time: 11:03
If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
Tweet
2 Comments
The most telling point of the interview is the difference between science and faith or dogma.To have a scientific view is to be open to questions.We can answer ourselves are the teaching of liberalism or multiculturalisms and other shibboleths of today scientific or a new faith, slogans ?
There is nothing that Henry Harpending says here that runs contrary to social constructionism properly understood. Social constructionism properly understood is not idealist, it is realist. The selection of which he speaks and how certain characteristics are determined to count may just as well be looked upon as social constructs – in fact, treating them as social constructs has significant advantages in terms of determination and agency. Who is he appealing to, but others, the social realm, in making his argument that race counts in a certain way? From whence were selections made, but the realm of the social and never in complete isolation? If the older parts of evolution that he might describe, prior to people being able to negotiate their meaning to a certain conscious extent, were not available to our discussion as people now, they would not matter; but as it stands, we can do something about it, the fact that racial classifications are operationally verifiable and that agentive directions can be taken in their/our interest are warrantably assertible with one another (White Nationalists).
One Trackback
[...] the Durants were completely ignorant about IQ studies and HBD in general (see this splendid interview of Henry Harpending by Craig Bodeker). Also, when in the chapter on race in The Lessons of History [...]