Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life (A Free Press Paperbacks Book) [Paperback]

First, let us dispose of a misconception: 'The Bell Curve' has not been "widely condemned as junk in scientific journals worldwide" -- rather, it has been so condemned in the tabloid press. A task force set up by the American Psychological Association explicitly to investigate it confirmed its main conclusions*; as did a letter to the Wall Street Journal by fifty-two leading psychometricians, a copy of which can be found on the Net ("Mainstream Science on Intelligence"), also reprinted as an appendix in H.J. Eysenck's Intelligence: A New Look).

For myself, I found this a strange book in some ways; and the reason is that it falls logically into three parts. The first, and by far the largest, covers the available evidence on IQ and heredity. The second and third parts extrapolate present trends to the future (with unpleasant consequences) and make policy recommendations to deal with these. Thus almost by definition these parts are on shakier ground.

- The first section seems to me a very able summary: it defines its terms, states its assumptions, produces its evidence and argues the merits of the various theories purporting to explain it. So there s no need for you to take my word (or anyone's) as to whether the thesis is justified; the evidence and the arguments are both there; if you're capable of rational thought, you should be able to decide for yourself. And this is what I advise you to do.

- The second part, as I mentioned, extrapolates present trends: in particular, the potential stratification of society by intelligence into a hereditary élite and underclass.

Here the authors start to part company with some (at least) of the aforementioned psychometricians. H.J. Eysenck, for instance -- certainly in the 'hereditarian' camp as regards IQ -- writes of an earlier article in 'Atlantic Monthly':

"Here Herrnstein is definitely beginning to run off the rails in his predictions (...) he disregards the importance of regression, the genetic factor which causes children of very bright and very dull parents to regress towards the mean of the whole population (...) [R]egression makes it quite impossible that castes should be created which will breed true -- that is, where the children will have the same IQ as their parents. Within a few generations, the differences in IQ between the children of very bright and very dull parents will have been completely wiped out." (The Inequality of Man, ISBN 0-912736-16-X, pp.213-219)

Richard Lynn, however, disagrees, pointing out that if regression operated in all cases, then dog-breeding, and indeed evolution as a whole, would be impossible.

- The third part, making policy recommendations, is well outside my area of competence; so I offer no comment.

There is, however, another misconception to rebut, and that is that the new edition of Stephen Jay Gould's The Mismeasure of Man has anything to contribute to a productive discussion.

Gould's writing certainly has many admirable qualities, but honesty and scientific impartiality are not conspicuous among them -- for specifics, see (for example) Chapter 3 of John L. Casti's Paradigms Lost (ISBN 0-380-71165-6). Or see J. Philippe Rushton's review of 'Mismeasure', or Arthur Jensen's review, both of which you can find on the Web.

I've been following the debate over IQ for 40 years, and 'The Mismeasure of Man' has more factual errors per page than any book I've ever read.

For a critical but still rational review of Herrnstein & Murray, I suggest Thomas Sowell's from 'American Spectator,' which can also be found on the Web ('Ethnicity and IQ').

If you want a balanced account of the IQ field, try Intelligence: The Battle for the Mind, half of which is written by H.J. Eysenck and half by Leon Kamin, with a final rejoinder from each. The best summary I'm aware of remains, despite its age, H.J. Eysenck's The IQ Argument (Race, Intelligence and Education in the U.K.); but good luck getting hold of it!

------------
*Update: I should have said that although the APA report could not (or at least did not) explicitly rebut any of Herrnstein & Murray's data, or their logic, it refused to endorse their conclusions.

For a more detailed factual account of the tactics of Gould et al, I recommend Ullica Segerstråle's Defenders of the Truth, although I'm not sure I'm convinced by her psychological diagnosis.

When this book was first published I read quite a few "reviews" of the book and attacks on Charles Murray in the media. Having read the book, it seemed to me that none of the people attacking it or its author had actually read it. It's clear that many of the people reviewing this book here haven't read it either.

Contrary to what you may have heard, The Bell Curve is not some sort of racist polemic. It has one chapter, out of twenty-odd, on the subject of race and IQ and the discussion in that chapter is backed up by solid data and hedged with the usual ifs and buts that psychologists always bring up whan discussing IQ.

So what is the book actually about? Well, the authors' thesis is that as life has become both more mobile (e.g. greater equality of opportunity) than in the past, the intelligent and well educated people end up at the top of society and the less intelligent and well-educated at the bottom. This has led to problems for those at the bottom. I could elaborate, but you can read the book for yourself.

I was not 100% convinced by the authors' views on IQ, and their analysis of American society didn't address the fact that the USA is one of the most economically unequal societies in the world. Also, I think they could have been rather MORE daring sometimes, but I guess they were trying hard not to offend anyone. Nevertheless, the authors' deserve praise for raising some original questions and trying to address controversial topics in a mature way.

Anyone in the UK who enjoyed the book might also like 'Mind the Gap' by Ferdinand Mount, which is not about IQ but also addresses the problem of the widening gap between rich and poor, specifically in Britain.

Lest it be misunderstood and I fear that is precisely what the critics of this book are doing, the whole point of Bell Curve is to show how important it is to treat people as individuals, not groups. However, this group-specific treatment is precisely what is happening in the current multicultural American educational system. The point is that because different groups (ethnic, racial etc.) perform differently in different subjects, we should not insist on quotas and precentages to be met in any area of public life. This is, in my opinion, the correct reading of the book and the lesson to be derived from it. Naturally, those who wish to use this book in order to gain from it ammunition for their racist thinking will do so, but they are doing harm to serious scholarly research.