PDF [17.5 Mib]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
SOHASKY-DISSERTATION-2017.Pdf (2.074Mb)
DIFFERENTIAL MINDS: MASS INTELLIGENCE TESTING AND RACE SCIENCE IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY by Kate E. Sohasky A dissertation submitted to the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Baltimore, Maryland May 9, 2017 © Kate E. Sohasky All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Historians have argued that race science and eugenics retreated following their discrediting in the wake of the Second World War. Yet if race science and eugenics disappeared, how does one explain their sudden and unexpected reemergence in the form of the neohereditarian work of Arthur Jensen, Richard Herrnstein, and Charles Murray? This dissertation argues that race science and eugenics did not retreat following their discrediting. Rather, race science and eugenics adapted to changing political and social climes, at times entering into states of latency, throughout the twentieth century. The transnational history of mass intelligence testing in the twentieth century demonstrates the longevity of race science and eugenics long after their discrediting. Indeed, the tropes of race science and eugenics persist today in the modern I.Q. controversy, as the dissertation shows. By examining the history of mass intelligence testing in multiple nations, this dissertation presents narrative of the continuity of race science and eugenics throughout the twentieth century. Dissertation Committee: Advisors: Angus Burgin and Ronald G. Walters Readers: Louis Galambos, Nathaniel Comfort, and Adam Sheingate Alternates: François Furstenberg -
Quide the Formation of Any Social Policies, Particularly Those Affecting Families, from a Conservative/Pro-Family Point-Of-View
irc MEMORANDUM TO; The Coalitions FROM; Connie Marshner DATE: May 20, 1981 SUBJECT: Yale Conference This week I participated in a conference at Yale University sponsored by the Rush Center for Child Development on the topic of "What is Pro-Family Policy. The list of speakers with their biographies is attached. The Bush Center for Child Development is a project supported by the Bush Foundation which is the 3-M Corporation Foundation. There are four such centers at universities around the country: Michigan, California, North Carolina and Yale. This conference was one of several they have during the year at which Bush Center people from all over the country come to hear and to participate. Mv talk on Tuesday was a straight-forward explanation of what principles shoul4 quide the formation of any social policies, particularly those affecting families, from a conservative/pro-family point-of-view. I had been expecting a much more lively controversy to be provoked than I ended up getting. In fact the wh 1 conference was more staid and dull than I had expected, even for an academic environment. I am not sure to what to attribute this. Perhaps the profession 1 child development types there felt there was no point in trying to ar^e with me. Perhaps they had anticipated what I was going to say or perhaps they don t ca e what the principles of pro-family policy are, but in any event it was less lively a conference than I had been expecting. I might note in passing that the afternoon speaker on Monday, Alan Crawford, made sort of a fool of himself and did not provoke any interest on the part of the audience either. -
Balanced Biosocial Theory for the Social Sciences
UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations 1-1-2004 Balanced biosocial theory for the social sciences Michael A Restivo University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/rtds Repository Citation Restivo, Michael A, "Balanced biosocial theory for the social sciences" (2004). UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations. 1635. http://dx.doi.org/10.25669/5jp5-vy39 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Retrospective Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BALANCED BIOSOCIAL THEORY FOR THE SOCIAL SCIENCES by Michael A. Restivo Bachelor of Arts IPIoridkijSjlarrhcIJiuAHsrsity 2001 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillm ent ofdœnxpnnnnenkfbrthe Master of Arts Degree in Sociology Departm ent of Sociology College of Liberal Arts Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas M ay 2004 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 1422154 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. -
The Strange Survival and Apparent Resurgence of Sociobiology
