38171Re: Dangerous Consequences Fallacy
- Sep 16, 2005An interesting story that I think reveals volumes:It is now possible using genetic markers to do much better than classify people as "black," "white" or "Asian." The method for doing so is implied in the studies using genetic markers, with the most recent being Tang, H., et al. (2005). "Genetic structure, self-identified race/ethnicity, and confounding in case-control association studies." American Journal of Human Genetics, 76, 268–275.The next step seems obvious: take a large sample of racially diverse people, give them a good IQ test, and then use genetic markers to create a variable that no longer classifies people as “white” or “black,” but along a continuum. Analyze the variation in IQ scores according to that continuum.And so I emailed some scholars on both sides of the IQ/race debate, suggesting that they jointly design and conduct such a study. I told them I would undertake to find someone to fund the study. It would be easy to find such a funder, but only if scholars from both sides were on board (otherwise, the funder would fear being called racist). I don't think I'm betraying a confidence when I say that Jensen and Rushton were enthusiastically in favor. Those on the other side, whom I will not name, declined.So the racialists are raring to go, Mr. Naff. Are you willing to join up?Charles MurrayClay Farris Naff wrote:
Meantime, despite their pious disavowals of racism, the racialists'
scholarship, which ought properly to address fine-grained,
scientifically defined subpopulations, instead feeds the ancient
fires of racial hatred (and, not coincidentally, the political
agenda of some of its funders).
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>