tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-59324506101124457.post3539543511071785810..comments2024-03-24T21:06:57.039-07:00Comments on FOUSESQUAWK: Charles Murray at VillanovaGary Fousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17014739065121483409noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-59324506101124457.post-51260550775175960252017-04-07T19:50:34.685-07:002017-04-07T19:50:34.685-07:00For many years I did not bother to read Murray'...For many years I did not bother to read Murray's best known work, <i>The Bell Curve</i>. But, when I submitted my first draft of an article on racism for a soon to be published reference work, it was returned by the editors with a request to discuss Murray, and his fellow author, Herrnstein's work. So, perforce, I had to read the book, because otherwise, I could not say anything useful about it. I found that Murray's argument was weakly built on a series of dubious inferences, but he did not adhere to traditional tenets of racism or white supremacy. Most telling, he freely admitted that there were black geniuses and white morons. He did assert that the aggregate IQ curves for the "white" population and the "black" population were noticeably different, with the "white" curve shifted toward nigher intelligence. He assumed that IQ was a reliable measurement of intelligence. I have a personal doubt about that, since my IQ was measured as anywhere from 70 to 140 in four tests administered when I was attending public schools. He argued that higher IQ is associated with greater success in college admissions, hiring and lifetime income... but while this could mean it measures greater ability, it could also reflect that colleges and employers give considerable weight in making decisions to standardized tests. He certainly appeared from his writing to be a man you could sit down and have a good argument with -- even while sharing a beer, if you drink such.Siarlys Jenkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15083839117838391267noreply@blogger.com