Discussion of The Bell Curve (at ToT)
Rick A. Hunter
Member # 379
posted 14 June 2002
Several years ago, Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray published The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. I’ve had a chance to closely examine this massive 872 page work, and I find it hard to believe that the authors didn’t realized the uproar it would cause.
One of the authors’ basic premises is that - when IQ is controlled for - American ethnic minorities (Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans) are not underrepresented in the “professions”. Among other things, they point out that the average Black IQ in America is some 15 points - that is, one standard deviation - lower than the average White IQ.
Liberals, many of whom apparently didn’t read the book, rejected the conclusions made by the authors because of the implication that ethnic minorities were intellectually inferior to Whites. Conservatives, on the other hand, saw it as validation of their anti-Affirmative Action sentiments. What’s the logic, Conservatives argue, of having preferences for those unable to perform at an acceptable level? So instead of shedding light on the situation, it served to further polarize the country.
Here are some of the other claims made by the authors of The Bell Curve:
1. There exists a “General Intelligence Factor”, denoted “g”.
2. This g factor measures the only types of “real” intelligence, namely verbal and math. Others intelligences, such as “musical” intelligence, are not relevant.
3. IQ (and other similar standardized) tests accurately measure this g factor.
4. g is the best measure of (eventual) social standing, not Socio-Economic Status (SES) at birth, not race and/or ethnicity (per se), and not education.
Once the VG/AH factor is taken into account - since the authors clearly didn’t - this book has been a rich source of material. Through the application of VG/AH Theory, I have found a way of reconciling the divisive issues - raised by the authors - in a positive and constructive way.
***************************************************************************
Vaudree
Member # 203
posted 14 June 2002
And, along with the Bell Curve guys was Phillip Rushton, who compared statistics for Whites, Asians and Blacks, and “found” a negative correlation between intelligence and genital size. Which leads to the next question...
Here are a few short articles on Intelligence research.
Development and Neurobiology (April 1999)
Development and Neurobiology (May 1999)
Development and Neurobiology (June 1999)
***************************************************************************
Lez
Member # 520
posted 15 June 2002
Vaudree, the [links to the] articles you posted were interesting and gave food for thought on “how do we measure intelligence”. It’s [been] a long time since I studied this subject, so be gentle with me. The nurture/nature argument has been going on forever - measuring intelligence is very subjective, and would vary from era to era and throughout different cultures. At a certain point in history, you might need people who could build/design vast buildings - would they then be considered more intelligent than someone who could write great works which had no use in society at that time?
***************************************************************************
Anthony
Member # 473
posted 15 June 2002
Rick, please go on to study Howard Gardner’s works on multiple intelligences. I hope that we have moved past the old IQ tests. They have been shown over and over to be culturally biased toward White people of Eastern European descent.
The world needs all types of people. When you begin to study evolution and survival or a species, diversity is the key to survival.
***************************************************************************
Rick A. Hunter
Member # 379
posted 15 June 2002
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope that we have moved past the old IQ tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony, maybe you and I have moved past it, but many others haven’t. Also, how can you explain that so few ethnic minorities are mathematicians?
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And, along with the Bell Curve guys was Phillip Rushton, who compared statistics for Whites, Asians and Blacks, and “found” a negative correlation between intelligence and genital size.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK Vaudree, but what if Rushton’s assertion is correct? Should we reject an idea merely because we don’t agree with it and/or find it to be politically incorrect?
By the way, do you know where I can find a device which accurately measures the aforementioned size difference?
***************************************************************************
Vaudree
Member # 203
posted 15 June 2002
I found a Philip Rushton article about how IQ explains why some countries are rich and some are poor. Then I show another article which gives another explanation for the same phenomena.
The Bigger Bell Curve: Intelligence, National Achievement, and the Global Economy
Greed & Capitalism
***************************************************************************
Lez
Member # 520
posted 16 June 2002
Vaudree, I have to go with the 2nd report. The first one for me brings up all sorts of measurement issues, cultural ideals and social norms. Who measures it, how do they measure it and how accurate is it?
With corporations taking over the global economy, I doubt IQ would matter too much in the overall picture. In this country, we seem to have lost - or are losing - the right of choice. Because we no longer stand up to politicians or company decisions, we will be as ineffectual at fighting the insidious growth of corporate greed - as many undeveloped countries are now.
***************************************************************************
Vaudree
Member # 203
posted 21 June 2002
Yes, Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray justifying inequality through faulty research. Is it true that they said that Affirmative Action is discrimination against the capable? I get the feeling that they are pro-market supporters and would like to both justify and maintain existing inequalities.
What they do do is assume that the playing field is the same for everybody and it is only the genes that make a difference.
