obvious nowadays.
And his criticism of TBC is — along with SJG — one of the best out there, especially since he’s a peer of Herrnstein.
While others here might believe that addressing the actual arguments of TBC is somehow productive, I think that has the opposite effect of legitimizing scientific racism, and putting it on the same stage with real science and real scientists. We do not ask Klan members about immigration or social welfare. We do not ask ex-Nazi scientists about birth control or profiling. Why should we debate the obviously misconstrued arguments of bigots as if they’re somehow legitimate?
What some may call “core arguments” are in fact part and parcel to the racism that people like Gardner address. And instead of wasting time debating racist scientists in their own twisted world, they push them to back-up their assertions in reality.
And even more troubling is the distinct lack of humanitarianism among these bigots that they attempt to hide under the guise of practical public policy. What do we do with stupid people? Really? We as a society have to decide what to do with them like they’re some kind of burden, or cross around our necks? These are people who should be empowered to decide for themselves what they want to do with their lives, and more importantly they should be given access to that freedom like everyone else is. But I digress…
TBC is but one aspect of a much larger debate that is certainly vocal, but honestly quite marginal in the scope of public discourse. And while some may wish to engage in endless debate over ignorance, it seems best to avoid the haters since there are so few of them.
LikeLike
Whenever you hear or read about court cases especially involving rape or murder, the defense attorney would sometimes bring up the argument that his or her client has a low I.Q. as a reason why their client committed the crime, if that person did commit the crime. It’s brought up during serious cases involving people of lower socioeconomic status. One would hardly hear the “low I.Q” argument in serious white collar cases.
This is something I’ve noticed a lot.
LikeLike
what zek said
LikeLike
Abagond,
I have no axe to grind with Gardner; what I have a problem with is the many socalled experts of various fields, who have made their discontent with TBC known, while at the same time completely dodging its core arguments. The real deal here is, that they are so ideologically blind that they refuse to engage arguments that have true and real merit, because they don’t like the person or group that argues said points. With all due respect, you do this quite a bit.
For example, on the question of crime: personally, I couldn’t care less what White folk do or don’t care about Black folk in this regard. If they wanna think that we’re all savages, fine by me. You know what I care about? Lowering crime, thats what, because at the end of the day I have a much stronger chance of being on the business end of a gun pointed at me by someone who looks like me, than do those HBDers who rail on about crime, often in the abstract. So, I want to address the crime rate, and if it just so happens that more Black folk are comitting crimes, so be it, then I want them cracked down on, because at the end of the day, it’s about protecting me and mine and ideology be danged.
But with you, you don’t seem to have that view; you seem much more concerned with the public perception of Black folk and so forth. While that may be admirable, public perceptions don’t stop you from being shot to death or being carjacked. It doesnt stop your girlfriend or wife from being mugged and/or raped and/or quite possibly killed. does that mean that there are no racists in this world – even those who may try to use crime stats to buttress their racial and racist arguments? Of course not. But at some point you have to decide which is more important to you to address. For me, I choose to address crime, no matter who’s doing it. It’s really as simple as that.
Bringing things back to our discussion, which ticks me off is that we are not dealing with the central point of TBC, simply because we don’t like the authors and think they’re baddies. So what? Whnat does that have to do with the points being made? No one, not you, not any of your readers, has yet to actually deal with this, and this has to be what, the third or fourth discussion you’ve had on TBC and counting? What is up with that? Whny is it so bad, so evil, so simply say, look, everyone ain’t smart enough or has the wherewithal to be a knowledge worker – what are we gonna do about this? I mean, come on.
If it comes out that more Black folk wind up on the left end of the curve. so be it, and if that is more grist for the mill of the HBDers of the world, fine. Last time I checked, people have to right to be jerks in this country. I just want those people, who are MY people. to be given a halfway decent shot at a haflway decent life, and they are most definitely NOT getting that now. Meanwhile the putatively best and brightest are obsessed with trying to out dogood each other. It’s sick.
Holla back
O.
LikeLike
@ Will
I know what you mean. I’ve noticed the same thing.
@ Abagond
High intelligence and high creativity are desirable. But unless they are linked to some kind of moral compass, their possessors might best be consigned to an island of glass-bead game players, with no access to the mainland.
Bellissima. Thanks for this quote; it just screams “Ankhesenology.”
LikeLike
Whny is it so bad, so evil, so simply say, look, everyone ain’t smart enough or has the wherewithal to be a knowledge worker – what are we gonna do about this? I mean, come on.
I think some guy once said something about content of character vs. color of skin or something to that effect? like in the 60’s or something?
LikeLike
@Obsidian:
I think it may be you who is missing the point. In response to what the Bell Curve actually addresses, Gardner’s critique is hardly a strawman argument. Yes, people of low IQs do tend to commit quite a bit of crime, but to limit this to one factor alone is disingenuous at best. Anyone who has done any actual reading on this correlation realizes that, more than anything, poverty breeds crime, if not natural human avarice. High income only assures that not only can one afford to be educated by the best, but one does not suffer or want for much if anything (though, as Sam pointed out, that doesn’t stop people from stealing, lying, and cheating on a global scale). And if one thing can be learned from both the social and biological sciences, it is that both nature and nurture play a balanced role in the development of a human being.
Further, in response to what society will do with those individuals of lower IQ who commit crimes, well I believe that answer is a fairly simple one. They’ll continued to be jailed in order to support the prison industrial complex, which makes quite a bit of money of its new form of slave labor. You see, even the allegedly “useless” among us still serve a purpose in this world, no matter how troubling that purpose may be.
However, what you seem to be ignoring is basic human genetics. As even TBC attests to, most people exist somewhere in the middle between intelligent and unintelligent based on certain tests which test certain aspects of human intelligence. However, as Gardner’s theory more eloquently states than what I’m about to write, there are multiple kinds of intelligences that are just as varied as the physical shells of man. Just because someone has excellent mathematical and spatial intelligence doesn’t mean they’re socially adroit or capable of comprehending multiple languages with any ease, for instance. And that is to say nothing of the vast physical differences between individuals even within one family (e.g.-talented runners, skillful ball players, etc. vs. the physical gauche, clumsy, etc.). How do you test for these things with our modern IQ tests? I believe that is Gardner’s point. Most tests do not test for multiple intelligences, but rather very specific kinds.
LikeLike
I fail to see why HBD proponents constantly make this fake argument that HBD simply espouses that “everybody in not the same.”
What HBD is in fact saying, is that all of the most flagrant differences are along racial lines, and are caused by racial genetic programing. THAT is not the same thing as glibly saying that “everybody is not the same.”
What HBD is saying is that some RACES are smarter, or faster, or stronger, are have a greater propensity for leadership than others.
LikeLike
I know “Intelligent people” who:
1) Live in their parent’s basements and play video games 50% of their waking hours.
2) Can’t keep a job because they are socially retarded, and can’t get along with people in a workspace.
3) Are always “A” students, but seem to be lost outside of their college courses, and never amount to much.
4) Are just not that motivated to do anything with their lives.
5) Are so morally corrupt that everyone who gets to know them ends up recoiling – making them perpetual outcasts.
6) Really knowledgeable and insightful in their own specialty, but are totally inept in a lot of other areas.
7) Are smart, but can’t control their impulses, their anger, and their desires, to the point that it constantly ruins their human relationships.
I know “less intelligent people” who:
1) Need things explained slowly, and thoroughly, and ask a lot of “dumb questions.” But once they have it down, they retain and use that information advantageously for the rest of their lives.
2) Will work very hard with amazing determination to graduate high school, then undergrad, then go on to earn a PhD – struggling every step of the way but they do it.
3) Never make much of a mark for themselves in academics, but who will successfully run one business after the other, and become very wealthy and well respected.
There are so many things that will never even turn up on any I.Q. test that even the people who give them don’t believe that it’s truly measuring how “smart” you are. “Smart” is a big word that really means a lot of things and there are many different ways to be smart or intelligent.
LikeLike
Jason said
” I think some guy once said something about content of character vs. color of skin or something to that effect? like in the 60′s or something?”
Yes the same man found in bed with three prostitutes the morning he was assassinated!
Content of character?
LikeLike
@Obsidian:
We don’t want to not discuss The Bell Curve because we are morally opposed to its messages. We don’t want to discuss it because it is useless and without any merit.
Saying “Yeah, but if we don’t discuss what they SAY how can we say it’s not right?” is, honestly said, a moot point. If I said the sky is green you wouldn’t want to discuss the socio-economical rammifications of it being green with me, you would call me either a liar or stupid. The Bell Curve basically says “The sky is green, let’s base politics on this fact”.
I don’t know how I can make it any clearer. There can’t be a discussion about either The Bell Curve or the IQ because both things do not have a stable fundament on which to build a discussion. They are non-issues because they are abyssimally stupid.
LikeLike
Zemo,
What is abmyssmally stupid is to put your fingers in your ears and say some sanctimonious stuff like what you just said, ignoring what we all know to be true day in and day out. And please, enough with the high horse rhetoric, OK? Like I said, there is nothing morally wrong with acknowledging that some people are smarter than others, anymore than there is nothing wrong in simply saying that some people are taller than others. By your and everyone else’s reasoning on this matter, everyone should be able to play in the NBA regardless of height. Yea, riight…
O.
LikeLike
King,
First off, your arguing strawmen. How?
Because TBC isn’t a racial text. It says very little about race. Indeed, much of it could very well be applied to Whites.
Secondly, of course there are loser Mensas; and make no mistake, while TBC seems to take the view that there is no downside to having a high IQ, the realworld evidence around us says everyday and every night that there is indeed a downside. Those who know me know that I’ve written extensively about this and plan to do so in the near future. So you can kill that noise.
NONE of what you said addresses what I said. It would be really nice if you, or gosh dangit, somebody here, actually did?
Whew…
O.
LikeLike
Ahh, the indirect interlocutor himself, Mr. Zek! Replies below:
Z: I remember Howard Gardner from my early days in college. His theory of multiple intelligences is quite an achievement, so much so that it seems obvious nowadays.
O: What seems quite obvious is that some people actually get dumber the longer they go to college; some sort of atrophy of commonsense seems to take place during the 4-10 years people tend to be there, impairing their ability to make connections with what their lying eyes are telling them every single day. Of course, these people make these pithy observations about theories from a safe and comfortable distance from the places I was talking about where violent crime happens on the daily, so they’ll never have to actually like, you know, deal with it?
Z: And his criticism of TBC is — along with SJG — one of the best out there, especially since he’s a peer of Herrnstein.
O: No, its not, because he doesnt deal with what TBC actually said, and its no surprise that you would priase it; you seem to have the same bad habit. Remember Zekie, I got your number. 😉
Z: While others here might believe that addressing the actual arguments of TBC is somehow productive, I think that has the opposite effect of legitimizing scientific racism, and putting it on the same stage with real science and real scientists. We do not ask Klan members about immigration or social welfare. We do not ask ex-Nazi scientists about birth control or profiling. Why should we debate the obviously misconstrued arguments of bigots as if they’re somehow legitimate?
O: Yup, I knew it was only a matter of time before you would whip out Godwin’s Law, thinking that, because of your particiular background, it would give you legitimate cover. Nope, doesn’t do any good with me, son; not only am I Black as the Ace of Spades, but I am speaking from a position of authority on the matter and reality of violent street crime; moreover, my people fought to liberate yours. So, take the ex-Nazi stuff and stuff it. No one’s talking about the Klan, a terrorist organization. No one’s talking about putting people down. Come on, Zek, you can do better than this – maybe you should have taken up debating and commonsense 101?
Z: What some may call “core arguments” are in fact part and parcel to the racism that people like Gardner address. And instead of wasting time debating racist scientists in their own twisted world, they push them to back-up their assertions in reality.
O: OK – the reality is that everyone ain’t the same. Everyone ain’t cut out for college. Everyone doesn’t have a fairly high IQ. Lower IQ does indeed correlate to certain outcomes. Violent street crime is one of them. Fact. Again, Satoshi Kanazawaa says this, and he didn’t have anything to do with TBC. Next question?
Z: And even more troubling is the distinct lack of humanitarianism among these bigots that they attempt to hide under the guise of practical public policy. What do we do with stupid people? Really? We as a society have to decide what to do with them like they’re some kind of burden, or cross around our necks? These are people who should be empowered to decide for themselves what they want to do with their lives, and more importantly they should be given access to that freedom like everyone else is. But I digress…
O: No one is talking about abridging their Constitutional rights, I know I’m not; but yea, when you have a segment of the population who are fundamentally ill-suited to function in the world in which we live, yea, questions like this, however unpleasant they may be, have to be addressed. And what is up with this notion that it is somehow inhuman to simply say, everyone isn’t the same? Come on. Whew…
Z: TBC is but one aspect of a much larger debate that is certainly vocal, but honestly quite marginal in the scope of public discourse. And while some may wish to engage in endless debate over ignorance, it seems best to avoid the haters since there are so few of them.
