Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!uknet!festival!castle.ed.ac.uk!cam
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Subject: Re: RACE and IQ 
References: <Pine.SOL.3.90.941026002730.9817D-100000@cslab5c> <CyKHDG.Fnr@festival.ed.ac.uk> <CyL27G.ty@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <CynMHo.4J4@festival.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: news@festival.ed.ac.uk (remote news read deamon)
Organization: University of Edinburgh
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 19:08:11 GMT
Lines: 49

In article <CyL27G.ty@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> ira@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ira Woodhead) writes:
>In article <CyKHDG.Fnr@festival.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
>>A lot of people seem very upset at the very idea that there might be
>>differences in mental capability between races.

>They aren't upset by the idea, they just have no use for it since it
>is inherently inflammatory and unjustifiable.

This seems rather confused. First, if it is inherently inflammatory
then they must be upset by it. But you say they are not upset by it.
In which case it can't be inherently inflammatory. Second, it is
rather begging the question to reply to my justification of the
existence of a difference by saying it is unjustifiable.

>>....it would be rather surprising if despite
>>all these physiological differences that they turned out to have
>>identical mental capabilities. Just as surprising as if men and women
>>turned out to have identical mental capabilities despite all their
>>physiological differences.

>Just to clarify your status as flamebait: Are you saying it is a
>worthwhile endeavor to look into possible differences of intelligence
>between races, and even between sexes?

I'm completely unconcerned about the worthwhileness of the endeavour,
but when considering questions of scientific research I've always
regarded the curiosity of an individual scientist to be at least as
good a guide to "worthwhileness" as any more utilitarian measure; and
this clearly excites curiosity.

What I am interested in, is that given the extreme unlikelihood that
there are no differences, why are so many people so upset by the idea
that there might be? Nobody seems to be much upset about whether there
are differences in disease susceptibility, height, weight, etc., and
seem quite content to let research uncover the details and supply the
answers.

Note too that even the most extreme of the claimed differences in
average IQ falls far enough within the variation between individuals
as to be of no utility in making judgements about individuals.

So what is all the fuss about?

That's my question.
-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh          +44 (0)31 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
"The mind reigns, but does not govern" -- Paul Valery