***************************************************************************
Rick A. Hunter
Member # 379
posted 21 June 2002
I am not capable of giving a valid opinion as to whether or not their research is faulty. However, I see no harm - to me personally - by assuming they are correct. I have seen how few minorities there are in math - a subject which should be independent of any cultural bias.
With all other factors equal, there is no doubt - in my mind - that ethnic minorities, in many ways, are given an unfair advantage over Whites and Asians.
I was commenting that their assessment of IQ tests as a measure of this elusive “g” is highly disputable. Regardless, Vaudree, didn’t you once recommend giving an IQ test to help determine her problem?
***************************************************************************
Vaudree
Member # 203
posted 24 June 2002
The IQ test is not a good measure of intelligence - it was never originally intended for that purpose. It can tell whether one’s nonverbal abilities are stronger than their verbal abilities or whether one has memory problems. It can show areas of strengths and weaknesses.
Stephen Ceci has shown in “On Intelligence” that even changing the context of a task in minor ways can determine who is or is not able to perform the task. Some people can use skill X in the real world and some people can use skill X only on paper and pencil tasks. Not everybody who can do one, can do the other. His Chapter three shows lots of examples on that.
Numbers are instruments, like a knife or fork, that can be used for both good or bad. The conclusions a person reaches depends mostly on which facts they feel are “important” enough to include, and which are “unimportant” enough to exclude. I cannot see where the authors of The Bell Curve have an argument, unless they rely on existing inequalities for it. That would mean that Blacks were not slaves, were not forbidden to read, and were not exploited. The only way they can validate their conclusions is by using existing inequalities and then ignoring them.
***************************************************************************
Rick A. Hunter
Member # 379
posted 25 June 2002
In the chapter about the relationship between low IQ and criminality, the authors describe their concept of the criminal:
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are deficient... in conscience or in self-restraint. They lack normal attachment to the mores of their culture, or they are peculiarly indifferent to the feelings or good opinions of others. They are over-endowed with restless energy or with a hunger for adventure or danger. ...[C]hronic offenders may be suffering from “moral insanity”.
...[L]ow intelligence often translates into failure and frustration in school and in the job market... [A] lack of foresight, ...often associated with low IQ, raises the attractions of the immediate gains from crime and lowers the strength of the deterrents... [A]n appetite for danger, a stronger-than-average hunger for things you can get only by stealing if you cannot buy them, an antipathy towards conventionality, an insensitivity to pain or to social ostracism,... combined with a low IQ, may set the stage for a criminal career.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds ominously like the AH.
Now let’s turn to the chapter on schooling:
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plenty of hollow credentialing goes on as well, ...as the educational degree becomes a ticket for jobs that could be done just as well by people without the degree... [T]he requirement for teaching certificates often impedes hiring good teachers in elementary and secondary schools...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who could argue with this? No one, unless some spineless politicians - elected by ignorant voters - decide to “declare war on education”. (Oops! Wrong buzzwords!)
Politicians say they’ll crackdown on poor teaching by requiring competency tests, along with and more and more educational degrees. In California, Oregon, and Washington, it is nearly-to-completely impossible to get any real, full-time non-college teaching job without a full teaching license and/or credential.
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dropout is extremely rare throughout the upper half of the IQ distribution... Being poor has a small effect on whether a person finishes school with a regular diploma or a high school equivalency certificate (GED).
...GED youths are not equivalent to “normal” graduates in terms of their success in the job market. In their unemployment rates, job tenure, and wages, the GEDs look more like dropouts than they look like high school graduates, raising the possibility that they differ from other high school graduates in a variety of ways that makes it dangerous lump all “high school educated“ people (GEDs and high school graduates) into a single group.
GEDs are more like dropouts than high school graduates in the problems they experience in the labor market. ...the brighter dropouts may go back to get a GED, but they continue to share - with permanent dropouts - a lower-class social background that has not inculcated a work ethic that makes for success in the labor force. Thus, GEDs are more like normal graduates in their intelligence but more like other dropouts in their success in the labor force.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But I thought that intelligence - which, according to the authors, is best measured by “g” - was the most important determining factor in one’s success. I am a high school dropout (GED), and yet I have completed the coursework for a doctorate in math. Regardless, the authors have done well in predicting my success in the labor market, even if their reasoning didn’t apply.
Next, in the chapter about race/ethnicity and IQ, the authors considered samples of Blacks and Whites with the same scores on IQ tests:
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whites are characteristically stronger than Blacks on the subtests involving spatial-perceptual abilities, and Blacks are characteristically stronger than Whites in subtests such as arithmetic and immediate memory, both of which involve retention and retrieval of information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above is a wonderful demonstration of why VG/AH Theory is inherently Good, Wholesome and Pure, and all others are not. My interpretation of the above result is that Whites are more likely to be VGs, and Blacks are more likely to be AHs.
Return to VG/AH Theory Homepage