Predictions about race & intelligence

richley crapo (RCRAPO@WPO.HASS.USU.EDU)
Wed, 2 Nov 1994 11:29:25 -0700

It seems to me that Rushton pulled a bit of flimflam
in shifting from his macro-level discussion of
supposed intelligence differences among the
"three races" to a prediction about the future of
China vs. Kenya (subpopulations within his racial
categories) and space exploration. Wouldn't a
more appropriate prediction from his arguement
be that the Oriental race should have invented the
space program and be currently at its forefront?

If Rushton's interpretation of the significance of
racial differences in brain-size was anything but
flummery, he surely wouldn't expect the
intellectually mediocre "race" to have beaten the
biggest-brained group to the moon, would he? If
Rushton had kept his predicting on the racial level
instead of shifting to the lower categories of
countries, his approach would have difficulty with
explaining a host of facts it would never have
predicted, including the political and economic
dominance of the West. After all, if brain size does
predict "success", why don't we use an Oriental
loanword for "superpower"?

On the other hand, maybe brain size really isn't a
good basis for such predictions. But if it isn't, why
does Rushton use the invidious comparison of
Kenya versus China to support his racialist
assertions? After all, he does claim that he
accepts a 50-50 view of the roles of culture and
biology. The bottom line is that in spite of his claim
to a balanced view, he has tremendous blinders
that let him see "racial" differences in "success"
when examples fit his ranking of the "races" and
do not do so when they do not.