Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
milo hobgoblin
New member
"Mismeasure of Man".. by Gould. Horrible book.. which is surprising because I liked his other works.
I was disappointed to see someones personal bias and eglatarian beleifs so obviously affect their "science" but he goes overboard.
His basic arguement that late 19th and early 20th century intelligence testing (if you can even call it that) were horribly flawed so "every measure of IQ" since then must also be flawed.
No one argues that giving people an IQ test fresh off the boat at Ellis island or measuring their cranial size are horribly inaccurate ways to test intelligence.. but that does NOT refute modern IQ testing.
The reality is that once I read the book and went back to "the Bell Curve" the more I found the science in The Bell Curve to be unbiased and straightforward and the more obvious it was that Gould was making a personal attack based on leftists beliefs of egality. All men are NOT created equal and anyone who thinks that is living in a fantasy world..
The reality is that IQ testing VERY accurately portrays how well people will do in their careers with all other factors being the same. He can argue the poitn ll he wants.. but REAL LIFE .. the actual DATA and its end results o not in ANY way agree with his assesment of IQ testing.
Gould attempts to apply all "nurture" and no nature which is criminal considering he was considered a very highly respected paleontologist. Much like your hieght, hair color and yes even skin color Genetics do play a large role in how intelligent you will be.
I will close this by telling you and anyone else who doesnt know this. I spent years reading authors like Gould, Dawkins and their peers as natural history always fascinated me during my years studying Molecular Biology... and this is one of the most biased attempts at science I have yet read.
I was disappointed to see someones personal bias and eglatarian beleifs so obviously affect their "science" but he goes overboard.
His basic arguement that late 19th and early 20th century intelligence testing (if you can even call it that) were horribly flawed so "every measure of IQ" since then must also be flawed.
No one argues that giving people an IQ test fresh off the boat at Ellis island or measuring their cranial size are horribly inaccurate ways to test intelligence.. but that does NOT refute modern IQ testing.
The reality is that once I read the book and went back to "the Bell Curve" the more I found the science in The Bell Curve to be unbiased and straightforward and the more obvious it was that Gould was making a personal attack based on leftists beliefs of egality. All men are NOT created equal and anyone who thinks that is living in a fantasy world..
The reality is that IQ testing VERY accurately portrays how well people will do in their careers with all other factors being the same. He can argue the poitn ll he wants.. but REAL LIFE .. the actual DATA and its end results o not in ANY way agree with his assesment of IQ testing.
Gould attempts to apply all "nurture" and no nature which is criminal considering he was considered a very highly respected paleontologist. Much like your hieght, hair color and yes even skin color Genetics do play a large role in how intelligent you will be.
I will close this by telling you and anyone else who doesnt know this. I spent years reading authors like Gould, Dawkins and their peers as natural history always fascinated me during my years studying Molecular Biology... and this is one of the most biased attempts at science I have yet read.
