In the beginning of Chapter 2 of Gould's The Mismeasure of Man he asks two questions of causality. The one which I will concern myself with is: did a priori commitment to ranking fashion the "scientific" questions asked and even the data gathered to support a foreordained conclusion?
Scientists often do have a priori commitment to ranking data in a way that makes a particular datum appear more meaningful than another datum. Gould makes the point that if there was not a reason for ranking these particular races in the first place then the argument which was made from Morton's data set would be irrelevant; however, the entire point of Morton's argument is to show the superiority of the Caucasian race. Although today most rational thinkers could agree that Craniometry and Polygenism are not reasonable in a scientific world. We can logically say that the size of a biological organism's brain is not relevant to the capacity for intellect. Further we can say through extrapolation of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms that man is descended from a common ancestor. If we accept these premises as true then we can say that all humans stand on equal footing in the grounds of intelligence presupposing lack of conflict from precipitating factors. This will not detract from some scientists' desire to rank individuals according to their: I.Q., S.E.S., education per capita, etc.; however, it might allow some of them to visualize the idea that despite advances in statistical methods there will hopefully never again be a reason to ask this question about one race "over" another ever again.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAJ,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your summary of Chapter 2. I found Morton's hypothesis to be completely ludacris, as did most people in our class. Not only did he miscalculate his final answers, he did not consider other facts that could play a role in one's intelligence (i.e. education, social class, etc.). Also, I found it interesting that he classified each ethnicity solely by looking at the skulls of each person. Today, we know that it is nearly impossible to tell the ethnicity of one by looking at their skull. Thus, that lead me to questioning whether or not he even classsified the skulls correctly. Overall, I feel like there were a lot of holes in his research and I find that there may not be a better way to correct and/or complete his research today given the facts.
While it may be difficult to discern one skull from another to the untrained eye, I know a few archaeologists who might disagree that it is impossible to discern race from a skull (as people all have distinct features, some more common to one race or another). Also I believe Morton classified the skulls due to where they were collected. The only places where he may have had some difficulty determining race would likely have been in his Egyptian samples of mixed race. While his data in craniometry does not support his white superiority theory, it does provide us with an interesting view of "old school" science and the average displacement within a person's skull.
DeleteI too hope that statistics will no longer be used as a means to justify racial prejudices. Nevertheless, I feel that we are not out of the woods when it comes to statistics being used as a means of justifying certain types of behaviors towards certain people. It seems that we are somewhat inclined as a species to make orderly rankings of certain things, situations and people. And while it may appear to us that ranking a person based upon their IQ is less offensive than ranking a person based on their race, these two ranking mechanisms are essentially the same. Because IQ tests fail to accurately measure a person's intelligence, they are as flawed as the method of craniometry in attempting to determine intelligence.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't say that IQ testing is quite as flawed as craniometry in determining intelligence. IQ tests normally have problem-solving questions and puzzles that don't necessarily require a stellar educational background. The test certainly isn't perfect, but at least it does measure a specific kind of intelligence in a useful way, that I consider to be a reliable guideline.
DeleteHowever, skull size, even if it was any indicator of intelligence, varies with sex and with the size and stature of the subject. Gould mentioned the unusually small statures of the Peruvians, whose skulls Morton used to determine American Indian intelligence. I also suspect that many of the non-white subjects may have grown up malnourished, underfed, overworked, or otherwise had their growth stunted by environmental influences, giving them proportionately smaller skulls. Morton's disregard for these other possible causes of small skull size means that not only did he assume that intelligence was connected to skull size, but also that race was the only factor in differing skull sizes, making his experiment even more flawed.
I would agree that the entire context in determining something about a person should first be observed. Therefore, I must also say that IQ tests, as neat and precise as they may look and sound, do not accurately measure someone's intelligence comparatively to another individual's. Every individual has their own perception of the world around them. This perception is fostered with the economic, sex, racial, political, cultural and environmental factors that surround the individual. These influences force individuals to solve problems and think critically which may be different from the technique used be someone else. For example, they may have an answer to solving a problem that is different that what is on the test, but from their own experience, it works. The language format is also a major barrier regarding the IQ test, and it was a major problem when it was mandatory for immigrants to take it before becoming U.S. citizens. Each culture has a different perception on situations (such as murdering being morally wrong, contrasting the ideology that murdering is used to portray economic and political strength). I do not think that intelligence of people could ever me accurately measured.
DeleteResponse 2
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete