Penn Museum, Philadelphia
Janet Monge of the Penn Museum examines some of the Morton collection skulls with her colleague, Alan Mann.
Posted on 06/14/2011 5:37:13 AM PDT by Pharmboy
Penn Museum, Philadelphia
Janet Monge of the Penn Museum examines some of the Morton collection skulls with her colleague, Alan Mann.
Scientists have often been accused of letting their ideology influence their results, and one of the most famous cases is that of Morton’s skulls — the global collection amassed by the 19th-century physical anthropologist Samuel George Morton.
In a 1981 book, “The Mismeasure of Man,” the paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould asserted that Morton, believing that brain size was a measure of intelligence, had subconsciously manipulated the brain volumes of European, Asian and African skulls to favor his bias that Europeans had larger brains and Africans smaller ones.
But now physical anthropologists at the University of Pennsylvania, which owns Morton’s collection, have remeasured the skulls, and in an article that does little to burnish Dr. Gould’s reputation as a scholar, they conclude that almost every detail of his analysis is wrong.
....
“These results falsify the claim that Morton physically mismeasured crania based on his a priori biases,” the Pennsylvania team writes.
Dr. Gould did not measure any of the skulls himself but merely did a paper reanalysis of Morton’s results...
But Dr. Gould himself omitted subgroups in his own reanalysis, and made various errors in his calculations. ...
But Ralph L. Holloway, an expert on human evolution at Columbia and a co-author of the new study, was less willing to give Dr. Gould benefit of the doubt.
“I just didn’t trust Gould,” he said... I just felt he was a charlatan.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Your humble poster met Gould for a beer back in the 1980s and debated him about intelligence; after hearing what I had to say, (which included my summary statement, "Stephen, you mean to tell me that as a biologist you believe that genes have a negligible effect on the highest of all neural functions, human intelligence?)the Harvard genius could only say to me : "You're too genetically driven."
I wish he were alive to see his "science" trashed.
RIP indeed, professor.
Kudos to the Times and Nick Wade for publishing this...it must have hurt. Ping...
So, racists use evolution as justification...
Not that we haven’t known this already.
I’m surprised the new theories don’t suggest that white middle aged heterosexual males are less than human. I mean, we’re just the despised net tax payers, and not allowed equal rights to all the protected categories.
I see Global Warming and Evolution as similar types of science. That is, they aren't science. They are ideologies. The evidence is manipulated to fit the theory, alternate views are shouted down, and the money flows in one direction.
it is racist, to do accurate measurements?
paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould was the racist who falsified data.
you can believe what you wish for cause. but measurements are measurements, and facts are facts.
just as you can postulate your own cause, for the facts in the research in “The Bell Curve”, and “IQ and the Wealth of Nations”.
Thomas Sowell, one of the most brilliant men in this country (and who is much more intelligent than me), understands this.
Do you understand that the conclusions from your measurements are based on an assumption,
and that there might be another assumption that fits the measurements just as well?
I find it amusing when people are so blinded as to not even see that they are making assumptions, observing data through those assumptions, then using their observations to state that their assumptions are proven because of the data.
I am unaware of any proven direct correlation between physical brain size and IQ, at least in individuals.
Might be different in large groups such as ethnies or “races.”
Recently picked up “The Bell Curve” at a garage sale. Remembered hearing about it in the 90s, mostly the criticisms. I thought it was a racist document.
Imagine my surprise to find out it is a highly compassionate attempt to address our society’s abandonment of those who are “less bright.” It addresses race and IQ not as a primary concern of the authors, but rather because they were too intellectually honest to ignore the implications of disparity in average IQ between racial groups.
I was especially impressed by their final chapters, where they discuss how society might be adjusted to make life less difficult for the less bright. Don’t agree with everything they said, but at least they showed how the increasing complexity and ambiguity of our society might be handled just fine by those with above average IQ, but is utterly devastating with those who are below average.
I have since tracked down a number of the book’s critiques. They pretty much ignore the authors’ evidence and conclusions and concentrate on denigrating them as “bad people.”
Very sad. The problems they discuss have just gotten worse, but we can’t even talk about what they are or possible solutions.
We don’t have a “raciest” problem ... we have a RACIAL problem.
Agreed.
We have people who gain and maintain power, and the money of the taxpayer, by keeping racial issues alive.
And, seriously, even if you accept the concept of “race”, that’s not what the disparities in outcome are the result of - it’s culture. People of any “race” with a good work ethic and no entitlement mentality are going to succeed.
“Gould asserted that Morton, believing that brain size was a measure of intelligence, had subconsciously manipulated the brain volumes of European, Asian and African skulls”
Perhaps you didn’t realize that Gould could read Morton’s mind as well as his paper.
“Gould asserted that Morton, believing that brain size was a measure of intelligence, had subconsciously manipulated the brain volumes of European, Asian and African skulls”
Perhaps you didn’t realize that Gould could read Morton’s mind as well as his paper.
During his lifetime, Gould constantly distorted, lied and bullied his way through his arguments about intelligence. Very few took him on. As a matter of fact, the Times provided fawning portraits of him.
Gould was a wonderful writer. Unfortunately he was a lousy scientist who put his political agenda before facts. I feel the same way about him as you do.
You underestimate liberal perfidy. If they could cook up a theory that white middle aged heterosexual males had superior brains, they could have institute permanent handicapping in order for society to be fair and maintain equality in the law.
Yes...he was a gifted writer, but his baseball analogies grew tiresome. Further, I often got the feeling that he was too driven to show how smart he was rather than to shed light. Sort of the science writer's William Safire, another pedant.
I think this discussion should be limited to the skell of the skull and not generalizations about intelligence.
As far as I can tell, Morton did believe in the intellectual superiority of whites. Whites versus Asians, for instance. Nuff said.
Looks like what Gould got wrong was his claim that Morton used cranial volume to support the contention of white intellectual superiority.
Using the guys own numbers, when you separated out the sexes, African males were at the top, and African females at the bottom in skull size (which was used as a proxy for intelligence).
No, Gould didn't remeasure the skulls volumetric capacity - he just pointed out that if you separate out the sexes the guys entire argument evaporates - or suggests that African men are naturally the top in intelligence because they have (had) larger skulls.
For example - the “English” sample was 100% male. Naturally when compared to samples that included a high proportion of females (the African sample) they had larger skulls. But if you compared only the English male sample with the African male sample - the Africans had larger skulls - and by the guys own premise - were therefore more intelligent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.