Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life (A Free Press Paperbacks Book) | 
| Authors: Richard J. Herrnstein, Charles Murray
Publisher: Free Press
Category: Book
List Price: $18.00
Buy Used: $2.12
You Save: $15.88 (88%)
New (49) Used (76) Collectible (7) from $2.12
Avg. Customer Rating:  189 reviews
Sales Rank: 26951
Media: Paperback
Edition: 1st Free Press Pbk. Ed
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 912
Shipping Weight (lbs): 2.1
Dimensions (in): 9.1 x 6 x 1.6
ISBN: 0684824299
Dewey Decimal Number: 305.9082
EAN: 9780684824291
ASIN: 0684824299
Publication Date: January 10, 1996
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Condition: Shows some signs of wear, and may have some markings on the inside. 100% Money Back Guarantee.
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The seminal book about IQ and class that ignited one of the most explosive controversies in decades, now updated with a new Afterword by Charles MurrayBreaking new ground and old taboos, Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray tell the story of a society in transformation. At the top, a cognitive elite is forming in which the passkey to the best schools and the best jobs is no longer social background but high intelligence. At the bottom, the common denominator of the underclass is increasingly low intelligence rather than racial or social disadvantage. The Bell Curve describes the state of scientific knowledge about questions that have been on people's minds for years but have been considered too sensitive to talk about openly -- among them, IQ's relationship to crime, unemployment, welfare, child neglect, poverty, and illegitimacy; ethnic differences in intelligence; trends in fertility among women of different levels of intelligence; and what policy can do -- and cannot do -- to compensate for differences in intelligence. Brilliantly argued and meticulously documented, The Bell Curve is the essential first step in coming to grips with the nation's social problems.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 184 more reviews...
 Arguing against these findings is like arguing against evolution July 29, 2008
It's a theory and it's based on means and scientific proof. There's people out there that don't believe in evolution despite all the proof, so no wonder there are those who dispute this books findings, especially when they hit closer to home perhaps.
At the end of the day we're all animals on this planet, no different than say a dog or horse. However, through evolution and selective breeding, there are over 100 different distinct dog breeds that have various strenghts and weaknesses due to their genetics. Some are fast and nimble. Some are slow. Some are short. Some are tall. Some make good guards. Some make good herders. Some just make a cute plaything. Some are very friendly. Some are known to be prone to violent behavior (how many pit bulls bite people vs english bull dogs???). Likewise, mentally, some breeds are quick to learn commands, follow signals, figure out problems - essentially be a "smart" dog. Some breeds are notorious for the exact opposite!
To think that ALL people are created equal and that no genetic differences could have formed (or form in the future) from PEOPLE "breeding" defies the previous logic.
Whatever your opinion, a classic. March 12, 2008
12 out of 14 found this review helpful
Murray and Hernstein's book is by now an infamous classic. This is too bad as the content is really mild, sobering, and well worth contemplating.
Far from being a racist screed, the text is more of a kick in the teeth. It asks us to look at reality and to stop day dreaming.
The thesis is rather simple: cognitive capacity is becomming more and more important in the modern United States (one could extend this globally, as have Lynn et al.). Therefore, our 'class' and 'caste' systems of old are breaking down into cognitive categories.
Those who are bright have a huge advantage over those who are not. This is true regardless of race or sex. The whole of Murray and Hernstein's book is one long argument for this simple premis. They show that g (general mental ability) matters in life. That it is not an artifact of factor analysis. They show that it is a highly heritable trait (h estimates hover around .4-.8) Furthermore, they show that it is related to work performance, social values, family values, and almost anything anyone could possibly think of measuring. After mounting an avalanche of data from the NLSY, the authors explain what such findings mean for a democratic society. If C.W. Mills book, The Power Elite, is held as the defining book on stratification during the Eisenhower years, then Murray and Hernstein's book must stand as the definitive tome on stratification for the information age. Interestingly, the thesis is more true today than it was when formulated over a decade ago.
The reaction to this book is so out of proportion with what it actually states that no short review can do it justice. However, I recommend that anyone with an open mind read this book and compare it to his/her own experiences.
I especially suggest this task to blank-slate sociologists. They riddicule it, cast aspersions upon Murray, leave work, drive past the poor enclaves and straight to their suburban houses in nice neighborhoods, with nice schools, where they send their prescious children. Damn that Murray! He is so wrong.
 "The Bell Curve": A Recipe for Transforming the City on the Hill into the Hills without the City January 14, 2008
2 out of 7 found this review helpful
There is a good deal of critical literature on "The Bell Curve" treating both its science and its ideology. Here are a few words about the latter.
The stripe is elitist. The banner "against equality" is the major one. Of course, one wouldn't expect there the plainness or the style of Nietzschean romanticism in praising the inequality. But the banner definitely lurcks from the background of the book.
In any case, this statistic-generous, but scholarly dubious discourse illustrates both the propaganda expertise of the authors and the fact that the ideology is its quintessece.
The news of the book would be the emphasis on the "intellectual partitioning" of American society and on its consequences. Roughly, the story of the "partitioning" goes like this. Known historical hierarchies of ancient, middle, or modern times, until lately, were anything but IQ sensitive in this sense: smart people were more or less dispersed throughout the social hierarchies (pp. 25-27). The possibility of a wise shoemaker and of a dumb king could have not so little mathematical chance to be a reality.
American educational institutions during the twentieth century have been increasingly changing the picture. Their intense smart-extractive power - the ability of the egalitarian system to collect IQ-efficient from all levels of society -- will result in a social structure where the "cognitive elite" will concentrate exclusively at the top of the social ladder. The education will divide (p.31).
This "IQ migration" will mean IQ depletion at the lower strata of the society. The poor, the single mom, the criminal and the homeless - all of them classifiable by mathematical necessity under the category "IQ deficient" - will stay at, or sink below the present bottom. It is most likely that the smart and the dumb will never cross each other's path again, at least in a way that is important for the latter (p. 25). For understandable reasons, the cognitive elite will ally with the wealthy already seated at the top.
The IQ-partitioning is as natural as anything and can't be stopped (though, it is socially and historically conditioned as you can see).
There are some dangers to the process of the de-equalization. One of them is current policy tendency of placing some artificial restraints to the process itself: by helping not-so-smart to creep into the ranks of the smart at the educational institutions, for example. The Affirmative Action is in point (for anti-affirmative action discourse see chapters 19, 21). Another is the fact that the smart and the dumb will become mutually alienated (the word the authors are not accustomed to use).
One could ask at this point: if the social-educational institutions are so successful in collaborating with the "nature" - scaling people up and down on the social ladder -- why not allow the same institutions to correct the "nature" a bit -- not much, of course (no Socialism!) -- by letting them practice affirmative action in a more fair way, or by spending some more on the education of the dumb? The answer, one will be informed, is twofold in essence:
a) The governmental intervention may not move the poor (IQ-deficient) somewhere up by educating him/her without the costs to the flights of the smart;
And
b) Even the strongest policies could not help the dumb to change his/her allotted IQ (p. 573).
One definitely needs to remember the wisdom of (a) and (b) while reading propositions like this: "To the extent that the problems of this small segment [i.e. the poor, or IQ-deficient] are susceptible to social-engineering solutions at all, they should be highly targeted" (pp. 549-50). One would be wise as well to spend some time and listen carefully to the word "solutions".
For short, there is a good marriage between the old conservative arguments for "letting government care less about the poor" and the Darvinized IQ-anthropology.
 Psuedoscience at its worst January 3, 2008
8 out of 33 found this review helpful
Everything in this book has been proven wrong time and again. The only value this title holds is as a demonstration of how bad science can become so popular when it justifies a belief many already hold.
Lost cause? November 22, 2007
4 out of 26 found this review helpful
I very much doubt it. In the UK young Black girls have overtaken young White men in academics recently, if genetics were true that wouldn't be so. I suggest you look into reaserach methods in general objectively.
I am assuming that the writer already had their own thesis before they started as reasearchers usually do. Apparently paedophiles are 70% more likely to be White males in the US. Does this mean White men are more genetically disposed to raping, being sexually attracted to children?
Fortunately I'm not closed minded enough to believe statistics without looking at all factors. For example White economic classes are not measured when comparing to other races, Black children born to two middle class, university educated parents fair a lot (lot!) better that most who fall under the poverty line. Similar things are mirrored in class differences amongst Whites which proves that academic acheivement is largely to do with environmental and cutural factors also. Asians are cited as academically brilliant but it is only Asians from certain areas, religions that stand out because its an intergral part of their culture to do well education wise in a Western sense.
As I pointed out before the disparity between boys and girls in certain ethnic minorities and including Whites usually ends up with girls doing better and gaining more qualifications on average. If Black girls do much better than Black boys and now officially better than White boys... does that mean they are genetically superior in intelligence? Maybe so :p
Im figuring I'm wasting my time here as most have already started down the Nazi route but thats OK, whatever gives you a stiffy..
|
|
|
