SHOCKLEY on EUGENICS and RACE the Application
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SHOCKLEY ON EUGENICS AND RACE The Application of Science to the Solution of Human Problems Copyright 1992 by Scott-Townsend Publishers All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Publisher. Scott-Townsend Publishers P.O. Box 34070 N.W. Washington, D.C. 20043 Tel: (703) 442-8010 Fax: (703) 847-9524 Printed in the United States of America printing number 23456789 1 0 Library of Congress Catalog'mg-in-Publication Data Shockley, William, 1910- Shockley on eugenics and race : the application of science to the solution of human problems / preface by Arthur R. Jensen ; Roger Pearson [editor]. p. cm. includes bibliographical references. ISBN 1-878465-03-1 (paperback) : $25.00 1. Eugenics. 2. Heredity, Human. 3. Degeneration. I. Pearson, Roger, 1927- . II. Title. HQ751.S54 1992 92-23574 155.7-dc20 CDP SHOCKLEY ON EUGENICS AND RACE The Application of Science to the Solution of Human Problems ROGER PEARSON Preface by ARTHUR R. JENSEN Scott-Townsend Publishers Washington, D.C. Dedicated at the suggestion of Emmy Shoekley and as William Shockley would have wished to The Search for Truth William Bradford Shockley (1910-1989) CONTENTS PREFACE BY ARTHUR R. JENSEN INTRODUCTION 15 DOCUMENT I Population Control or Eugenics....................................................................... 51 DOCUMENT 2 Is T he Quality of U.S. Population D eclin in g ?..........................................84 DOCUMENT 3 Proposed Research to Reduce Racial Aspects of the Environment-Heredity Uncertainty 94 DOCUMENT 4 The Entrenched Dogmatism of Inverted Liberals................................... 105 DOCUMENT 5 Ten Point Position Statement on Human Quality Problems..................................................................... 124 DOCUMENT 6 An Analysis Leading to a Recommendation Concerning Inquiry into Eugenic Legislation 127 DOCUMENT 7 Hum an-Q uality Problem s and Research Taboos......................................130 DOCUMENT 8 Proposed NAS Resolution, drafted O ctober 17, 1 9 7 0 .........................168 DOCUMENT 9 Hardy-Weinberg Law Generalized to Estimate Hybrid Variance for Negro Populations and Reduce Racial Aspects of the Environment-Heredity Uncertainty............... 170 DOCUMENT 10 Dysgenics - A Social Problem Evaded by the Illusion of Infinite Plasticity of Human Intelligence?................................. 175 DOCUMENT II Dysgenics, Geneticity, Raceology: A Challenge to the Intellectual Responsibility o f E ducators..........................................184 DOCUMENT 12 Proposed Resolution Regarding the 80% G eneticity E stim ate for Caucasian IQ .............................................208 DOCUMENT 13 Eugenic, or Anti-Dysgenic, Thinking Exercises.......................................210 DOCUMENT 14 Society Has a Moral Obligation to Diagnose Tragic Racial IQ Deficits.................................................................... 212 DOCUMENT 15 Has Intellectual Humanitarianism Gone Berserk?............................. 219 DOCUMENT 16 Anthropological Taboos About Determinations of Racial Mixes 223 DOCUMENT 17 Sperm Banks and Dark-Ages D ogm atism ..............................................225 DOCUMENT 18 Intelligence in T ro u b le..................................................................................229 DOCUMENT 19 Playboy Interview with William Shockley, August 1980 . 234 DOCUMENT 20 A Tribute to Dr. William Shockley by his S tudent Office Personnel.....................................................275 DOCUMENT 21 True (Not Berserk) Humanitarianism: A Positive Absolute Value That Unites Religion and Science .... 277 A PHOTOTOGRAPHIC MEMORIAL TO WILLIAM SHOCKLEY 293 Preface PREFACE BY ARTHUR R. JENSEN The man of science, whatever his hopes may be, must lay them aside while he studies nature; and the philosopher, if he is to achieve truth, must do the same. Ethical considerations can only legitimately appear when the truth has been ascertained; they can and should appear as determining our feeling towards the truth, and our manner of ordering our lives in view of the truth, but not as themselves dictating what the truth is to be. Ben rand Russell (Mysticism and tMgic, 1914) William Bradford Shockley (1910-1989) was one of those rare persons who, both fortunately and unfortunately, became a legendary and symbolic figure. The public image of such a person is always a mixture of fact and fantasy, and, in the case of Shockley, calumny as well. The present collection of articles and interviews presenting Shockley's own words about his position on issues of great social importance provides an essential basis for free-thinking persons to separate fact from fantasy and calumny regarding his views. Readers can decide for themselves the cogency of his message and argumentation. It is hard to imagine that even those who, after reading this collection, disagree with Shockley, on specifics or in general, or who would dismiss his overriding concern with the future course of the human species, could thoughtfully believe that, if Shockley's worries are perchance justified, they should not be a matter of great public concern but should simply be ignored or denied. Such an attitude would have to presume either that the open recognition of the problem would have worse ultimate consequences than the problem itself, or, absolutely contrary to fact, that Shockley's concern about possible dysgenic trends in the nation's population has been contradicted by a preponderance of scientifically reputable evidence. Shockley's purpose was simply to instigate investigation that would pul his worry about dysgenic trends to the test of scientific evidence. He suggested that inquiry should focus on the one objectively measurable and heritable human trait that appears to be correlated, probably more than any other, with the overall quality of life, namely, intelligence. To misconstrue his purpose as anything other than this is to perpetuate a fiction. His few specific proposals were explicitly intended as "thought experiments," to get people thinking about the issues. Such "thought 2 Shockley on Eugenics and Race experiments" were routine in his scientific activity and led to many of his electronic inventions. He once remarked, "I'm led up with questions about whether I'm a 'good guy' or a 'bad guy'. It's so irrelevant! I want researchers to do the necessary studies and determine whether I'm right or wrong." To a magazine writer who requested an interview with him, in order to write a "personality profile," Shockley said, "I don't give a damn about my personality. I want someone to evaluate what I'm saying." He refused the interview. The reporter called me to see if I might be able to intervene on his behalf. So I called Shockley, who said he would be willing to grant the interview if the reporter would devote at least 10 hours to studying material he would send him and then be able to pass a written exam on it. Otherwise, no interview. The reporter did not accept the challenge. The editor of this collection asked me to write this preface, which seems appropriate, as I was personally acquainted with Shockley throughout the entire period (1967-1989) of his involvement in the so- called "IQ controversy," and I, too, became one of the principals in this history. The editor’s Introduction covers in considerable detail the events of this period in Shockley's career, and Shockley's main published contributions to the "controversy" are best explained in his own writings. So I will only add a few sidelights that may enhance the reader's appreciation of the material that follows. Shockley, the man, first came to my attention late one Friday afternoon in 1967, at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, where I was spending the year as a Fellow. It had been announced that a Nobel Prize winner in physics from Stanford University would give a talk titled something like "The IQ-Heredity-Environment Uncertainty." As I was at that lime writing a book chapter closely related to this topic, I was naturally eager to hear Shockley's talk. Scarcely more than a dozen other Fellows attended. Shockley explained that he was preparing a paper he would present at a meeting of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and he wanted to give it a trial run before an audience of behavioral scientists. He welcomed questions and criticism. It was a remarkable, even startling, talk, and provoked considerable discussion. Because it touched on the possible genetic basis of racial differences in IQ, two or three of the Fellows warned Shockley, not at all unsympathetically, that he was asking for big trouble if his forthcoming presentation to the NAS were to be covered by the press. Which of course it was. It may have been at that moment that Shockley first coined the expression "research taboo,” which he was to find useful on many subsequent occasions. Shockley had also raised certain Preface 3 questions about the heritability of IQ which suggested to me that he was probably not fully aware of certain important studies that I thought would be useful to him. After his talk, I introduced myself, mentioned my interest in the genetics of intelligence, and offered to send him some reprints on the subject. In his typical methodical way, he jotted my name, occupation, and phone number in his notebook. I sent him the reprints, and a few days later