I knew someone from high school to a few years after college, who went on to become a professor and such, and very aggressively argued the Gould/Lewontin side of the race debate. I remember he picked out a quote:
Racial differences in behavior
and made an appeal to authority. No serious academic believes in this.
In other words, the No True Scotsman fallacy.
Well, I’d say Nicholas Wade, genetics writer for the New York Times, is a True Scotsman if there ever was one! And here’s what he says:
“The thesis presented here assumes . . . that there is a genetic component to human social behavior; that this component, so critical to human survival, is subject to evolutionary change and has indeed evolved over time; that the evolution in social behavior has necessarily proceeded independently in the five major races and others; and that slight evolutionary differences in social behavior underlie the differences in social institutions prevalent among the major human populations.”
Exactly 20 years after the Bell Curve, a new and far more devastating book is out. I can’t even find liberal reviews of it on the internet. They must still be frantically trying to find how to criticize it?
Genetic difference in behavior was the Holy Grail for us, or for the liberals, the Great Taboo. It was their line in the sand — sure, the skeletons are different; sure, there are racial differences in drug effectiveness (Bidil for blacks, for example). But don’t you dare cross the line on race and behavior! The only reason races act different is environment!
Well, Nicholas Wade has used the True Scotsman of the New York Times to get it out there, and Charles Murray echoes it in the WSJ to make sure the business conservatives get it.
The next few months will be quite interesting as this book is digested (or not) in the American blogspheres. I look forward to seeing the IREHR and Lewontin and other Science* for the People types try to field this one. This isn’t a shot across the bow; this is cannon fire right into the hull of the ship of Semitical Correctness.