For this blog post I finally read two articles in the "the bell curve wars" that support at least some of Hernstein and Murray's conclusions. The first article focused on the positive ways of looking at Hernstein and Murray's comments regarding race. In the author's view one can interpret the Bell Curve's conclusions as follows: Blacks score substantially lower on the IQ test, no racial group can be intellectually superior to another; therefore IQ tests are flawed and/or blacks suffer from environmental disadvantages that pre-date the earliest administered IQ tests (typically around 4 years old). The second article focused on the non-racial aspects of the bell curve and argues that the sections of the book are merely examples of the main point regarding class and intelligence. The article argues that Hernstein and Murray are entirely correct about the eventual outcome of a meritocracy, an opinion echoed in the interview of Murray I read for my last blog post. The second article also argues that Hernstein and Murray erred in including what they knew to be controversial arguments regarding race as the resulting conflict obscured there central point. I agree with the second articles point that the racial arguments in the bell curve detract from what I see as Herrnstein and Murray's insightful thesis about meritocracies. However, I cannot help but speculate that the Bell Curve's authors were aware of the level of publicity (and therefore book sales) that controversial claims regarding race would produce. However, even if one removes the section of racial differences in IQ there remain highly controversial statements in the book. These include a section where (not in so many words) Herrnstein and Murray essentially state that the end result of a stable-long term meritocracy is that poor people will be stupid. This of course is simply a corollary of their earlier statement, rich people are smart but seems highly objectionable nonetheless. To me, the bell curve would have retained a significant portion of its populairty and controversy without the racially charged chapters dealing with racial differences in the IQ scores. As the same time more attentions would have been given to the author's brilliant insights regarding the long-term future of our economic system. Many seem to aspire to an absolute meritocracy but if Herrnstein and Murray at least partially correct (and I think they are) than such a system would need serious refinement to avoid a social structure more rigid and uneven than any seen before.