DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | Students for a Democratic Society, Herrnstein lecture, February-June, 1972 | 1972-02-24 Daily Iowan Letter to the Editor: 'Criticizes Herrnstein teach-in'

Transcribe
Translate

Students for a Democratic Society, Herrnstein lecture, February-June, 1972

1972-02-24 Daily Iowan Letter to the Editor: 'Criticizes Herrnstein teach-in'

DI
2/24/72

Criticizes Herrnstein teach-in

To the editor:
   At the "Teach-In on Racist Ideology" on Monday night, discussion ranged from air pollution in the ghettoes to maltreatment of state hospital patients to the sterilization bill now before the Indiana legislature. No action was proposed to deal with these issues. Instead, an attempt was made to set up Richard Herrnstein, woh is to speak on campus this Friday, as a symbol of American racism, and as the recipient of all the wrath we feel toward a wide variety of injustices.
   Many of those at the meeting had not read the Atlantic article for which Herrnstein is being attacked. Perhaps they wanted to but couldn't: some usually serious student has mutilated the shelf copy in the University Library. Nor did the sponsors of the meeting see fit to distribute even an abridgement of the article. To do so might have been embarrassing to their invited panel, who claimed that the article said many things which it did not.
   Herrnstein's paper is divided into four parts. The first part surveys the history of intelligence testing, and speculates inconclusively about the nature of IQ. The second part points out that there is a correlation between IQ and type of job-for  instance, accountants usually (though not always) have higher IQ's than bakers. Something important (besides an income gap) follows from this: because the high IQ jobs are in general the most prestigious, there is also a correlation between IQ and social status.
   In a third section, Herrnstein takes up the question of whether IQ is determined by heredity or environment. He is a heredity man. Particularly telling, in his view, are a number of studies done on identical twins, who have exactly the same genetic makeup-in other words, exactly the same heredity. His evidence, like all evidence, is arguable, but at least it is evidence, unlike the unsupported assertions which were leveled against it on Monday night.
   It is especially important to note that Herrnstein is writing about the heritability of intelligence in whites-not blacks. He specifically and carefully points out that "80 to 85 percent of the variation in I.Q. among whites is due to genes. Because we do not know the heritability for I.Q. among blacks, we cannot make a comparable statement about them...Although there are scraps of evidence for a genetic component in the black-white difference, the overwhelming case is for believing that American blacks have been at an environmental disadvantage. To the extent that variations in the American social environment can promote or retard I.Q., blacks have probably been held back. But a neutral commentator (a rarity these days) would have to say that the case is simply not settled, given our present stage of knowledge." 
   In his fourth and final section, Herrnstein states his conclusions. I found these unconvincing, though in no way racist or (Herrnstein has been called everything in the book) fascist. It is his view that, as social and economic barriers fall and our society becomes increasingly a "meritocracy," intelligence will play an ever increasing role in determining employability and social standing. Because intelligence is heritable, employability and social standing will tend to run in families even more than they do now. As Herrnstein puts it, "By removing arbitrary barriers between classes, society has encouraged the creation of biological barriers."
   In terms of the present controversy, what is most important of all is that Herrnstein thoroughly deplores the future he foresees, which, he writes, "reminds us of the world we had hoped to leave behind-aristocracies, privileged classes, unfair advantages and disadvantages of birth."
   Herrnstein's article, in short, may be less than brilliant, but it is not racist. You can find this out for yourself the same way I did. Ask at the Circulation Desk, and they will give you their reserve copy for you to Xerox-unless the reserve copy has by now gone the way of the shelf copy.
   The hard-working people who organized Monday's meeting would like to prevent Herrnstein from speaking. They are trying, unjustly, to set him up as a symbol of racism, sexism, imperialism, and fascism.
   Other letters in this column have defended Hernstein's freedom to speak and students' freedom to listen. The purpose of this letter is to point out one more reason why Herrnstein should not be attacked or heckled during his visit here: namely, that he never wrote what some people want you to believe he wrote. Please don't object to his visit unless and until you have ready the Atlantic article. It provides no basis for attacking Herrnstein as a symbol of everything that is wrong with American.