O: More ad hominem; I wonder how many copies of Gardner’s book sold. Perhaps we can compare that to the success of TBC…
Try again, son.
O.
LikeLike
the bell curve stands with all its perceived weaknesses
only social arguments against it
no scientific proof against it
the scorecard so far
bell curve and iq 10
those against it nil
LikeLike
The whole theory of measuring an entire person’s intelligence level with a single test is a sham.
The ones who feel that this is possible have minds that are as narrow as the paper that the test is printed on.
LikeLike
theobsidianfiles is right
LikeLike
Ok Obsidian. Let me try again another way…
OK? Like I said, there is nothing morally wrong with acknowledging that some people are smarter than others, anymore than there is nothing wrong in simply saying that some people are taller than others.
But there is something morally wrong when you attempt to use pseudo scientific evidence to show how Short people are a deviant to the “norm” – Tall people. Then take this further to argue what the day-day practical implications (Policies) should be for allowing Short people to live in the same society as Tall people.
Further…there is something remarkably stupid about Short people accepting that Tall people have the right to define what the norm should be in the first place!
But then it goes beyond the bounds of incredulity for Short people to debate with Tall people about what should be the best policies to allow them to function “adequately” in a society designed specially for Tall people.
There is no difference in this type of dialogue than there would be between a “Master” and a “Slave” Or a Human being and an animal.
This fundamentally addresses your argument Obsidain but you just don’t see it yet.
LikeLike
O,
Since you think there is validity to the bell curve and that it accounts for so much crime in your community, why would anyone think you are an exception to the rule (since you say you are Black) and argue with you.
LikeLike
Hathor,
Very good question!
As is the case with much of what I write, this too comes from a deeply personal place rooted in the real world, and not some arid academic discourse conducted in the abstract. On my blog I talked about, earlier this Spring, an incident about how I was nearly shot by the police for being suspected of being the accomplice of a suspect while getting some Chinese takeout. The Police thought that I was guilty because I was Black and Male and on the scene at the same time a roustabout was giving the Chinese place folks agita.
I have been stopped and hassled by the cops in virtually every city I’ve been in, without exception, and no matter what time of day or night, no matter what kind of attire I had on, and no matter if I was on the job or not.
So, if what Michael Levin proposes in his book, about the need to step up racial profiling of Black Males given their propensity to commit more violent street crime than anyone comes to pass, I’m basically screwed.
That said though, I am still concerned about violent street crime, because aside for my own safety, which I can handle ably enough, I am even more concerned about the safety and wellbeing of my sisters and my lady, the latter of which likes to take photos and is scared to death of taking her nice cameras out only to run afoul of Black knuckleheads who would be keen to relieve her of such equipment. So while I’m between a rock and a hard place, at the end of the day I don’t want my kith and kin to wind up on a slab.
Next question?
O.
LikeLike
2) Can’t keep a job because they are socially retarded, and can’t get along with people in a workspace.
Maybe they should become a police officer!
1) Live in their parent’s basements and play video games 50% of their waking hours.
They also watch pornography incessantly, hence most are blind!
3) Are always “A” students, but seem to be lost outside of their college courses, and never amount to much.
I dated a clown like that once, once being the operative word! He wanted me to pay for everything as he was unemployed and had a history of chronic unemployment. Needless to say, I told him to take a flying leap off the nearest skyscraper(being in an urban center) . I always wanted to know what it would be like to date a weirdo! It wasn’t nice. I’ll take the ‘dumb’ one over the ‘smart’ one any day!
LikeLike
@ Herneith
Lol! You are crazy!
@ King
I agree with what you said. Just because one has potential it doesn’t mean that one will live up to it or do anything useful with it.
LikeLike
Howard Gardner’s “Multiple Intelligence Theory” is just that – A THEORY. It has never been proven. Some say that M.I. is just a way to try and build self-esteem for minorities. True intelligence is mathematics and language arts. How well you can do math and read & write. Kobe Bryant is not as smart as a doctor, sorry he didn’t even go to college.
LikeLike
@ joseph
When you grow up you’ll learn that ALL doctors aren’t smart, and that all smart people didn’t go to college. But you have to grow up first.
LikeLike
@ mochasister
And the real brain twister is if you never were going to do anything with the “potential” was it ever a potential at all?
LikeLike