On Wed, 7 Feb 1996, Gilbert Skillman wrote: > That this travesty has been given any serious attention at all, let > alone "praised...and heatedly discussed" is a quite telling sign of > the times. I don't know, Gil. Times are bad, but I don't think this in particular is evidence for it. Jensen's article in 1969 got the same sort of attention. So did Herrnstein's "IQ" article in, I think, 1974, followed by an equally repulsive book. The fact is that the Noble Lie is as old as Plato and is always popular with the privileged. Of course Plato tipped the game early on, acknowledging that it is, after all, a lie. That was obvious to him even back then and absent modern statistical analysis. But nothing short on an egalatarian society will squelch it, when it' sno longer in anyone's interests to justify unjustifiable power and reward. But you knew that. The irritating thing about Murray, Herrnstein, and other Noble Liars is that they take up the time and energy of people like those you cited who demolished this latest idiotic manifestation of the lie and who otherwise might have spent their time doing something constructive. --Justin