Jonathan Penner
404 Sixth Street
Coralville

Saving...

DI 2/24/72 Criticizes Herrnstein teach-in To the editor: At the "Teach-In on Racist Ideology" on Monday night, discussion ranged from air pollution in the ghettoes to maltreatment of state hospital patients to the sterilization bill now before the Indiana legislature. No action was proposed to deal with these issues. Instead, an attempt was made to set up Richard Herrnstein, woh is to speak on campus this Friday, as a symbol of American racism, and as the recipient of all the wrath we feel toward a wide variety of injustices. Many of those at the meeting had not read the Atlantic article for which Herrnstein is being attacked. Perhaps they wanted to but couldn't: some usually serious student has mutilated the shelf copy in the University Library. Nor did the sponsors of the meeting see fit to distribute even an abridgement of the article. To do so might have been embarrassing to their invited panel, who claimed that the article said many things which it did not. Herrnstein's paper is divided into four parts. The first part surveys the history of intelligence testing, and speculates inconclusively about the nature of IQ. The second part points out that there is a correlation between IQ and type of job-for instance, accountants usually (though not always) have higher IQ's than bakers. Something important (besides an income gap) follows from this: because the high IQ jobs are in general the most prestigious, there is also a correlation between IQ and social status. In a third section, Herrnstein takes up the question of whether IQ is determined by heredity or environment. He is a heredity man. Particularly telling, in his view, are a number of studies done on identical twins, who have exactly the same genetic makeup-in other words, exactly the same heredity. His evidence, like all evidence, is arguable, but at least it is evidence, unlike the unsupported assertions which were leveled against it on Monday night. It is especially important to note that Herrnstein is writing about the heritability of intelligence in whites-not blacks. He specifically and carefully points out that "80 to 85 percent of the variation in I.Q. among whites is due to genes. Because we do not know the heritability for I.Q. among blacks, we cannot make a comparable statement about them...Although there are scraps of evidence for a genetic component in the black-white difference, the overwhelming case is for believing that American blacks have been at an environmental disadvantage. To the extent that variations in the American social environment can promote or retard I.Q., blacks have probably been held back. But a neutral commentator (a rarity these days) would have to say that the case is simply not settled, given our present stage of knowledge." In his fourth and final section, Herrnstein states his conclusions. I found these unconvincing, though in no way racist or (Herrnstein has been called everything in the book) fascist. It is his view that, as social and economic barriers fall and our society becomes increasingly a "meritocracy," intelligence will play an ever increasing role in determining employability and social standing. Because intelligence is heritable, employability and social standing will tend to run in families even more than they do now. As Herrnstein puts it, "By removing arbitrary barriers between classes, society has encouraged the creation of biological barriers." In terms of the present controversy, what is most important of all is that Herrnstein thoroughly deplores the future he foresees, which, he writes, "reminds us of the world we had hoped to leave behind-aristocracies, privileged classes, unfair advantages and disadvantages of birth." Herrnstein's article, in short, may be less than brilliant, but it is not racist. You can find this out for yourself the same way I did. Ask at the Circulation Desk, and they will give you their reserve copy for you to Xerox-unless the reserve copy has by now gone the way of the shelf copy. The hard-working people who organized Monday's meeting would like to prevent Herrnstein from speaking. They are trying, unjustly, to set him up as a symbol of racism, sexism, imperialism, and fascism. Other letters in this column have defended Hernstein's freedom to speak and students' freedom to listen. The purpose of this letter is to point out one more reason why Herrnstein should not be attacked or heckled during his visit here: namely, that he never wrote what some people want you to believe he wrote. Please don't object to his visit unless and until you have ready the Atlantic article. It provides no basis for attacking Herrnstein as a symbol of everything that is wrong with American. Jonathan Penner 404 Sixth Street Coralville