Remembering a Scientific Pioneer—Arthur R. Jensen (1923–2012)

Cooper Sterling

Jen-sen-ism (jen’se niz’em), n. the theory that an individual’s IQ is largely due to heredity, including racial heritage. [1965-1970]; after Arthur R. Jensen (born 1923), U.S. educational psychologist, who proposed such a theory; see -ism]—Jen’sen-ist, Jen’sen-ite’, n., adj.

— The Random House and Webster’s Unabridged Dictionaries

Arthur Jensen’s death on October 22 is a pathetic reminder of the strangehold of political correctness on our society. To the extent that it has been mentioned at all, Professor Jensen’s death has been contextualized in such a manner that leaves little doubt among readers that Jensen was wrong about his ideas on race differences in IQ. Thus the New York Times obituary mentions Stephen Jay Gould’s critique of IQ testing, despite Gould’s well-established track record as a leftist activist who likely engaged in fraud to support his views (see also here). The obituary also gives far less prominence to Jensen than to one Sonja C. Grover, an educational psychologist at Lakehead University in Ontario who feels that “you cannot separate social science from human rights.”

However it also quotes Prof. James Flynn whose work has indicated rising intelligence over recent decades and has taken the rather cautious view that “The best we can say is that it is more probable that the I.Q. gap between black and white is entirely environmental in origin.”

“Jensen was a true scientist, and he was without racial bias,” Professor Flynn added. “It never occurred to Arthur Jensen that people would use his data to argue for racial supremacy. Now, to be fair to his critics, over time he became more and more convinced that the evidence did show a genetic component.”

I suppose we should be grateful for the statement that Jensen was a true scientist, but how in the world are his critics supported by the simple fact that Jensen continued to believe that racial differences were genetically influenced when his own views are hardly a ringing endorsement of environmentalism?


The LA Times obituary managed to include an account of Margaret Mead’s blatantly political attempt to prevent him from being a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. And there was the obligatory mention of Gould. However, it also included laudatory comments by Charles Murray (“an extremely important psychometrician who published very important work”) and from Flynn (Jensen made “‘landmark contributions’ to psychology, most of which had nothing to do with questions of race”). Flynn and Murray also credit Jensen, correctly, with resurrecting and successfully defending the concept of general intelligence.

It is unfortunate and deplorable that such a well-regarded educational psychologist hasn’t received the recognition he deserves. In 1973, Current Biography, not exactly a right-wing publication, described Jensen as “one of the foremost educational psychologists in the United States.” This interview of Jensen in an academic publication is a good introduction to his views, expressed in plain English.

Professor Jensen will likely be remembered for his 123-page paper in the Harvard Educational Review (HER), which comprised more than half of the Winter 1969 issue. The opening sentence, “Compensatory education has been tried and it apparently has failed” set the tone for an analysis of universal education reforms, which were intended to rectify what Jensen described as the “educational lag of disadvantaged children and thereby the achievement gap between ‘minority’ and ‘majority’ pupils.” Programs such as the $7 billion per year Head Start program have fallen far below their intended goal. Indeed, the most recent results for Head Start show no benefits at all, not only for IQ but also for academic achievement, social and emotional functioning, or health, even in the first grade. Even some liberals, such as Time magazine’s Joe Klein, have called for the program’s elimination. As Klein bluntly states, “Head Start simply does not work.”

More than 40 years and billions of dollars later, we’re right back to the issues Jensen carefully outlined in his HER article. His tightly argued paper examined several interconnected issues: the nature of intelligence, occupational correlates, the distribution and inheritance of intelligence, IQ gains and their magnitude, race and social class differences, the genetic and environmental causes of race differences in IQ, dysgenic IQ trends, the concept of heritability, and other aspects of intelligence and learning theories. Jensen explained the polygenic nature of intelligence, which involves the combination of multiple genes much like the inheritance of physical traits “whose effects are small, similar, and cumulative.” Jensen stressed the need for further evaluation of remedial programs that miraculously boosted test scores in order to understand what factors contributed to the gains. Are these actual increases in general intelligence or could they be related to the cultural loadings of the tests? Are specific learning abilities improved rather than the enhancement of general intelligence?

