Smart genes?
The Economist has an introduction to a study by scientist Gregory Cochran that will soon be released in the Journal of Biosocial Science. Cochran’s study focuses on Ashkenazi Jews–descendents of Jews who fled to Europe around the first century–and purports to show that certain ethnic groups are, as a matter of genetics, more intelligent than others. He also appears to support a genetic relationship between susceptibility to disease and intelligence. The clearest testable hypothesis to come from the study is that people with a single copy of the gene for any number of diseases, by nature of that same gene, will be more intelligent than average.
Ashkenazi Jews provided Cochran with a unique study sample due largely to the history of discrimination against them, the fact that they were often employed in jobs that demanded high levels of intelligence, and that they have historically tended to marry other Ashkenazi Jews. Notable Ashkenazi Jews include neurologist Sigmund Freud, physicist Albert Einstein, and composer Gustav Mahler.
I’m not sure if the domestic mainstream media outlets will run with the story, but the idea is certainly controversial enough to cause some serious debates. Controversy would be nothing new for Cochran. In 1999 Cochran stirred things up when the Atlantic Monthly featured a cover story on “new germ theory”–the idea that certain diseases previously thought to be non-infectious are caused by bacteria. His theory was later shown to be correct. Probably more controversial, than germ theory or intelligence, is Cochran’s thought that homosexuality is caused by infection.
[Update]: Paul has provided a link to a story in the NY Times that was released around the same time as The Economist’s story. Maybe if we weren’t priveleged enough to hear about Michael Jackson and crazy runaway bride (is that over yet?) we’d get to hear some discussion over this issue.
17 Responses to “Smart genes?”
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/science/03gene.html
Thanks for the link Paul. Neither the NYT’s story nor The Economist’s story are really breaking news. Is anyone else surprised that there hasn’t been more talk of this study?
The current “missing white woman” is no longer the runaway bride. She’s been replaced by some girl in Aruba.
The subject has been taboo in liberal circles for decades. However, Sowell has had some decent commentary as well as libertarian, Charles Murray in The Bell Curve. It is not politically correct so more power to them.
Didn’t The Bell Curve cause all kinds of commotion though?
I seriously don’t want to start a flame war, and I have no knowledge regarding the history, but
Cochran’s study focuses on Ashkenazi Jews–descendents of Jews who fled to Europe around the first century
I had been led to believe that the Ashkenazi Jews were mostly Eastern Europeans who converted to Judaism. In other words, they were, themselves, not Semites (middle easterners). Does anyone have a link to a concise history of Ashkenazi Judaism?
Yes, I found several using Google.
My impression was that the Bell Curve was greeted by incredulous silence. It could be that Hernstein (?) died around the time of its publication. The socialists of the left generally shout down ideas with which they cannot contend. While the book was not cited in the recent SC decision concerning the need for so-called affirmative action it may have been the basis for the comment (in the opinion) that 25 years hence we may have a different view-slow rolling activism?
The problem with The Bell Curve is that it was just bad science. See, e.g.,
http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/faculty/block/papers/Heritability.html
among many other good scholarly treatments of it out there.
This more recent study seems to be on a much better scientific footing, not least of all because they’ve got a case they can make about the biological effects of some particular genes.
As for the Ashkenazi: no, they are indeed a semitic people, who started travelling into Europe sometime in the first millenium AD. (Note that Judaism has never been much of a proselytizing religion, and has never had much in the way of converts.)
Scof, I found a number using Google, too. The problem with Google, is that they oftentimes bring up links to lots of crap. I was hoping to get a link or two to some real history. I can do the Google stuff that brings up links between the EuroJews and the Khazars. I did that years ago. Do you have a link to concise information regarding Jewish history regarding the Ashkenazi? I really would be interested. (I have a minor personal interest in the subject matter, but won’t explain further unless someone asks me to.)
Regarding The Bell Curve, it’s true that Hernnstein died shortly after the publication, but the Thernstroms (the co-authors) have been beating on the issue for years. Particularly Abigail Thernstrom. So much so that she has become something of a caricature. I can’t figure out why Anonymous suggests that The Bell Curve was greeted by incredulous silence. I was alive at the time that the book was published, and was well aware that the book caused something of a firestorm at the time it was released. Perhaps unfairly so, but that was the case.
philosopher at June 11, 2005 02:35 PM |
Just want to acknowledge your post regarding the Ashkenazi. Thanks.
I was unaware of a Thermstron connection to the Bell Curve tome. They are both worth a reader’s time. The sniping mentioned by philospher is only that. The scholarship of the authors of the Bell Curve are as villified by the political correctness crowd as any other scholar in that field who mentions IQ racial differences. That sort of sniping and shouting down has been a feature of “liberal thought” for at least 50 years.
You can read a draft of the paper here.
http://harpend.dsl.xmission.com/Documents/AshkenaziIQ.jbiosocsci.pdf
Thanks TC. That is an interesting article. Has it been submitted for peer-reviewed publication?
It will be published in Journal of Biosocial Science.
In 1999 Cochran stirred things up when the Atlantic Monthly featured a cover story on “new germ theory”–the idea that certain diseases previously thought to be non-infectious are caused by bacteria. His theory was later shown to be correct. Probably more controversial, than germ theory or intelligence, is Cochran’s thought that homosexuality is caused by infection.
The guy is an idiot.
Race and intelligence is an established area of intelligence research, though one that can be filled with politics and can be pretty difficult to navigate. Wikipedia’s article on it has been scrutinized by scientists from opposing sides, and is quite good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence