On 30 Mar 99, at 9:36, John W. Kulig wrote:
> So, in place of the usual treatment of Goddard as protrayed in our texts, let
> me make a modest proposal to remove the horns from his head, applaud his early
> efforts to utilize racial-free standards, and train future generations of
> psychologists to make continued progress in the fair and objective treatment
> of fellow humans.
According to Fancher (1987), in later life, Goddard was concerned about
his image in future generations and moderated his earlier
hereditarianism and fear of the scourge of the "feeble-minded." He
apparently wrote, in reply to Pastore's criticism of his earlier views
the following rather interesting perspective:
"I think perhaps you may have been misled by having the answer before
you had the problem...Did you realize that my work was done some forty
years ago when the problem of nature-nurture was not formulated?
It is perfectly natural that you should interpret my language in terms
of today's experiences. But unfortunately that does not give you the
*facts* as much as it gives you what you *judge* to be the facts, or
even what you *wish* had been the facts.
[I] was NOT led to "emphasize heredity and deemphasize environment."
[I] was studying heredity and had no inclination to deemphasize
environment, because in those days environment was not being considered.
(Goddard to Nicolas Pastore, April, 3, 1948, quoted in Smith, 1985, p.
133).
Fancher, R. E. (1987). Henry Goddard and the Kallkak family
photographs: "Conscious skulduggery" or "Whig history." American
Psychologist, 42, 585-590.
Smith, J. D. (1984). Minds made feeble: The myth and legacy of the
Kallikaks. Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
--
==========================
David E. Johnson
Department of Psychology
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
501-524-7164
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