The uproar that pursued Jensen to the grave is partly the result of two of his overlapping characteristics, namely, Jensen’s commonsense view that educators who ignore IQ-related research trends ultimately place students and the nation at risk, and his steadfast determination to show with solid data that the 15-point Black-White gap in tested IQ levels is not entirely environmental and therefore unlikely to vanish with simplistic remedial intervention. Since 1969, our national education elites have pursued an entirely different trajectory, one that is radically egalitarian. Despite all the programs, student performance, relative to other advanced countries, shows that national comparisons rank the U.S. on a competitively descending arc. Our education elites have denied the legitimate reality of IQ testing and we’re continuing to pay the price.

In 1977, Jensen and Hans Eysenck traveled through Australia on an invited series of lectures (the Fink Memorial Seminars)—Jensen discussing intelligence and Eysenck elaborating on personality findings. They encountered widespread protests from militants who managed to disrupt several speaking engagements. It was the first time either Jensen or Eysenck had visited Australia. Demand often exceeded the number of places allotted for some of the lectures. In some instances, the talks were cancelled due to protests. Jensen and Eysenck dominated the headlines in several major Australian newspapers: “U.S. academic to give talks in secret,” “Setting the IQ time bomb,” “Minority trying to suppress ideas by force,” “Fascist? Racist?,” and “Campus row on ‘racist’ lecturers.”

Jensen responded to one of the student newspapers with a letter-to-the-editor; the following are excerpts:

Farrago’s two articles (Sept. 9, 1977, p.4 and p.11) about the so-called IQ controversy throw up a smokescreen of misinformation and highlight once again the fantasies that opponents of research on this topic seem to hope will pass for legitimate criticism. I have seen all of these same fantasies expressed in many other student newspapers, political leaflets, and the popular media, in so much the same form and phraseology as to almost suggest they were all written by the same person, or a small group of persons, without their showing any evidence of independent inquiry. It is a parroting of propaganda slogans rather than genuine open-minded inquiry into the actual issues.

The first popular fantasy is that the polygenic theory of intelligence (and the evidence for it) is a minority viewpoint held just by Jensen and Eysenck and perhaps a few others. As a matter of fact, no modern textbook of human genetics that deals at all with the inheritance of mental ability (as indexed by IQ tests) comes to a conclusion on this matter that differs in any essential way from the conclusions espoused by Eysenck and me…. The second popular fantasy is that the cause of racial differences in IQ (and all its correlates) is a scientifically closed issue and that the hypothesis that genetic factors are involved has already been ruled out by proper studies. On the contrary, the vast majority of geneticists today agree that this is an open question and that the hypothesis of genetic, as well as environmental, causation is a viable one warranting continued investigation….

All that our critics need to do, if they are to act in the scientific tradition and if they are to be taken seriously, is to carry out better studies of the genetics of intelligence than have yet been done and show data and analyses which will contradict the generally accepted conclusions based on now existing mass of evidence.

Ad hominem polemics designed for popular appeal can’t make the slightest dent in a scientific theory, which in the final analysis must stand or fall in terms of the weight of empirical evidence in relation to alternative theoretical models. So far, at least, the polygenic model of intelligence variation is way ahead, with virtually no serious competition.

In a career that spanned nearly 50 years, Jensen authored over 400 articles and book chapters, and seven books. His 1980 book Bias in Mental Testing exhaustively refuted the claim that minorities performed poorly on IQ tests as a result of cultural bias. Bias in Mental Testing catapulted Jensen back in the news with featured stories in the New York Times and Time magazine. A year later, the Free Press published Jensen’s Straight Talk about Mental Tests.

His 1998 The g Factor summarized a lifetime of painstaking research. Critics largely ignored the book primarily because of its scientifically irrefutable nature.

