JBeukema
Rookie
- Banned
- #41
Ugh. Not to be a snob, but I really have a hard time accepting a scientific work that isn't peer reviewed journal work.
They cite a number of peer-reviewed studies and are respected persons in their fields.
In fairness, I feel the same way about Dawkins' attempts to dispute the existence of God through evolutionary science.
I've never heard Dawkins claim he disproved the existence of the supernatural; he merely refuted the claims of creationists.
Neither the nature versus nurture concept, nor the idea that cultural differences can affect IQ test scores, are given adequate weight, particularly when IQ is used as a surrogate for actual intelligence.
[/QUOTE]The Berkeley Science Review: ArticlesThe suggestion that intelligence, behavior, and physical traits are determined by a persons race is more likely to help perpetuate racism than to end it.
The never make that claim in the book. The point out the evidence that IQ
A) appears to be ~50% inheritable based on available evidence
B) [the average IQ] differs between the major races, with a large degree of poverlap in the scores of members of different races
C)Is an imperfect measure on intelligence and potential
The reviewer has misrepresented the book and the words of the authors.