>He asserts that there is an I.Q. score gap of slightly over one standard
deviation unit >between White and African-Americans....He admits that
solid proof for the last >statement is lacking, but he claims that
genetic causation should be the 'default >hypothesis' until it is
disproved.
This is a hoot. Anyone familiar with American social history knows that
the admixture of "white" genes in the African-American gene pool is
tremendous. (Read "The Peculiar Institution" for a thorough grounding.)
The "one drop of (African) blood" mean that a person could have one (!)
great-great-grandparent from Africa and *all* the rest from Europe, and
that person still counts as an African-American. Furthermore, it is
well-known that many very light-skinned individuals "passed" in the South
and vanished into the White population (I know personally of one such
case. The family moved north so their children could be free, and one
was in my reputedly lily-white suburban high school. He also won a full
scholarship to a top Ivy-league university.) And it helps not one bit
that skin and eye color are not linked with any other "racially"
significant characteristics, so you can't tell a person's percentage of
"African" genes just by looking at him/her. If we could just get Jensen
and company to take an elementary bio course and read a US History book
or two....
>Test items and tests that have the lowest apparent cultural loadings
(e.g., the Raven >Matrix tests) show the greatest disparity between
racial groups. This rules out the >hypothesis that the test gap is due to
the test's content differentially favouring the white >over the
African-American culture.
This is another hoot. I've sampled the Raven Matrix test and it compares
very well with the puzzle- and workbook/coloring books that American
middle class children get all the time. In fact, my cousin's little boy
was just last week showing off to me the mazes and picture-comparison
games in the one he was working with, just as I used to show mine off to
my older sister. I doubt if Jensen hangs out much with seven-year olds
(even his own when he presumably had one or two) but in order to talk
about culture and learning you have to get very involved in the details
of everyday life, something which is easy to do in an open, tropical
village but not in a modern "each family walled off in its own domicile"
community. Maybe someone could drag him down to the local shopping mall
and give him a tour of the local Toys'r'Us. Also, in all the tests that
I know of, there is also a crucial time element - the faster you work the
more points you get. Not everybody thinks that way. I've tried giving
multiple choice entrance exams to Soviet immigrants, and they absolutely
do not understand the concept of "guess and go on." Giving an answer
they don't for sure know to be correct appalls them. They simply run out
of time because they're trying to get it right, not just get points.
Why is this tripe still around? Why are people still trying to deny that
in this country "race" is a stand-in for "social class" and that even
with upward mobility it takes a couple of generations for child-rearing
habits to catch up. I'm in racially mixed classes in my public health
program (mostly Caribbean), and the major difference between the races is
not in quality of work (I have this from the professors), it's in the
willingness of students to be assertive in class, challenge the prof, and
generally be individualistic. These are cultural, not racial, but are
the sort of thing which impresses culturally unsophisticated people, even
college professors.
If Jensen wants to be taken seriously, let him first do research on
groups of people with known genetic backgrounds, i.e. Frenchmen and
Nigerians with comparable cultural backgrounds (if that can be done).
Otherwise, let him shut up. It's like arguing if the moon is made of
Muenster or Swiss cheese. It may make great journal articles, but it's
not science because he's ignoring the observable, factual background,
because he's too dumb - yes dumb - to get off the campus and look at what
he's supposedly investigating in situ. Perhaps he's double-dealing for
political reasons, but I doubt it. I've seen too many other, though
lesser-known, people doing the same thing.
End of tirade. :-)
Rachel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 14:04:09 PST