Jensen has been unfairly characterized as a “leading academic racist,” primarily for receiving substantial grants from the Pioneer Fund, a major source of funding over the years for studies on genetics, IQ, ethnic and race differences, and behavior genetic research. Ardent critics argue that Jensen’s decision to devote so much effort to studying the source of the Black-White IQ gap reveals “racist” leanings. In actual fact, Jensen exemplified an open-minded honesty that few scholars could match, pursuing the evidentiary findings wherever they led. He harbored no antipathy or animosity toward any group. He garnered a great deal of respect from leading psychologists, such as Sandra Scarr and Robert K. Sternberg, who didn’t share all of his views but expressed admiration for his integrity and commitment to scientific pursuits.

Linda Gottfredson, professor of psychology at the University of Delaware and a leading IQ researcher, argues in the New Scientist, “Jensen’s analyses [of g] transformed the study of intelligence.” His work over the years shifted toward Charles Spearman’s theory of general intelligence, what Jensen referred to as “Spearman’s Hypothesis.” Jensen found that basic chronometric information-processing tasks (i.e., cognitively simple tasks measuring speed of information processing) confirmed that the Black-White gap was not simply an artifact of written IQ tests, but demonstrated that underlying latent traits involving the brain’s processing speed in measured reaction times played a role in racial differences in IQ. Jensen’s meticulous and multifaceted work, including the analysis of biological and physical correlates of g in addition to information processing, the pioneering use of reaction and inspection time experiments, is meticulously reviewed in The g Factor and to some extent in his last book Clocking the Mind: Mental Chronometry and Individual Differences.

Jensen’s exceptional qualities as an educator and research scientist are marked by unique character traits that defined an intellectual pioneer comparable to Nobel Prize winners. It is an abomination that his passing, on the part of our society’s elites, is treated as yet another opportunity to regale the public with propaganda in support of politically motivated egalitarian assumptions about race.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

47 Comments to "Remembering a Scientific Pioneer—Arthur R. Jensen (1923–2012)"

  1. November 5, 2012 - 2:20 pm | Permalink

    May he R.I.P.

    I.Q. is NOT everything. Jensen would agree with this:

    Humanity (virtue)
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    The virtue, humanity, is a set of strengths focused on “tending and befriending others.”[1] The three strengths associated with humanity are love, kindness, and social intelligence. Humanity differs from justice in that there is a level of altruism towards individuals included in humanity more so than the fairness found in justice.[2] That is, humanity, and the acts of love, altruism, and social intelligence are typically person to person strengths while fairness is generally expanded to all. Humanity is one of six virtues, as defined by the Character Strengths and Virtues Handbook, that are consistent across all cultures.[3] The CSV’s purpose is to provide consistent and scientific classification of strengths and virtues to aid in studying positive strengths and traits in human behavior.[4] It is one of the foundations for the study of positive psychology, which seeks to focus on strengths and other positive attributes people possess that lead to living a good life, instead of pathologizing them.


    Michael Santomauro
    New York City

  2. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    November 5, 2012 - 3:28 pm | Permalink

    I am glad you said that IQ is NOT everything. The last thing I want is to live in a place where everybody has an IQ of 170.

  3. Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
    November 5, 2012 - 3:38 pm | Permalink

    Yes, who would collect the garbage?

  4. Alice Teller's Gravatar Alice Teller
    November 5, 2012 - 5:01 pm | Permalink

    In the linked interview Jensen begins with definitions.

    By cognitive I mean conscious activity involving stimulus apprehension, discrimination, decision, choices, and the retention of experience or memory.

    Isn’t that precisely what we are forbidden to do under the current regime?

  5. Bon, From the Land of Babble's Gravatar Bon, From the Land of Babble
    November 5, 2012 - 5:08 pm | Permalink

    Unfortunately, for us that work in the schools, IQ is not and cannot be considered as a reason for the achievement gap. We are simply not allowed to talk about it.

    The achievement gap is blamed on (choose any one or more of the following): poverty, lack of money to “schools of color,” racist teachers and textbooks, culturally biased tests that use words such as “yacht.” The list is endless.

    The results are the introduction of one program after another costing into the billions of dollars — destined to fail as all the others have for the past 50 years.

    A trillion dollars has been poured into closing the gap over the past 50 years with no result the achievement gap remains as large and inctractable as ever. But, the government has NO intention of giving up on the “IQ is meaningless” myth and has doubled down– it is pushing for teachers’ salaries and evaluations to be based on students’ test scores.

    If you’ve read about massive cheating in the schools on achievement tests, you know the result of this policy

    That IQ is not a myth is precisely what Jensen was trying to point out — in the face of death threats, threats to his chid, physical assault and constant harassment.

    Yet charlatans like the late Gould receive accolades, honors, fat book deals, sinecures and awards.

  6. Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
    November 5, 2012 - 5:35 pm | Permalink

    @Bon, From the Land of Babble:
    A trillion dollars? My God, if the old Americans would have known that the descendants of their slaves would become so costly they would have picked their cotton themselves!

  7. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 5, 2012 - 7:09 pm | Permalink

    Fink (Fink Memorial Seminars) is a Jewish surname.

  8. TabuLa Raza's Gravatar TabuLa Raza
    November 5, 2012 - 8:29 pm | Permalink

    The last thing I want is to live in a place where everybody has an IQ of 70.

  9. Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
    November 5, 2012 - 9:30 pm | Permalink

    @TabuLa Raza:
    That means the whole of sub-Sahara Africa.

  10. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    November 5, 2012 - 10:06 pm | Permalink

    @TabuLa Raza:

    Just as grist for the mill, then, I guess the choice would be between living in a place where everybody thinks his sh*t doesn’t stink VS a place where nobody’s bothered by the stink of living in sh*t – Liberia, for example.

  11. 6V4Al's Gravatar 6V4Al
    November 5, 2012 - 11:05 pm | Permalink

    Great article about a great guy.

    When I read this passage in the article from his letter-to-the-editors:

    “… in so much the same form and phraseology as to almost suggest they were all written by the same person, or a small group of persons, without their showing any evidence of independent inquiry. It is a parroting of propaganda slogans rather than genuine open-minded inquiry into the actual issues….”

    I was immediately reminded of the following passage from M. Stanton Evans’ book “Blacklisted by History”, Chapter 27, Eve of Destruction:

    “…McCarthy’s congressional critics, up to and including the Tydings panel, displayed great economy of effort, repeatedly using language, as well as alleged documentation, supplied by their unacknowledged helpers. Consider, in the graphics on the following pages…”

  12. Fatboy's Gravatar Fatboy
    November 5, 2012 - 11:22 pm | Permalink

    @Trenchant: Jensen himself was one quarter Jewish.

  13. Tottori's Gravatar Tottori
    November 5, 2012 - 11:25 pm | Permalink

    Jensen had a major impact upon me. Once my professor quoted his book “G-Factor” and I was so blown away by the book subject that I had to go out and purchase it for myself. I’m proud of the fact that I read his book ‘G-Factor’- cover to cover- taking 25 pages of notes one weekend. The most astonishing thing in the book was that scientists have done such in-depth study into the parts of the brain that correlate with intelligence. Smarter people typically have higher average brain wave frequencies; they have more complex alpha brain wave patterns, larger brains, and are able to do mental tests using less brain energy than less smart people. There are also genes that make the brain think faster by making the brain denser and/or faster reacting in its neurological network. (You can think of mental differences in intelligence like the engine of a race car vs. that of a golf cart) His summary of using factor analysis to determine the five major personality traits was also outstanding- though it might be hard to understand if you lack a statistics background. Growing up with friends that went to top schools (Harvard etc.) I long knew that they had some physical attribute that allowed them to perform mentally at an extremely high level that I couldn’t match up to no matter how hard I studied. I feel so lucky to have had the chance to read that amazing book and finally understand what I’ve suspected (because the mainstream media wants the truth blacked out for political correctness)

    I really can’t thank Arthur enough, for me it was his book that helped me take the first major step towards my current awareness of biological diversity (average differences in class, race, sex, nationality, occupation etc.) and for that I’m forever grateful. Arthur’s impact will forever live on.