This is a repository copy of The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/118157/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Dennis, A. orcid.org/0000-0003-4625-1123 (2018) The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences, 31 (1). pp. 19-35. ISSN 0952- 6951 https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966 Dennis A. The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences. 2018;31(1):19-35. Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966. Article available under the terms of the CC- BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology Abstract A recent dispute between Richard Dawkins and Edward O. Wilson concerning fundamental concepts in sociobiology is examined. -
Evolution, Politics and Law
Valparaiso University Law Review Volume 38 Number 4 Summer 2004 pp.1129-1248 Summer 2004 Evolution, Politics and Law Bailey Kuklin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Bailey Kuklin, Evolution, Politics and Law, 38 Val. U. L. Rev. 1129 (2004). Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol38/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Valparaiso University Law School at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Valparaiso University Law Review by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Kuklin: Evolution, Politics and Law VALPARAISO UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 38 SUMMER 2004 NUMBER 4 Article EVOLUTION, POLITICS AND LAW Bailey Kuklin* I. Introduction ............................................... 1129 II. Evolutionary Theory ................................. 1134 III. The Normative Implications of Biological Dispositions ......................... 1140 A . Fact and Value .................................... 1141 B. Biological Determinism ..................... 1163 C. Future Fitness ..................................... 1183 D. Cultural N orm s .................................. 1188 IV. The Politics of Sociobiology ..................... 1196 A. Political Orientations ......................... 1205 B. Political Tactics ................................... 1232 V . C onclusion ................................................. 1248 I. INTRODUCTION -
1988 BGA Nijmegen
1(1 Milb Behavior Genetics Association ightee th Annual Meeting ........---------- ...,.--- Programs and A;13m.JA . actsj University of Nijmegen Nijmegen, The Netherlands June 22 - 25, 1988 BEHAVIOR GENETICS ASSOCIATION The purpose of the Behavior Genetics Association is to promote scientific study of the interrelationship of genetic mechanisms and behavior, both human and animal; to encourage and aid the education and training of research workers in the field of behavior genetics; and to aid in dissemination and interpretation to the general public of knowledge concerning the interrelationship of genetics and behavior, and its implications for health, human development, and education. For additional information about the Behavior Genetics Associ- ation, please contact Prof. James R. Wilson, BGA Secretary, Institute for Behavioral Genetics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309- 0447. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1987-1988 1988-1989 President Peter A. Parsons Leonard L. Heston President-Elect Leonard L. Heston Robert Plomin Past President Sandra Scarr Peter A. Parsons Secretary James R. Wilson James R. Wilson Treasurer Gregory Carey Gregory Carey Member-at-Large Vicki E. Pollock Nicholas G. Martin Member-at-Large Nicholas G. Martin Pierre L. Roubertoux Member-at-Large Pierre L. Roubertoux Dorret I. Boomsma Previous Presidents Previous Dobzhanskv Awardees Th. Dobzhansky, 1972-1973 Steven G. Vandenberg, 1977 John L. Fuller, 1973-1974 Elliot Slater, 1978 Gerald E. McClearn, 1974-1975 Ernst W. Caspari, 1979 J. P. Scott, 1975-1976 Benson E. Ginsburg, 1980 Irving I. Gottesman, 1976-1977 Sheldon C. Reed, 1981 W. R. Thompson, 1977-1978 Gardner Lindzey, 1982 Lee Ehrman, 1978-1979 Peter L. Broadhurst, 1983 V. Elving Anderson, 1979-1980 Leonard L. -
The Black-White Test Score Gap: an Introduction
CHRISTOPHER JENCKS MEREDITH PHILLIPS 1 The Black-White Test Score Gap: An Introduction FRICAN AMERICANS currently score lower than A European Americans on vocabulary, reading, and mathematics tests, as well as on tests that claim to measure scholastic apti- tude and intelligence.1 This gap appears before children enter kindergarten (figure 1-1), and it persists into adulthood. It has narrowed since 1970, but the typical American black still scores below 75 percent of American whites on most standardized tests.2 On some tests the typical American black scores below more than 85 percent of whites.3 1. We are indebted to Karl Alexander, William Dickens, Ronald Ferguson, James Flynn, Frank Furstenberg, Arthur Goldberger, Tom Kane, David Levine, Jens Ludwig, Richard Nisbett, Jane Mansbridge, Susan Mayer, Claude Steele, and Karolyn Tyson for helpful criticisms of earlier drafts. But we did not make all the changes they suggested, and they are in no way responsible for our conclusions. 