EgalitarianJay

Welcome

Welcome...

Hello, EgalitarianJay, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. I see you have some interest in genetics, and I would like to ask your help for suggestions of additional sources for the human biology source list I keep in user space for the use of all wikipedians. WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 16:20, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome. A book that I would recommend for the best sources on race section is:

1. Graves, Joseph L. (2001). The Emperor's New Clothes: Biological Theories of Race at the Millennium. Rutgers University Press; 1 edition. ISBN 978-0813528472. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |rev= ignored (help)

Thanks for the recommendation. I picked up some new books today, but I still haven't seen the Graves title--just a lot of citations to it. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 05:47, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I ordered the book off of Amazon recently. It's very good. EgalitarianJay (talk) 13:14, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

It is indeed very good. Another great one is Jefferson Fish's Race and Intelligence: Separating science from Myth, it contains a good chapter by Graves and another by Templeton.·Maunus·ƛ· 18:36, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I will have to check that out. EgalitarianJay (talk) 18:53, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Scientific rasism

Unfortunately the term has several different meanings. The narrow meaning as refering to historical physical anthropology with its claims of completely discrete races that are superior and inferior could not doubt be classified as pseudoscience. The broader meaning of for example calling The Bell Curve scientific rasism and pseudoscience is not appropriate since that races/ethnic groups in the US differ on average IQ is not disputed and the question of a genetic contribution to this is unresolved. Furthermore, the authors themselves would deny that they are racist in the sense of seeing some races as superior or inferior.Miradre (talk) 18:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

• The research in The Bell Curve can be appropriately regarded as pseudoscience if they advocate theories with no scientific basis whose fundamental premises have been discredited. The authors of The Bell Curve promote the idea that race is a biological reality and that there is a large body of evidence supporting the hypothesis that there are heritable genetic traits that cause average disparities in intelligence between races. A great deal of the premises for their theory have been disputed such as the claim that race is a concept applicable to human biological variation, that their definition of intelligence is valid and that the behavior-genetic concept of heritability is reliable way to provide evidence for a casual link between race, genes and intelligence. Alot of their references have been called pseudoscientific by authorities in fields related to the research they cite. They may deny that they are racist however the idea of ranking races in hierarchical fashion based on mental traits is a racist concept. The Scientific Racism article already has pseudoscience as a tag so I suppose that is good enough. EgalitarianJay (talk) 22:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)