Lawler, J.M. (1978). "Introduction" (pp. 3-6). In I.Q. Heritability, and Racism. New York: International Publishers.

Introduction

Theories of the innate intellectual inferiority of working class and especially of Black people attack the central core of the work of our school system. Where educational institutions aim at the development of intellectual and cultural abilities, the main thrust of the theories of Arthur Jensen, Richard Herrnstein, Hans J. Eysenck, William Shockley and others, is that the level of intelligence that students will reach or fail to reach was basically decided once and for all in the genes. Schools should therefore not be thought of as providing an enriching and creative environment, but should be adjusted to the function of sorting out and selecting the "bright" from the "dull," as determined by nature, and as basically reflected in the existing social hierarchy.

For teachers in the schools attended by working-class and Black children a fatalistic attitude is cultivated by supposed experts in matters of intelligence. According to some, the difficulties encountered in teaching cannot be resolved by such "superficial" methods as improving teacher-student ratios, or providing early childhood education, or improving pedagogical understanding of the dynamics of learning. According to Jensen, that which is essential to the educational process, thinking itself, cannot be taught, because it is a capacity that is fixed and determined by biological mechanisms.

For the children who fail to move ahead normally in their studies, spokesmen for the newest "science" essentially tell them that they face nearly insurmountable obstacles because they were "born dumb," because they "don't have the brains." And for the [p. 4] parents who had hoped that their children would acquire the intellectual means of improving their lives, who make sacrifices and are willing to sacrifice more for the future of their children, the media announces that the real "brains" in this world think that they are wasting their time, and might as well face the fact that they have only endowed their offspring with a deficient amount of intelligence genes.

The 1954 Supreme Court decision condemning the legal apartheid educational system in the U.S. South has led to the growing recognition that segregated schools in the North and elsewhere are no less the result of racist planning. Segregated schools are inherently unequal, and, while perpetuating inferior education for Black children, also condemn white children to the backward cultural isolation in which poisonous racist ideas easily breed. The theory perpetuated by Jensen, however, locates inequality and educational inferiority in the genes of the victims of racism themselves, and declares nature itself to be the first cause and champion of segregation.

As the economic crisis facing our country deepens, there is a message for all who are concerned with maintaining and extending the school system. In the competition for funds, education is said to be more of a luxury than a necessity. Early childhood education and early compensatory programs, as well as integration efforts, won't change the picture much, it is argued, so the money for these programs is better spent elsewhere. While hundreds of billions of dollars are poured into the military-industrial complex, projects for further expanding the scope of higher education, for establishing general policies of open admissions and free college and university programs, are declared utopian and unproductive. Are the doors of the campuses closing on more and more young people who cannot afford the high cost of living and studying at the same time? This is unfortunate from the point of view of "ideals," sigh the theorists of the stagnation and recession of intelligence. But perhaps it's for the best, they argue, since if a person doesn't have the money, he probably doesn't have the brains either.

The impact of the theories that will be discussed in this book is not limited to the school system, but has a much broader effect. The main thrust, as has already been pointed out by many critics, is a reinforcement of racism with the prestige of science. The highly [p.5] technical arguments that Jensen marshals forth to establish the "plausibility" of his thesis may go over the heads of academics, as well as of students and the lay person who read about it in Time or Atlantic Monthly. But the conclusion Jensen draws filters down just as definitely into the ordinary pollution of racism.

On the other hand, 1) if intelligence is not innate, but a social, historical product, 2) if a truly scientific pedagogy locates the obstacles to learning in the practical environments of the children, both in and out of school, and demonstrates that children are all capable of assimilating the essentials of a scientific culture, 3) if this is not the best of all worlds but one in which the talents of people are systematically wasted and destroyed, and 4) if the potentialities of society today make possible and positively require a broader and deeper cultivation of a scientific culture among the entire population -if these things are true, then what follows is not resignation, passivity, fatalism and despair, but recognition of real possibilities, an active approach to education, outrage at the injustices committed, and determination to fight for the educational rights of the people and the children.

These are not purely theoretical matters; they have the kind of practical import which Marx had in mind when he wrote that "theory becomes a material force when it is grasped by the masses."

This is not to deny the special character of the theoretical aspects of the issues raised by theories of IQ and its "heritability." There are many questions that come to mind when we begin to examine beliefs that have been so deeply ingrained in us as to be part of colloquial language. There are real problems still to be mastered in the complex realm of the theory and practice of education. It is necessary to understand the relation of biological and social factors of human development; the causes and consequences of the formation of races; the historical growth of human thought; the division of intellectual and manual labor; the causes and effects of racism; the laws of the development of cognition in the child and the practical application of these laws in scientific pedagogy; the structure of the school system in the U.S. today; government policy and priorities in relation to education; and the demands and possibilities of modern science and technology. These are all matters that require understanding, and call on the resources of many different disciplines.

As to the concepts most closely related to Jensen and his followers, [p.6] the issues involved in IQ measurement and heritability estimates are extremely confusing for both experts and non-experts alike. Lack of understanding of historical materialism and dialectical theory of scientific methodology produces a theoretical incapacity when interpreting the meaning of certain empirical facts and methods of analysis. Jensen belittles "philosophizing" and "ideological" approaches to the study of empirical data. But there are no purely empirical approaches to reality which do not make use of certain categories and general methods of analysis. Unless these categories and methods are critically examined, they are inevitably borrowed from uncritical philosophy and are subject to the effects of prevailing ideology, whether consciously or not.

The object of this essay is to examine the basic concepts and methods that are most pertinent to the arguments which Jensen and others have put forward, to expose their philosophical and ideological presuppositions and prejudices, and to outline an alternative interpretation based on the concepts of dialectical and historical materialism. This Marxist critique does not pretend to substitute for empirical research but to facilitate such research by removing the theoretical blinders that operate in much of the literature on IQ and its causes.

*See also James Lawler's piercing critiques of: (1) Anne Anastasi's (1961) views on the "Reliability and validity of IQ tests"; and (2) Arthur Jensen's "heritability estimates".