2. These statistics also imply, of course, that a lot of blacks score above a lot of whites. If the black and white distributions are normal and have the same standard deviation, and if the black-white gap is one (black or white) standard deviation, then when we compare a randomly selected black to a randomly selected white, the black will score higher than the white about 24 percent of the time. If the black-white gap is 0.75 rather than 1.00 standard deviations, a randomly selected black will score higher than a randomly selected white about 30 percent of the time. -
ETHOLOGY NEWSLETTER Continue to Give Us the Benefit of Their Experience
BONDINGz A UNITARY PROCESS? To those whose term on the Executive Board ended with this issue, 1. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, William McGrew, William Charlesworth, and Cheryl Travis, I am certain that the entire membership is grateful for the vital roles you have played in the founding of ISHE! It is with equivalent enthusiasm that we welcome our new Board members: Michael McGuire, Esther Ian Uine, and Ronald Weigel. They will serve for two years, overlapping in 1982 with Robert Adams, Gordon Burghardt, En Fa.ce Mut..uat Gaze Wade Mackey, and Gai 1 Zivin. Committee aSSignments will be especially easy this time since most of our Board members are already serving in some capaCity. It seems fitting that we ask Michael McGuire to chair the committee for term requesting simultaneously that Bill Charlesworth and I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt ETHOLOGY NEWSLETTER continue to give us the benefit of their experience. Gail Zivin and Ron Weigel have their work cut out for them with .IClfVi 8. LllCKMD.. EDl TCft VOLUME 3 l.HlVER8IlY Of VASHIHGTOH the upcoming international meeting in Atlanta. Bob Adams Rfif(Qt, 1562 ISSUE 5 6EATTLE, WAOOIHGTDi 98195 will continue to handle our recent literature section, Wade Mackey our human ethology abstracts, and Gordon Burghardt our membership. If Esther Thelen would take over the nominations committee and if Ian Uine, with Bill McGrew's 18. .E..!::..a§. EQB. SPRIHG I continued help, would be willing to spearhead the European theater of our book review committee, then all immediate tasks would be covered. The masthead of this issue is flying the topiC for our next I have asked Nick Blurton-Jones to coordinate the responses. -
Not in Our Genes, Biology, Ideology and Human Nature - Reviewed by Richard Dawkins by Steven Rose, Leon J
Not in Our Genes, Biology, Ideology and Human Nature - Reviewed by Richard Dawkins by Steven Rose, Leon J. Kamin and R.C.Lewontin (Pantheon Books, 1985) Reviewed by Richard Dawkins in "Sociobiology: the debate continues", New Scientist 24 January 1985 Those of us with time to concentrate on our historic mission to exploit workers and oppress minorities have a great need to "legitimate" our nefarious activities. The first legitimator we came up with was religion which has worked pretty well through most of history but, "the static world of social relations legitimated by God reflected, and was reflected by, the dominant view of the natural world as itself static". Latterly there has been an increasing need for a new legitimator. So we developed one: Science. "The consequence was to change finally the form of the legitimating ideology of bourgeois society. No longer able to rely upon the myth of a deity... the dominant class dethroned God and replaced him with science... If anything, this new legitimator of the social order was more formidable than the one it replaced ... Science is the ultimate legitimator of bourgeois ideology." Legitimation is also the primary purpose of universities: "... it is universities that have become the chief institutions for the creation of biological determinism ... Thus, universities serve as creators, propagators, and legitimators of the ideology of biological determinism. If biological determinism is a weapon in the struggle between classes, then the universities are weapons factories, and their teaching and research faculties are the engineers, designers, and production workers." And to think that, through all these years working in universities, I had imagined that the purpose of science was to solve the riddles of the Universe: to comprehend the nature of existence; of space and time and of eternity; of fundamental particles spread through 100 billion galaxies; of complexity and living organisation and the slow dance through three billion years of geological time. -
Curriculum Vitae 9/96
