A Scientific Debate on Race and Intelligence Part 10 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
• psychometrics
• biological determinism
• racial differences
• heredity
• hereditarianism
• science
• pseudoscience
• debunked
• refuted

[unfathomablebo]

Native Americans are Asians because their art is similar...

Great argument Mr Rushton

[EgalitarianJay]

@unfathomablebo Indeed. Rushton has no explanation for why Native American societies aren't equal to Northeast Asian societies despite being their closet derivative population. He's trying to claim that their temperament is similar to Asians. Hispanics are primarily of Spanish and Mesoamerican descent ("Caucasian + Mongoloid"). Hispanics communities have a problem with violent crime in America and lower IQs than Whites. How can that be genetic? Rushton has no answer.

[0point00]

Rushton really had no argument in this video. All he had was some may be, perhaps, possibly type hypothesis.

Racism is stupid.

[EgalitarianJay]

@0point00 You are correct.

[PiotrThePrimate]

@EgalitarianJay No he isn't Jay and you know that. All Graves did here is criticise Rushton's application of r/K selection theory. As you well know there two components to Rushton's work: (a) discovery that a broad range of athropometric variables group into three taxa; and (b) an explanation of (a). Graves only attempted a refutation of (b).

[EgalitarianJay]

@PiotrThePrimate Graves comment was not out of context. It fit perfectly within the conversation going on at the time. If that is not the case explain how. Rushton's application of r/K selection is central to his evolutionary arguments. His listed variables are all based around proving that there is a racial continuum in life history traits. Graves proved that his approach was unscientific and explained why his variables were unreliable and irrelevant.

[EgalitarianJay]

@PiotrThePrimate If you want to discuss this on a message board we can do so. I have already directed you to a webpage where I have explained this issue in more detail. There is only so much that can be said on Youtube, If you are familiar with Rushton's work you know that it is impossible to address all 60 variables within the time frame of the presentations in this video which is why Graves wrote two articles to flesh out his points. Rushton cannot defend his own arguments.

[JAYforgiveMYsins]

@0point00 "And to this date, no one has ever found an allele for a gene which is found 100% in one "race" and 0% in another race."

Facepalm. As irrelevant as this is, I think it is factually wrong now.

[JAYforgiveMYsins]

@EgalitarianJay Because they split off 20,000 years ago and then evolved slower.

[cirosuperiore]

the blacks speakers are angry and frustrated. I think there is race riot brewing...

[cirosuperiore]

that's not a slide, dummy. 

[joaninoni]

I see no changes all I see is racist faces. - Tupac

[0point00]

@PiotrThePrimate

There isn't even a proper way to define mongoloids, caucasians and negroids, let alone say which one is greater.

And to this date, no one has ever found an allele for a gene which is found 100% in one "race" and 0% in another race. Compare that with male and female differences where several dozen genes are known to be present in the Y chromosome.

Of course geographic differences exist, but for the most part we are talking about very high frequency in one group specifically.