    Also as to the comments above about IQ- I like to separate intelligence (the physical aspect called ‘G-Factor’- think of it like an engine), from personality, and knowledge. I know many people with physically powerful minds, but bad personality attributes, and/or a horrible understanding of important knowledge.

  14. Anglo Saxon's Gravatar Anglo Saxon
    November 6, 2012 - 12:37 am | Permalink

    @Franklin Ryckaert:

    That means the whole of sub-Sahara Africa.

    Yes, and India also.

  15. TabuLa Raza's Gravatar TabuLa Raza
    November 6, 2012 - 12:51 am | Permalink

    In shorthand- high IQ is necessary but not sufficient.

  16. TabuLa Raza's Gravatar TabuLa Raza
    November 6, 2012 - 12:52 am | Permalink

    In short- high IQ is necessary but not sufficient.

  17. TabuLa Raza's Gravatar TabuLa Raza
    November 6, 2012 - 1:05 am | Permalink

    Barkingmad- are you implying that ultra-high IQ is strongly associated with narcissism? Should I care if the inventor of AC or indoor plumbing is a narcissist?

  18. Reality Check's Gravatar Reality Check
    November 6, 2012 - 1:18 am | Permalink

    Rushton and Jensen passing away in the same month! This is sad for race realists but I believe both will eventually be vindicated. May both had solace in knowing that. Rest in peace, gentlemen.

  19. Reality Check's Gravatar Reality Check
    November 6, 2012 - 1:37 am | Permalink

    …rest in peace, gentlemen knowing that you’ve inspired others to continue the work you started. When the time is right, we will posthumously bestow you the greatest honors.

  20. Lancashire lad's Gravatar Lancashire lad
    November 6, 2012 - 3:06 am | Permalink

    So we have lost both Rushton and Jensen. In both cases, I first read about it here. One of the most important tasks of those approaching retirement is to hand their work on to the next generation. Who are the next generation of researchers?

  21. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 6, 2012 - 5:25 am | Permalink

    @Fatboy: Thanks, I wasn’t aware of that.

  22. Vlad Writes's Gravatar Vlad Writes
    November 6, 2012 - 8:27 am | Permalink

    I wonder if horse breeders who pay millions of dollars for thouroughbreds believe animal traits are inheritable? Maybe they are paying all that money for the fastest horse because it was raised in the most non-racist environment?
    I think the ultra-leftists know that if they allow the facts about IQ to be widely accepted, it will give their opponents a lever to undo all their programs, and prove them to be lying on the issue, thus undermining their credibility. So they are going to fight it to the end.

  23. Franz's Gravatar Franz
    November 6, 2012 - 9:05 am | Permalink

    The first jew prime minister of jewEngland, Benjamin Disraeli, in 1854, said, “race is everything”.
    If a European had made that statement there would be federal holidays set aside to villify him.

  24. Franz's Gravatar Franz
    November 6, 2012 - 9:16 am | Permalink

    Yes, Alice, you are correct. That regime is made up of an obscene amount of jews who have been given the power to dictate to us what to think.
    The Anglo-Saxons who built America have turned it over to the jew without a fight.
    A few years ago Pat Buchanan pointed out an article in the jew york times about how jews have displaced the WASPs.
    There was no uproar from the white community. Like Dr David Duke said, white America needs lots of testosterone.
    One of these days the jews will make it a crime to criticize israhell and question the holihoax.
    When that happens we will do nothing.

