For this blog post I read the conclusion of the Bell Curve Wars written by the books editor that addressed on a macro-level the controversy surrounding the Bell Curve. This section attacked the violent personal attacks used by both the defenders and detractors of Hernstein and Murray. It mentions that many have tried to censor the ideas of the Bell Curve rather than rebutting them with sound and calm intellectual arguments.The author attacks these individuals on the grounds that they cannot aspire to a higher intellectual plane if they refuse even to discuss the ideas they agreed with in a civilized manner. The ideas of Hernstein and Murray could, in the words of Stephen Frazer (the editor) "still have merit" even if they are not "correct" in the traditional sense. Frazer goes on to state that the oppressive and intolerant thinking of which Hernstein and Murray are accused is used by their very accusers when they refuse to consider ideas that they disagree with. He adds that no work however, heinous should be dismissed out of hand but instead should by carefully and examined in an intellectual light. I agree with Frazer that it generally a good idea to examine every new idea and theory in a critical light and that no idea should be dismissed completely out of hand. However, upon further consideration I do tend to agree with some of the Bell Curve's harsher critics. While the work should not of course be banned or overtly censured it is important to remember that it contains highly-controversial and in many ways repellent ideas and that it includes policy recommendations that could, if implemented affect millions of people. The very appearance of an equal weighing of the Bell Curve's ideas with those of its opponents elevates them to the same level as any other theory. However, the ideas of the Bell Curve are in many ways dangerous and could, in theory, be used to justify any number of inequities and injustices in society.