In Race Evolution and Behavior Professor J. Philippe Rushton provides impressive scientific evidence in favor of race realism.
Race realism makes the following assertions about race. First, race is an important biological category of humans.
Second, the races differ significantly in average characteristics necessary to the creation and maintenance of successful societies and civilizations.
Third, average racial differences in performance and behavior are the result of thousands of years of evolution in response to different population pressures.
An abridgment of the book may be found here.
http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm
I have purchased a hard copy of the abridged edition, which is virtually the same as the online essay.
The pdf of the third edition, which is much longer, can be found here:
https://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Race-Evolution-and-Behavior-ocr.pdf
I have read the online edition of the longer edition of Race, Evolution, and Behavior. I have had trouble buying a hard copy of it. I prefer a physical book that I can read in my easy chair, underline stuff, and write notes in the margins.
What is called “race realism” was the scientific and political consensus before the Second World War. Following that War revelations of the Holocaust made many people want to believe that race differences did not matter or that they did not exist.
This is ironic because the Holocaust was directed at the most accomplished 0.2% of the human population. Professor Rushton acknowledges the higher average intelligence of Ashkenazi Jews.
Race, Intelligence, and the Brain: The Errors and Omissions of the Revised Edition of S. J. Gould's The Mismeasure of Man (1996)
For years I had thought that as the Holocaust faded as a living memory it would be possible to have a rational and civil discussion of intrinsic, average racial differences. Nevertheless, as genetic and sociological evidence accumulates to substantiate race realism, efforts to suppress this evidence increase too.
Professor Rushton divides races into those he calls “Orientals” (AKA, East Asians). These are Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese. I would add Vietnamese. Then there are whites. These are Caucasians who live in Europe, or who are descended from people who did. Finally, there are Negroes. This is the race that evolved in sub Saharan Africa. Professor Rushton recognizes that all humans do not fit into one of these races, but most humans do.
Harvard Professor Richard Lewontin has popularized the belief that “Race is only a social construct.”
In his response, Charles Murray, who can also be called a race realist, mentions an interesting experiment in his essay “The Inequality Taboo.”
3,636 people were asked to identify themselves by race. Then they were asked to donate a tissue sample for DNA testing. Finally, their tissue samples were analyzed by scientists who did not know what races the donors said they belonged to. The donors and the testers agreed 99.9 percent of the time. This experiment has been duplicated several times with different groups of people, and the same results.
http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf
Anyone who has had extensive experience with Orientals, whites, and Negroes has probably noticed that they differ in average intelligence and behavior.
SAT and ACT Scores by Race/Ethnicity
www.ceousa.org
Professor Rushton explains these differences by drawing attention to different population pressures lasting for thousands of years. In sub Saharan Africa there was no defense against lethal diseases. These killed randomly. Nevertheless, food was plentiful, because disease and inter tribal warfare kept the population low. The best reproductive strategy for men and women was to have many children by several different partners, with the expectation that several children would survive the diseases. Several different partners would increase the likelihood that some of the children would have more natural resistances to the diseases than other children.
When some humans migrated out of Africa – Professor Rushton claims this happened about 100,000 years ago; others estimate a more recent migration, perhaps 60,000 years ago – and when they moved to colder climates they found different population pressures. Disease was less of a problem, but finding enough food was more of a problem. People had to build warm clothes and habitations and to store food for the winter months. This took more intelligence. Women could not do this alone; they needed the help of a man.
Thus, it made sense to have a small number of children, and to raise them carefully. Because Orientals evolved in a slightly colder climate than whites, this made more sense for them than whites. Again the attentive observer has probably noticed that Orientals tend to be more intelligent and monogamous than whites.
These behavioral differences continue to characterize Orientals, whites, and Negroes, even when they share countries and environments. This is because instincts that took thousands of years to evolve continue to influence behavior.
Professor Rushton is usually careful to write in terms of averages and tendencies, rather than consistent differences. He recognizes that there are intelligent, monogamous, and law abiding Negroes, just as there are stupid, promiscuous Oriental criminals.
The major shortcoming of Race Evolution and Behavior is that Professor Rushton ignores the evolutionary effect of civilization. He claims that cold climates select against physical aggression. Anyone who agrees has never studied the history of the Huns, the Vikings, and the Mongols.
In “The Roman State and Genetic Pacification,” Professor Peter Frost, and in “Western Europe, State Formation, and Genetic Pacification,” Professor’s Peter Frost and Henry Harpending argue that civilization, rather than cold climates, selects genetically against physical aggression.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230796751_The_Roman_State_and_Genetic_Pacification
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/147470491501300114
They point out that until fairly recently in civilized countries criminals were usually killed at the scene of the crime, they died in custody, or they were executed. There was no effort at rehabilitation. It is rarely effective. The few children some criminals had rarely lived to adulthood.
In a tribal environment all men fight in the wars. The best warriors have more than one wife, and consequently more sons who inherit their violent inclinations and abilities. Men are expected to avenge wrongs done to them, their relatives and their friends. Women usually refuse to become involved with men who do not do this.
In a civilization the military is one of several specialties a man may adopt. Enlisted men often find it difficult to raise families.
Most men are never in combat. The government has the effective monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. The government punishes wrongs done to oneself, one’s relatives, and one’s friends.
Consequently, a tribal environment selects genetically for physical aggression; a civilization selects genetically for peaceful behavior.
Professor Rushton acknowledges that race realism resembles Nazi theories. He points out that theories of human nature opposite to race realism resemble Communist theories, and that Communist governments have killed lots of people too.
Race realism makes the following assertions about race. First, race is an important biological category of humans.
Second, the races differ significantly in average characteristics necessary to the creation and maintenance of successful societies and civilizations.
Third, average racial differences in performance and behavior are the result of thousands of years of evolution in response to different population pressures.
An abridgment of the book may be found here.
http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm
I have purchased a hard copy of the abridged edition, which is virtually the same as the online essay.
The pdf of the third edition, which is much longer, can be found here:
https://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Race-Evolution-and-Behavior-ocr.pdf
I have read the online edition of the longer edition of Race, Evolution, and Behavior. I have had trouble buying a hard copy of it. I prefer a physical book that I can read in my easy chair, underline stuff, and write notes in the margins.
What is called “race realism” was the scientific and political consensus before the Second World War. Following that War revelations of the Holocaust made many people want to believe that race differences did not matter or that they did not exist.
This is ironic because the Holocaust was directed at the most accomplished 0.2% of the human population. Professor Rushton acknowledges the higher average intelligence of Ashkenazi Jews.
Race, Intelligence, and the Brain: The Errors and Omissions of the Revised Edition of S. J. Gould's The Mismeasure of Man (1996)
For years I had thought that as the Holocaust faded as a living memory it would be possible to have a rational and civil discussion of intrinsic, average racial differences. Nevertheless, as genetic and sociological evidence accumulates to substantiate race realism, efforts to suppress this evidence increase too.
Professor Rushton divides races into those he calls “Orientals” (AKA, East Asians). These are Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese. I would add Vietnamese. Then there are whites. These are Caucasians who live in Europe, or who are descended from people who did. Finally, there are Negroes. This is the race that evolved in sub Saharan Africa. Professor Rushton recognizes that all humans do not fit into one of these races, but most humans do.
Harvard Professor Richard Lewontin has popularized the belief that “Race is only a social construct.”
In his response, Charles Murray, who can also be called a race realist, mentions an interesting experiment in his essay “The Inequality Taboo.”
3,636 people were asked to identify themselves by race. Then they were asked to donate a tissue sample for DNA testing. Finally, their tissue samples were analyzed by scientists who did not know what races the donors said they belonged to. The donors and the testers agreed 99.9 percent of the time. This experiment has been duplicated several times with different groups of people, and the same results.
http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf
Anyone who has had extensive experience with Orientals, whites, and Negroes has probably noticed that they differ in average intelligence and behavior.
SAT and ACT Scores by Race/Ethnicity
Percentage of Births to Unmarried Women | Center for Equal Opportunity
www.ceousa.org
Professor Rushton explains these differences by drawing attention to different population pressures lasting for thousands of years. In sub Saharan Africa there was no defense against lethal diseases. These killed randomly. Nevertheless, food was plentiful, because disease and inter tribal warfare kept the population low. The best reproductive strategy for men and women was to have many children by several different partners, with the expectation that several children would survive the diseases. Several different partners would increase the likelihood that some of the children would have more natural resistances to the diseases than other children.
When some humans migrated out of Africa – Professor Rushton claims this happened about 100,000 years ago; others estimate a more recent migration, perhaps 60,000 years ago – and when they moved to colder climates they found different population pressures. Disease was less of a problem, but finding enough food was more of a problem. People had to build warm clothes and habitations and to store food for the winter months. This took more intelligence. Women could not do this alone; they needed the help of a man.
Thus, it made sense to have a small number of children, and to raise them carefully. Because Orientals evolved in a slightly colder climate than whites, this made more sense for them than whites. Again the attentive observer has probably noticed that Orientals tend to be more intelligent and monogamous than whites.
These behavioral differences continue to characterize Orientals, whites, and Negroes, even when they share countries and environments. This is because instincts that took thousands of years to evolve continue to influence behavior.
Professor Rushton is usually careful to write in terms of averages and tendencies, rather than consistent differences. He recognizes that there are intelligent, monogamous, and law abiding Negroes, just as there are stupid, promiscuous Oriental criminals.
The major shortcoming of Race Evolution and Behavior is that Professor Rushton ignores the evolutionary effect of civilization. He claims that cold climates select against physical aggression. Anyone who agrees has never studied the history of the Huns, the Vikings, and the Mongols.
In “The Roman State and Genetic Pacification,” Professor Peter Frost, and in “Western Europe, State Formation, and Genetic Pacification,” Professor’s Peter Frost and Henry Harpending argue that civilization, rather than cold climates, selects genetically against physical aggression.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230796751_The_Roman_State_and_Genetic_Pacification
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/147470491501300114
They point out that until fairly recently in civilized countries criminals were usually killed at the scene of the crime, they died in custody, or they were executed. There was no effort at rehabilitation. It is rarely effective. The few children some criminals had rarely lived to adulthood.
In a tribal environment all men fight in the wars. The best warriors have more than one wife, and consequently more sons who inherit their violent inclinations and abilities. Men are expected to avenge wrongs done to them, their relatives and their friends. Women usually refuse to become involved with men who do not do this.
In a civilization the military is one of several specialties a man may adopt. Enlisted men often find it difficult to raise families.
Most men are never in combat. The government has the effective monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. The government punishes wrongs done to oneself, one’s relatives, and one’s friends.
Consequently, a tribal environment selects genetically for physical aggression; a civilization selects genetically for peaceful behavior.
Professor Rushton acknowledges that race realism resembles Nazi theories. He points out that theories of human nature opposite to race realism resemble Communist theories, and that Communist governments have killed lots of people too.