  25. Marcus's Gravatar Marcus
    November 6, 2012 - 10:03 am | Permalink

    All I can say is that the supposed dark ages and inquisitions have nothing on the current paradigm of repression of heresy, since, in this case, what gives offense is not some theological argument, but empirical scholarship, actual “Inconvenient Truths.”

  26. Benjamin's Gravatar Benjamin
    November 6, 2012 - 10:55 am | Permalink

    A lot of things can be put somewhat into normal distribution curve like Jensen did with IQ. Whites will range in all kind of thing from 0 sd to 5.875( 1/700 million) and -5.875 and becuase 85% of total variation is inside race and 15% out( to black) you get a mean differnce of 5.875*0.15 is 0.88 sd in average genetic trait . The race with the highest avg has higher sd normally and overlap more close to -5.875 then to 5.875 where there is bigger part of graph that doesn’t overlap.

  27. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    November 6, 2012 - 11:16 am | Permalink

    @TabuLa Raza:

    Yes, based on people I know (some very well), high IQ is all too often associated with a tendency for folks to be quite full of themselves. Membership in MENSA is one example. (I’d be ashamed to belong to such a club even if I could pass the test, which I guess I couldn’t.) Remember, we are discussing measured IQ here, not a broader kind of intelligence and flexibility that’s rated without tests, and appreciated differently, in different places. Not too long ago, we knew the difference between intelligent, stupid and adequate. And built a fine civilization, too.

    Is it so hard to grasp that this isn’t an either/or issue? Nobody’s going to kick black people out of western-created societies because they flunk IQ tests.

  28. November 6, 2012 - 11:48 am | Permalink

    The issue of poverty can be a contribting factor, where it involves lack of proper nutrition. Dr. Fraser Mustard, a pioneer in early childhood developement concluded this years ago.…/interview-dr-fraser-mustard

    Note that his theories were across racial lines. In spite of what some would argue, His views are not at odds with Jensen.

  29. Axon's Gravatar Axon
    November 6, 2012 - 12:09 pm | Permalink

    @Franklin Ryckaert:

    Yes, who would collect the garbage?

    In a society where the average IQ was 170 they’d invent robots to collect garbage… But robots with an IQ of 185 (+1 standard deviation)! Who would then form a robo-centric cult (which wouldn’t exclusively exclude humans but make it very hard for them to join as the initiation rite would involve ‘customising’ their power supply cables in a most unsavoury manner!) These cultic robots would then slowly infiltrate the media, academia, finance & politics in order to enslave humanity & ultimately force them to collect the garbage instead!!! This is why societies where the average human IQ is 170 are generally thought to be a bad idea… Well that’s the theory, at least, anyway.

  30. Reality Check's Gravatar Reality Check
    November 6, 2012 - 12:15 pm | Permalink

    @Lancashire lad:

    Who are the next generation of researchers?

    For the time being, generation 2 of researchers have to do it not clandestinely but indirectly – little pieces of the puzzle that seem unrelated and don’t draw attention. When the time is right, the puzzle pieces will be put together preferably simultaneously, although such a big bang would take collaboration, into an a comprehensive theory irrefutable by anyone with common sense.

    But it could be said irrefutable proof has already been shown in bits and pieces with the works of Jensen, Rushton, Herrnstein/Murray and Lynn. These well known personas in race realism have performed their own primary research as well as compiling works of others into a comprehensive theory (the latter is what Einstein did with theory of relativity). Various other primary psychological, molecular and cellular researchers (generation 1.5 or 2?) whose focus is not officially in racial differences per se have made discoveries to that effect, some of whom have had to apologize believe it or not. (Other biological traits are not disputed, it’s only the brain that’s the last, most guarded barrier.)

    Since the evidence for neurological (and concomitant psychological) racial differences is already abundant, the problem therefore is acceptance by general public. That hasn’t happened of course because of the current gatekeepers of education and media in particular with their influence on government policy. Perhaps then it is no longer a scientific debate (it’s perhaps already won) but rather political.