Curriculum Vitae Kirby Deater-Deckard, Ph.D. Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA Address Psychological and Brain Sciences Tel: (413) 545-0083 441 Tobin Hall, 135 Hicks Way Fax: (413) 545-0996 University of Massachusetts Room 413 Tobin Hall Amherst, MA 01003 USA [email protected] Education 1985-1988 B.A. Psychology, Human Development, Pennsylvania State University 1992 M.A. Psychology, University of Virginia 1994 Ph.D. Psychology, University of Virginia Dissertation: Differential discipline and parent perceptions of siblings’ characteristics (Committee: Sandra Scarr [Chair], Richard Q. Bell, Charlotte Patterson, Emily Hauenstein). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: Sciences and Engineering, 55, 4620. Professional Positions 1988-1989 Mental Health Technician, Meadows Psychiatric Hospital, Centre Hall, PA 1989-1994 Graduate Research & Teaching Assistant, University of Virginia 1994-1995 Post-Doctoral Fellow & Instructor, Vanderbilt University, TN 1995-1998 Research Associate, Institute of Psychiatry, London (UK) 1999-2002 Visiting Lecturer, Högskolan Väst (Trollhättan, Sweden) 1998-2002 Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Oregon 2002-2005 Associate Professor of Psychology and Behavior Scientist in Child and Family Center, University of Oregon 2004-2005 Visiting Associate Professor, Center for Developmental and Health Genetics, Pennsylvania State University 2005-2015 Professor of Psychology, Virginia Tech 2012-2015 Professor of Psychiatry, Virginia Tech -
Nature-Nurture, IQ, and Jensenism
1 NATURE-NURTURE. I.Q., AND JENSENISM: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE By RICHARD STEPHEN RI CHARDE A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1979 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express appreciation to my committee members, Dr. Robert E. Jester, Dr. Richard J. Anderson, and Dr. Arthur Newman for their support in this project. I would also like to thank Dr. Robert R. Sherman and Dr. William B. Ware for their assistance in my research. Special thanks fo my wife, Lee, for her moral support and typing skills. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii ABSTRACT iv PROLOGUE 1 I WHY BE CONCERNED? 6 II THE ORIGIN OF THE CONTROVERSY: A HISTORICAL VIEW FROM PHILOSOPHY 12 III NINETEENTH CENTURY BIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY: THE SCIENCE OF RACISM 34 IV A BRANCHING PATH: GENETICS VS. EUGENICS 58 V A VIEW FROM PSYCHOLOGY: THE MENTAL TESTING MOVEMENT IN AMERICA 82 VI JENSEN AND JENSENISM: ANACHRONISTIC HERESY 148 Jensen's Mentors 156 Level I and Level II Abilities 164 Jensen's Advocates 167 The Range of Opposition 169 Psychology and Education 170 Cultural Anthropology 187 Quantitative Genetics 190 The Contribution ol Jensen 212 VII FROM THE PROMETHEAN LEGACY TO A NEW OPTIMISM APPENDIX LIST OF REFERENCES BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH iii Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida V in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy NATURE-NURTURE, I.Q., AND JENSENISM- A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE By Richard Stephen Ri Charde December 1979 Chairman: Robert E. -
Future Human Evolution (2006)
John Glad Future Human Evolution Eugenics in the Twenty-First Century Preface by Seymour W. Itzkoff Hermitage Publishers 2006 03e This book may be downloaded free of charge at www.whatwemaybe.org. John Glad FUTURE HUMAN EVOLUTION Eugenics in the Twenty-First Century Copyright © 2006 John Glad Copyright preface © 2006 by Seymour Itzkoff Photography by Richard Robin All rights reserved Excerpts from this book have appeared in Mankind Quarterly and Jewish Press. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data: Glad, John. Future human evolution: eugenics in the twenty-first century / John Glad. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-55779-154-6 1. Eugenics. I. Title. HQ751.G52 2005 363.9’2—dc22 2005052536 Published by Hermitage Publishers P.O. Box 578 Schuylkill Haven, PA 17972-0578 E-mail: [email protected] The entire Hermitage Publishers catalog is available on the Internet: www.Hermitagepublishers.com Acknowlegements I wish to express my gratitude to all those who gave so generously of their time in preparing the various drafts of this book: Carl Bajema, Norman DiGiovanni, Sarah Forman, Larisa Glad, Oleg Panczenko, Richard Robin, Alex Van Oss, James Woodbury, and Ilya Zakharov. Table of Contents Preface....................................................................................7 Introduction ........................................................................13 What Is Eugenics?...............................................................20 Science..................................................................................21