Stephen Jay Gould: The mismeasure of man (1992, Penguin)
352 pages
English language
Published Jan. 6, 1992 by Penguin.
The Mismeasure of Man is a 1981 book by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The book is both a history and critique of the statistical methods and cultural motivations underlying biological determinism, the belief that "the social and economic differences between human groups—primarily races, classes, and sexes—arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of biology".Gould argues that the primary assumption underlying biological determinism is that "worth can be assigned to individuals and groups by measuring intelligence as a single quantity". Biological determinism is analyzed in discussions of craniometry and psychological testing, the two principal methods used to measure intelligence as a single quantity. According to Gould, these methods possess two deep fallacies. The first fallacy is reification, which is "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities". Examples of reification include the intelligence quotient (IQ) and the general intelligence factor (g factor), which …
The Mismeasure of Man is a 1981 book by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The book is both a history and critique of the statistical methods and cultural motivations underlying biological determinism, the belief that "the social and economic differences between human groups—primarily races, classes, and sexes—arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of biology".Gould argues that the primary assumption underlying biological determinism is that "worth can be assigned to individuals and groups by measuring intelligence as a single quantity". Biological determinism is analyzed in discussions of craniometry and psychological testing, the two principal methods used to measure intelligence as a single quantity. According to Gould, these methods possess two deep fallacies. The first fallacy is reification, which is "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities". Examples of reification include the intelligence quotient (IQ) and the general intelligence factor (g factor), which have been the cornerstones of much research into human intelligence. The second fallacy is that of "ranking", which is the "propensity for ordering complex variation as a gradual ascending scale".The book received many positive reviews in the literary and popular press, while scientific reception was highly polarized. Positive reviews focused on the book's critique of scientific racism, the concept of general intelligence, and biological determinism, while critics accused Gould of historical inaccuracy, unclear reasoning, or political bias. The Mismeasure of Man won the National Book Critics Circle award. Gould's findings about how 19th-century researcher Samuel George Morton measured skull volumes were particularly controversial, inspiring several studies debating his claims. In 1996, a second edition was released. It included two additional chapters critiquing Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray's book The Bell Curve (1994).
It is difficult for a reasonable reader to finish this book without questioning what they "know" about testing and intelligence.
The edition I have is so old it doesn't even have an ISBN barcode :) so it is pre Bell Curve and I haven't read the additions expressly about that controversy. But the danger is far older than that book, and this is a well-reasoned warning about and response to the abuse of standardized tests to categorize and classify people far beyond what the tests actually measure. It should be obvious stuff, really, in an ideal rational world; but as we humans are it has always been, and still is, tempting both to take shortcuts in trying to understand the world, and to seek out theories that assure us that we are superior to someone else in some way.
Gould may slip from pure scientific reporting into advocacy in places, but I think that's entirely appropriate; this isn't a peer-reviewed scientific paper, and what he is advocating for is rationality …
The edition I have is so old it doesn't even have an ISBN barcode :) so it is pre Bell Curve and I haven't read the additions expressly about that controversy. But the danger is far older than that book, and this is a well-reasoned warning about and response to the abuse of standardized tests to categorize and classify people far beyond what the tests actually measure. It should be obvious stuff, really, in an ideal rational world; but as we humans are it has always been, and still is, tempting both to take shortcuts in trying to understand the world, and to seek out theories that assure us that we are superior to someone else in some way.
Gould may slip from pure scientific reporting into advocacy in places, but I think that's entirely appropriate; this isn't a peer-reviewed scientific paper, and what he is advocating for is rationality and truth and compassion. So yeah...
I started reading this book based a friend's recommendation after a discussion about science and politics. Going into it, I understood it to be two things:
Given the binary option of saying whether I think Gould is successful in achieving his stated goals, I'd have to say yes. I think that, overall, he compellingly argues that some scientists are disingenuous, or even at times outright deceptive, and use scientific knowledge and techniques to draw unwarranted conclusions that bolster their biases and prejudices. He also shows how a scientist who relies on "good" methodology to gather "objective" data can still suffer bias, but that such data can, at least, be re-examined later. ("Objectivity must be …
I started reading this book based a friend's recommendation after a discussion about science and politics. Going into it, I understood it to be two things:
