Jake Young is a 
James Watson, Nobel Laureate and member of the Watson-Crick duo that discovered DNA, has been suspended from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory after some comments about race and genetics:
James Watson, in London to promote a new book, was forced to return to New York after Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Long Island, relieved him of his duties because of his apparent views. It follows a hellish week for the 79-year-old geneticist who helped to unravel the structure of DNA more than 50 years ago.
After being quoted in The Sunday Times saying that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really", Dr Watson added that he hoped everyone was equal, but that "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true".Yesterday, the prestigious scientific institute where he has worked for 35 years issued a terse statement halting his responsibilities. It will come as a devastating and personal blow to Dr Watson who has served as the laboratory's director and president.
Related LinksThe suspension prompted Dr Watson to cancel a string of speaking engagements in Britain that were meant to take place to promote his book. Yesterday morning, his publicist at Oxford University Press said that he had flown back to the US to "sort out" his job. "He returned to the United States this morning because of circumstances back home at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory," Kate Farquhar-Thomson said. "He felt that's where he needed to be."
ScienceBlogs had a flurry about this last week.
1) Nobel Laureates are no less likely to be periodic dumbasses than the general population. They just have bigger microphones. Mr. Watson is incorrect scientifically. He is also shockingly naive if he thought he could make comment like that off-hand and get away with it. Whatever.
2) I find it slightly ironic that CSHL can get in such a tizzy considering that they were the former home of a large part of the modern eugenics movement -- the Eugenics Record Office. CSHL gets an A in political correctness and a C in history.
When I was looking this up I found this great site that has pictures from the American eugenics movement. Check it out here.
Hat-tip: 3 Quarks Daily
Politics
Comments
It's sad how today a scientific institution is more interested in kowtowing to "PC" than in scientific debate. There are some very well-researched scholarly works that do NOT support the contention that race either is meaningless or does not exist at all. Take a look at Washington Summit Publishers. I have read all three of the books referenced on this page and can find nothing unscientific, nor anything bigoted, in any of them.
Posted by: JonA | October 22, 2007 5:01 PM
JonA, no one is saying that race is meaningless or does not exist at all. That is a blatant strawman. What Watson said is that is that black people are inherently not as smart as white people, which is a hugely different claim.
The fact of the matter is, the only ways we have of measuring intelligence are flawed to the point of uselessness. IQ has been shown repeatedly to be so closely tied to your upbringing that it can tell you nothing about genetic differences. People aren't even sure if g is more than a statistical artifact, and even if it wasn't, it would suffer a lot of the same problems as IQ. Methods such as looking at overall success are completely contaminated by the culture that success was acheived in.
Personally, I believe that the evidence we do have indicates that there is no reason to believe any one race (or gender) is mentally inferior. Nevertheless, we know so little about the subject, and indeed, still know so little about how the brain works at all, that any statement made is going to be one from almost total ignorance. In this case, it is far more constructive to work from the assumption that there is no difference between races and gender, because we stand to profit far more if correct than suffer if we are wrong.
Posted by: CaptainBooshi | October 23, 2007 2:02 AM
I find it slightly ironic that CSHL can get in such a tizzy considering that they were the former home of a large part of the modern eugenics movement -- the Eugenics Record Office.
That's a good point.
But you may have committed an act of irony yourself here, by criticizing Watson on a blog powered by the Seed Media Group. Watson is an advisor on the Board of Directors:
Seed Media Group: James Watson, Advisor
Harvard Crimson: Watson's Media Ties Questioned
Scientific American: James Watson retires, gives statement, has media ties questioned
Posted by: Alex | October 25, 2007 1:29 PM
On the group level, people in sub-Saharan Africa ARE less intelligent than other groups in other regions. The difference is rather shocking. That is not equivalent to saying that "black" people are inferior.
Posted by: Caledonian | October 25, 2007 7:41 PM
Capt. Boo, Happy Halloween
I happen to agree with you.
We're all like the folks in Garrison's Lake Woebegone: Everyone is above average!
Posted by: Jack Coupal | October 27, 2007 9:00 PM
I find it slightly ironic that CSHL can get in such a tizzy considering that they were the former home of a large part of the modern eugenics movement -- the Eugenics Record Office. CSHL gets an A in political correctness and a C in history.
There is nothing ironic in it. On the contrary, one reason why CSHL reacted to strongly to what Watson said is because of the history of the institution. CSHL has been very open and regretful about their past. In fact, the eugenics archive you linked to is maintained by CSHL.
Posted by: boob | October 30, 2007 9:26 AM
I cannot resist, I must bite...
Watson's problem is that he has no science back up his claim. However, science now assumes that the mind is no different than the brain. You can argue otherwise but if you think our intellect is immaterial then youre really doing metaphysics not science. Anyway, if there is genetic variation in biology then there is genetic variation in the brain as well. Therefore, there will be genetic variation in intelligence as long as we accept that intelligence is biologically contingent, which it seems to be. I'm not saying there is variance between one race and another but as I think I have shown, unless youre a Cartesian, intelligence is necessarily variable within our current scientific knowledge.
Posted by: BenjaminPQ | November 6, 2007 10:10 PM