Articles not to write when you are defending a rather controversial hypothesis

The first priority for race realists should be to establish beyond reasoned debate that there is, in fact, at least a small genetically conditioned difference in g between races. Flynn and Dickens (2001) have generously provided an extravagant model by which small differences between races can amplify in absence of disparate treatment. Small genotypic differences can, theoretically, go a long way. In addition, Gordon (1997) has shown how the impact of individual IQ differences can multiply in aggregate. Gordon’s basic conjecture has been borne out in numerous studies. The impact of IQ differences magnify as you move from individuals to households, to school districts, to states, to nations, to global regions (page 51 on). Taken together, contrary to what some have argued, small genetic differences between populations can, theoretically, account for large population differences in social outcomes. It follows, then, that by simply establishing the existence of such differences, one can shift the burden of proof in the debate about culpability, which has long been at the heart of the Race debate. The onus would be on ‘social constructionists‘ to show that various outcome differences didn’t have an ultimate genetic etiology (in a biometric sense).

Given this, it’s somewhat disheartening to see the direction that recent race realist research has taken — dubious arguments about penis size and pleiotropy and intra-racial differences supported by questionable data:

An examination of Rushton’s theory of differences in penis length and circumference and r-K life history theory in 113 populations

Do pigmentation and the melanocortin system modulate aggression and sexuality in humans as they do in other animals?

IQs in Italy are higher in the north- A reply to Felice and Giugliano

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Articles not to write when you are defending a rather controversial hypothesis

  1. B.B. says:

    An examination of Rushton’s theory of differences in penis length and circumference and r-K life history theory in 113 populations:
    Rushton’s theory does not propose that there is a direct causal relationship between intelligence and penis length, such that high intelligence entails a reduction in penis length or greater penis length entails a reduction in intelligence.

    I’m not so sure about this. In Race Differences in Sexual Behavior when Rushton is discussing the sampling of the population he points out that the Kinsey data on penis size he is using is mostly of black and white college students, and speculated that if a more representative sample were being used that the differences might be greater. The unstated assumption being that non-college educated would have a larger penis length than college educated because the college educated are more intelligent.

  2. Zimriel says:

    Do the penis measurers allow comments? I’m tempted to go there and troll. “I don’t know how mine measures up, it’s been some time since I last called YOUR MOM.”

    This really is a scene right out of Idiocracy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s