English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Was this book scientifically valid? Were the people that wrote this book found to have a lack of credibility? Even if the research was valid, is it our duty to attack such a book?

2007-05-25 23:38:07 · 4 answers · asked by pomosimulacrum 2 in Social Science Sociology

4 answers

Yes, unfortunately, there was such a book. No, the science was not valid. Among other problems, which are mentioned at the Wikipedia entry for the book, is that intelligence is not as simple as people make it out to be. The IQ tests are notably biased, and intelligence is not always a simple matter of smart mom/smart dad equals smart baby. Yes, that often happens, but it also often happens that a normal family will produce a genius.

Studies show that it's not just genetics that determines intelligence; it's also opportunity, wealth (which equals opportunity), parental involvement and encouragement, and nutrition. We can easily see why minorities might often test lower from this- they often are in a lower economic bracket. Think of it- your average poor black child won't have access to a home computer, won't go to a really good public school, and may not be getting the nutrition necessary for proper brain development. How can that kid compare with the rich white kid with her own computer, the best preschools, private schools, and tutors, and plenty of stimulating extracurricular activities?

If the research was valid, it would warrant more study, to see what, precisely the differences were and how large they were. As it was, that's not even a question.

2007-05-26 02:23:38 · answer #1 · answered by random6x7 6 · 0 0

I wasent aware there was a difference in intelligence between whites and blacks. There was a certain science related to geneology ( I cant remember the name at the moment) populer in the 1930s into late 1950's which held that rascism could be justified through science. The modern scientific world have given up that dogma though, its behind the times.

2007-05-25 23:49:58 · answer #2 · answered by richard p 2 · 1 0

Basically, the "science" was flawed. IQ test in general are flawed. Yes, most people here in America do alright on the standard versions, but what if you had never gone to school? What if your whole childhood consisted of fixing mechanical things, or growing crops? In your Field of study, you would probably excel, but have you ever seen an I.Q. test that ask when cotton should be planted, or how to fix a tractor? If they did ask these questions most "normal" people would do poorly, but "ignorant" farmers and mechanics would be deemed highly intelligent!!

2007-05-26 02:08:19 · answer #3 · answered by jenn_a 5 · 2 0

yes, there was and it was flawed big TIME

2007-05-26 08:17:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers