Re: [xmca] Nobel prize talks stupid things about human intelligence

From: Jay Lemke <jaylemke who-is-at umich.edu>
Date: Mon Oct 22 2007 - 20:40:39 PDT

"Unscientific" viewpoints will necessarily play a
role in whatever cultural advances humanity
manages in the future to move beyond science,
just as "un-religious" viewpoints were in the
development of what passes today for (sometimes) more enlightened thought.

No?

JAY.

At 08:03 PM 10/22/2007, you wrote:
>David P,
>
>It remains diffuse to me what you mean by "doing science." The Steve Connor
>comment says a lot of things (as already mentioned: representing a more
>balanced view). The issue here (as far as I am
>concerned) is not to decide "who
>is right" (that would be outside the scope of my
>competence, anyway) but rather
>to emphasize the scholarly legitimacy or value of conflicting views, of
>multivocal/polyphonic (or, perhaps, cacophonic) discourses. The papers you
>referred to earlier, seem to me to represent that kind of "cacophony."
>
>Eirik.
>
>On 2007-10-22, at 22:08, David Preiss wrote:
> > Eirik,
> >
> > The Steve Connor comment you send us (second link below) tells
> > exactly why JW was not doing science at all. Particularly, why you
> > can't infer from an heritability ratio a conclusion about the
> > intelligence of people that works with you (as Watson say). On the
> > other hand, something can be statistically heritable and not genetic
> > at all. A nice explanation is in the Sternberg, Grigorenko and Kidd
> > paper I sent before.
> > David
> >
> >
> > David
> >
> > On Oct 22, 2007, at 3:16 PM, E. Knutsson wrote:
> >
> >> Amanda,
> >>
> >> JW's comment (http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/
> >> article3075642.ece)
> >> concludes with this request: "[W]e as scientists, wherever we wish
> >> to place
> >> ourselves in this great debate, should take care in claiming what are
> >> unarguable truths without the support of evidence."
> >>
> >> Some of the other comments also seem to give a more balanced view:
> >>
> >> http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3070538.ece
> >>
> >> http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article3075640.ece
> >>
> >> "Curtailing free debate is almost always a mistake. Allowing
> >> scientists and
> >> individuals to air their theories openly does not validate them. On
> >> the
> >> contrary it allows them to be refuted."
> >>
> >> Eirik.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2007-10-21, at 01:26, Amanda Brovold wrote:
> >>> Just for the record, it sounds to me as if Watson has suggested he
> >>> may have
> >>> been misquoted. In the article linked to 3 messages below he
> >>> says: "I can
> >>> understand much of this reaction. For if I said what I was quoted as
> >>> saying, then I can only admit that I am bewildered by it. To
> >>> those who have
> >>> drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is
> >>> somehow
> >>> genetically inferior, I can only apologise unreservedly. This is
> >>> not what I
> >>> meant. More importantly from my point of view, there is no
> >>> scientific basis
> >>> for such a belief." I am not sure why the first two sentences of
> >>> this quote
> >>> are generally left off when it is repeated. Such common
> >>> occurrences though
> >>> (even on this very list) lead me to believe it is plausible that
> >>> what Watson
> >>> said my not have been as appalling as what has been passed around
> >>> makes it
> >>> seem. I agree that it seems certain he has a view I very much
> >>> disagree with
> >>> and seems to be contradicted by the preponderance of evidence.
> >>> However, I
> >>> find un-thoughtful knee-jerk responses to such views to be at
> >>> least as
> >>> dangerous as the views themselves. I have heard people stress
> >>> that it is
> >>> important for academics to respond appropriately to events such as
> >>> these. I
> >>> very much agree, it is important for experts in the relevant
> >>> fields to
> >>> correct any misunderstandings that stories like this are likely to
> >>> perpetuate. It is also extremely important though for the academy to
> >>> remember that academic freedom is absolutely vital. As appalling
> >>> as views
> >>> expressed by one academic may be, the expression of controversial
> >>> view
> >>> points simply cannot be allowed to threaten the protections
> >>> necessary for
> >>> inquiry to be carried out.
> >>>
> >>> Something else to consider, phrased a different way, I feel
> >>> confident that
> >>> many people outraged by Watson's remarks would agree that in fact
> >>> there are
> >>> differences in the intelligences of different people, often
> >>> correlated with
> >>> differences in culture. These are not differences in terms of one
> >>> being
> >>> overall superior to another, but I do not think that reading is
> >>> forced by
> >>> the words that have been quoted without context, even if they are
> >>> accurate.
> >>> It is at least possible that Watson, as he now seems to claim,
> >>> really meant
> >>> to refer to differences without evaluating them. And isn't the
> >>> recognition
> >>> of the complexity of intelligence one of the things that makes
> >>> many of the
> >>> outraged so upset about IQ testing?
> >>>
> >>> -Amanda
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> xmca mailing list
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> > David Preiss, Ph.D.
> > Subdirector de Extensión y Comunicaciones
> > Escuela de Psicología
> > Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
> > Av Vicuña Mackenna 4860
> > Macul, Santiago
> > Chile
> >
> > Fono: 3544605
> > Fax: 3544844
> > e-mail: davidpreiss@uc.cl
> > web personal: http://web.mac.com/ddpreiss/
> > web institucional: http://www.epuc.cl/profesores/dpreiss
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>_______________________________________________
>xmca mailing list
>xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

Jay Lemke
Professor
University of Michigan
School of Education
610 East University
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Tel. 734-763-9276
Email. JayLemke@UMich.edu
Website. <http://www.umich.edu/~jaylemke%A0>www.umich.edu/~jaylemke
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Mon Oct 22 20:44 PDT 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 20 2007 - 14:25:43 PST