The Cyclical Return of the IQ Controversy: Revisiting the Lessons of the Resolution on Genetics, Race and Intelligence

Author:

Serpico DavideORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn 1976, the Genetics Society of America (GSA) published a document entitled “Resolution of Genetics, Race, and Intelligence.” This document laid out the Society’s position in the IQ controversy, particularly that on scientific and ethical questions involving the genetics of intellectual differences between human populations. Since the GSA was the largest scientific society of geneticists in the world, many expected the document to be of central importance in settling the controversy. Unfortunately, the Resolution had surprisingly little influence on the discussion. In 1979, William Provine analyzed the possible factors that decreased the impact of the Resolution, among them scientists’ limited understanding of the relationship between science and ethics. Through the analysis of unpublished versions of the Resolution and exchanges between GSA members, I will suggest that the limited impact of the statement likely depended on a shift in the aims of the GSA due to the controversies that surrounded the preparation of the document. Indeed, the demands of the membership made it progressively more impartial in both scientific and political terms, decreasing its potential significance for a wider audience. Notably, the troubled history of the Resolution raises the question of what can make effective or ineffective the communication between scientists and the public—a question with resonance in past and present discussions on topics of social importance.

Funder

British Society for the History of Science

Università degli Studi di Genova

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

History and Philosophy of Science,General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

Reference96 articles.

1. AAAS: American Association for the Advancement of Science. 1967. “Racial Studies: Academy States Position on Call for New Research.” Science 158(3803): 892–893.

2. AAAS Committee on Science in the Promotion of Human Welfare. 1963. “Science and the Race Problem.” The Quarterly Review of Biology 38(4): 366–371.

3. Adams, R. 2019. “Cambridge College Sacks Researcher over Links with Far Right,” 1 May 2019. The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/may/01/cambridge-university-college-dismisses-researcher-far-right-links-noah-carl.

4. APA: American Psychological Association. 2001. Resolution Against Racism and in Support of the Goals of the 2001 UN World, https://www.apa.org/about/policy/racism.

5. ASHG: American Society of Human Genetics. 2018. “ASHG Denounces Attempts to Link Genetics and Racial Supremacy.” American Journal of Human Genetics 103(5): 636.

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3