10 Questions with Charles Murray

I hope it was a comment problem that killed my first try at this.

The Bell Curve has been debunked again and again as a piece of scientific racism. The ties between the researchers and the Pioneer Fund alone should have been a sign. Not to mention Stephen Jay Gould's critique in Mismeasure of Man and the statistical flaws identified in their regression analysis.

Why would a conversation with this bigot be worth republishing again?

i know him as a personal acquaintance. he's not a bigot. if he is, so am i, and you should stop reading this weblog.

You have much work to do around these parts, it seems.

And I'm not a virgin, I'm just in a lull! I'm also still cranky about being shot down a few days ago, so watch it or there'll be blood running in the streets soon. D:

The Bell Curve has been debunked again and again as a piece of scientific racism

Too funny.

No worries there. Have fun with your Pioneer Fund buddy.

According to critic Ulric Neisser, who was the chairman of the APA's 1995 taskforce on intelligence research, the Pioneer fund's contribution has overall been "a weak plus".

Neisser gave support for Richard Lynn's argument in a review of Lynn's history and defense of the fund, The Science of Human Diversity: A History of the Pioneer Fund (2004). Though race and intelligence research "turns [his] stomach," Neisser stated that "Lynn's claim is exaggerated but not entirely without merit: 'Over those 60 years, the research funded by Pioneer has helped change the face of social science.'" Neisser concludes, in agreement with Lynn and against William Tucker's critical 2002 book The Funding of Scientific Racism, that the world was ultimately better off having had the Pioneer Fund: "Lynn reminds us that Pioneer has sometimes sponsored useful research - research that otherwise might not have been done at all. By that reckoning, I would give it a weak plus."