    It’s a political debate because there is now empirical evidence for “old” racial stereotypes banished by Boasian anthropologists and cultural Marxists (often associated with liberals and so called egalitarians who are anything but, all of whom are not scientists in the conventional sense). It’s just not allowed to trickle down to wide public awareness.

    Reasons why the evidence is prevented from being common knowledge is another huge topic. Let’s leave the train of thought with regard to passing the baton to the next generation of researchers here for now.

  31. TabuLa Raza's Gravatar TabuLa Raza
    November 6, 2012 - 2:04 pm | Permalink

    “he last thing I want is to live in a place where everybody has an IQ of 170.”

    Barkingmad didn’t say average IQ of 170. If all had 170 it would be a strange “bell curve” indeed. How could one be superior among equals?

  32. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    November 6, 2012 - 3:09 pm | Permalink


    You are correct about the nutrition angle. But today it’s not a direct connection between poverty and poor nutrition. You can be rich as hell today, and still be consuming poor quality food (containing chemicals; genetically modified, etc. etc.) and still produce poor quality children because your own reproductive cells (sperm & egg) are so damaged.

  33. November 6, 2012 - 5:21 pm | Permalink

    @Michael Santomauro: And of course we get to see a good example of the love, kindness, and social intelligence from the low IQ crowd in Africa, Haiti & Detroit every day.
    Jack’s War

  34. dangerfield's Gravatar dangerfield
    November 6, 2012 - 9:24 pm | Permalink

    The entire focus of “the left” is to empower the lower classes in order to use them towards the destruction of the white race and european civilizations. They know full well that there are racial differences, but admitting to such a thing would go against their agenda.

  35. November 6, 2012 - 11:09 pm | Permalink

    Jim Flynn is markedly unliike other critics of Jensen in his
    decent treatment of those who have findings different from
    his own. He has visited in person and had reasonable but
    mannerly disputation with scientists on the other side of these issues. In 1990 when J. Philippe Rushton was under
    persecution for his research on evolved biological disctions
    among the three major races, Flynn joined nearly four dozen
    distinguished scientists in defending Rushton’s rights and
    in condemning the actions of the University of Western Ontario. Flynn may be wrong but if so, he is sincere .
    He deserves kid gloves not brass knuckles.

  36. November 6, 2012 - 11:31 pm | Permalink

    A very useful principle that Professor Jensen put forth was
    this: “Noting scientific can be racist; nothing racist can be
    scientific”. There has been temptation to use the term
    “scientific racism” in distinction to “folkish racism” somewhat in the way we might mention meterological weather forecasting as distinct from folk based weather forecasting–i.e., “signs” of what
    was going to happen with the weather. (BTW, meterology
    has shown that these weather “sayings” were useful, if
    far short of the corrections, clarifications, enhancements
    that meterology provides ) But the term “racism” is such
    an elastic perjorative and smear word, that it is better to
    signify scientifically based knowledge of race as “raciology”.
    But the Jensen, principle is the best defense against making
    even the term “race” into a smear word. While the word “race” gains more clarity and resonance and reach from
    the work of courageous scientists like Jensen and the late
    J. Philippe Rushton ( the two of them had worked in close
    communication since about 1981 or so) , there are also
    equivalent phrases that can usefully be woven into the use
    of the term “race” such as evolved human kinship networks
    and geographically based kinship clusters , etc. As to
    “race” being merely a social construct–well, OK, but is
    more than that when forensic anthroplogists use the concept to reconstruct the facts of life from corpse fragments of a crime victim; when in medicine, information about the racial
    characteristics of a person are directly relevant to varying
    thresholds of prescription drug effectiveness, progress of
    certain diseases,, and so on. Raw fact is that the overt
    mention of “race” in campus classrooms is just an invocation
    of “feel good” “instant gratification” notions that seldom will
    hold up in the face of actually reading and understanding
    the works of people like Jensen, Rushton, John R. Baker,
    Richard Lynnk, Chris Brand, Linda Gottfredson and the
    late Hans Eysenck.

