A Scientific Debate on Race and Intelligence - Part 4 of 11

Setting: John Jay College of Criminal Justice
Event: A time to heal - education as the power to eliminate racial prejudice in America
Date: March 22, 1997

Joseph L. Graves debates J. Philippe Rushton on the significance of racial differences in IQ as well as the role that evolution and genetics play in determining human intelligence and behavior.

Dr. Graves is an evolutionary biologist who has a B.A. in biology from Oberlin College and a Ph.D. in Environmental, Evolutionary and Systematic Biology from Wayne State University. He is the author of The Emperor's New Clothes: Biological Theories of Race at the Millennium.

Dr. Rushton is a psychologist who has a B.sc. from Birkbeck College at the University of London, a Ph.D. from the London School of Economics and a D.Sc. from the University of London for work on altruism in children. He is the author of Race, Evolution and Behavior: A Life History Perspective.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Joseph L Graves
• J Philippe Rushton
• scientific racism
• racist
• racialism
• racialist
• race
• evolution
• behavior
• life history theory
• evolutionary biology
• genetics
• environment
• dysgenics
• eugenics
• intelligence
• IQ
• psychology
• biological determinism
• racial differences
• heredity
• hereditarianism
• science
• pseudoscience
• debunked
• refuted

[EgalitarianJay]

@ApeHoldsBioChemPaper Rusthon's claims of a correlation between cranial volume and IQ is only 0.2 and he arrived at this value via the practice of aggregation of different studies without establishing meaningful controls. His methodology is not credible. What is your source for racial variation in the frontal lobe? And what is your basis for calling Lieberman a hypocritical liar? His arguments in his article critiquing Rushton were supported by several other scientists.

[EgalitarianJay]

@ApeHoldsBioChemPaper Getting a study published in a peer-reviewed journal does not make the science valid. It simply means the paper being published has met the standards of quality by that journal. Rushton is the author of that study and he is generally not taken seriously by experts on human biology. Even among his colleagues in Psychology he has been criticized. For example Read: "Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples around 3000 years B.C", 2009.

[ApeHoldsBioChemPaper]

@Raybanmonster Size in this case is volume. Recently measured precisely using MRI.

See "Whole Brain Size and General Mental Ability: A Review", 2009.

Peer reviewed and thus accepted as valid science.

"OH you cant.. so what we have is just..."

Oh I can, so what we have is a NEGROID.

[ApeHoldsBioChemPaper]

@EgalitarianJay 0.4 is not very weak. Most of the brain is support structure. The non-raciao variation is probably in that. The functional frontal lobes and surface thickness are known to be the main point of racial variation. The internal support volume is thermoregularatory.

Lieberman is just a hypocritical liar.

[Raybanmonster]

@BioChemFailure cranial size DOES NOT CORRELATE WITH IQ. and also what do you mean by "SIZE" exactly? Please show me the peer-reviewed research accepted by many on this issue.. OH you cant.. so what we have is just the rantings of a racist buffoon, who ironically cannot demonstrate much intellectual ability himself, so resorts to racist bigotry in attempt to dismiss the feelings of inferiority that flood his insides as he realises he isnt actually that special. oh dear.

[EgalitarianJay]

@BioChemFailure The correlation between cranial size and IQ is very weak and the idea of a racial hierarchy in brain size was debunked by Philip Tobias in 1970. Leonard Lieberman critiqued Rushton's brain size/IQ relationships and found them to be based on flawed methodology. dubious sources and distortions of credible sources that actually debunk the claim (ex. Beals, Smith and Dodd 1984).

[BioChemFailure]

@Raybanmonster Actually cranial size correlates with IQ. Exceptions do not disprove the rule. Your tiny nigger peanut brain, for example, correlates with your low IQ, and your Dunning-Kruger/Narcissistic Personality Disorder high opinion of yourself.

[cirosuperiore]

it is silly that we have to argue over the obvious.

[EgalitarianJay]

@TehAlexJonesChannel I took a look at the book on Google Books. I could not get a complete passage but it does name Richard Lynn as a major proponent of the Dysgenics Hypothesis (the excerpt does mention that modern geneticists reject this theory). In on of my email conversations with Richard Nisbett he described Lynn as being a very foolish man. He didn't think any better of Rushton. Their research is fringe and controversial among scientists.

[Raybanmonster]

@TehAlexJonesChannel Lynn does not necessarily trump an encyclopaedia, he is better than Rushden, but still full of embarrassing flaws