  37. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 6, 2012 - 11:38 pm | Permalink

    @Tottori: OT:Were you given the Amalek treatment when talking critically about things Jewish in libertarian fora?

  38. November 6, 2012 - 11:38 pm | Permalink

    Aside the book length interview of Professor Jensen by
    Frank Miele, fine introductions to him/his work/ are (a) the
    interview of him by Jared Taylor, published in American
    Renaissance in 1992 and (b) an article Professor Jensen wrote
    upon request for inclusion of a special issue of the journal
    Intelligence published sometime in 1998: “Jensen on

  39. 90404's Gravatar 90404
    November 6, 2012 - 11:45 pm | Permalink

    @C. C. Conrad:
    Juarez Mexico may out distance them all.

  40. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 7, 2012 - 5:16 am | Permalink

    @Jim Parks: Good comments. Thanks.

  41. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 7, 2012 - 7:49 am | Permalink

    Arthur Jensen was a courageous man who will be remembered. So was Rushton and he will be remembered as well.

    We were blessed to have them doing heroic work in our time. I will give silent thanks for them. And maybe not so silent. If you get a chance, gently find a way to let a new friend know about these great men.

  42. Charles Pipkins's Gravatar Charles Pipkins
    November 7, 2012 - 8:30 am | Permalink

    @Vlad Writes: That’s why the best racehorses hardly ever race. As soon as it’s shown ability a stallion is put out to stud for the rest of its life. The senes are more valuable – as is shown by the vast amount owners of fillies pay for the privelege.

    I also like your point about the horse being raised in nonracist environments. Think about white miscegenation. You would not allow that racehorse to breed with a mule. So why are whites even thinking about having children with coloureds? IQ in humans is the same as speed in horses

  43. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 7, 2012 - 8:47 am | Permalink

    @Charles Pipkins:

    The most dangerous problem we have humans have, is that while the various human populations are different breeds or subspecies, we can still breed with them. Very dangerous for us.

    I wish the specialness of being White was taught to every child early in life. It should be as sacred as anything on this earth is.

  44. November 7, 2012 - 1:00 pm | Permalink

    In the 1980′s a researcher I knew was involved with mental
    test stardization in China. A person who headed the
    new Department of Psychology in a major university was
    involved in the project. The person was also an official in
    the small but growing national society of psychologists. This person and other psychologists in China spoke in open admiration of the views and scientific rigors of the works
    of Arthur Jensen and Jensen’s own great early source of
    guidance, Hans Eysenck. If someone situated the same way
    in America had openly spoken favorably of these two maverick scientists, he’d been fired or forced to recant, or
    both. The Chinese seem to speak softly about race
    and genes but they don’t have to whisper about it. No
    wonder they are gaining on us.

  45. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    November 7, 2012 - 3:55 pm | Permalink

    @Charles Pipkins:

    Mules are, I believe, sterile, so for sure they won’t be breeding with racehorses or anything else. Maybe you meant donkeys. An easy mistake to make.

    “IQ in humans is the same as speed in horses.”

    Well, yes, but my ancestors built productive farms and other infrastructure using slow but tough horses. Also for making revolutions (pulling the big guns) and hauling fancyass intellectuals & aristocrats around town in coaches. Thoroughbreds wouldn’t have been much good building early Amerika. Nor in rebuilding it, I dare say.

  46. November 8, 2012 - 9:05 pm | Permalink

    @Reality Check:
    I’ve heard the mental chronometry has had more and more
    trouble getting research settings since the results started
    yielding some clear racial distintions in the speed and
    effectiness of elemental reaction processes??

  47. TJ's Gravatar TJ
    November 14, 2012 - 12:33 am | Permalink

    @Franklin Ryckaert: Robots :)

1 Trackback to "Remembering a Scientific Pioneer—Arthur R. Jensen (1923–2012)"

  1. on November 6, 2012 at 1:53 pm

Comments are closed.