Race, Evolution, and Behavior

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (July 2009)

Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective is a controversial book written by J. Philippe Rushton, a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario, and the current head of the Pioneer fund. Rushton argues that race is a valid biological concept and that racial differences frequently arrange in a continuum of Mongoloids (Orientals, East Asians) at one extreme, Negroids (blacks, Africans) at the opposite extreme, and Caucasoids (whites, Europeans) in the middle.^[1] Rushton's book is focused on what he considers the three broadest racial groups, and does not address other populations such as South East Asians or Australian aboriginals. The book grew out of his earlier paper, Evolutionary Biology and Heritable Traits (With Reference to Oriental^[2]-White-Black Difference).^[3]

The 1st unabridged edition was published in 1995 and the 2nd unabridged edition was published in 1997.

The 1st abridged edition published under the Transaction Press name in 1999 caused considerable controversy. The 2nd abridged edition was published under the name of The Charles Darwin Research Institute in 2000, and contained some response to the criticism of the 1st abridged edition. (see Mailing Controversy below)

Summary

Rushton argues that Mongoloids, Caucasoids, and Negroids fall consistently into the same one-two-three pattern when compared on a list of 60 different behavioral and anatomical variables. (Rushton's 2000 book, like other population history works (e.g. Cavalli-Sforza 1994) uses the terms Mongoloid, Caucasoid, and Negroid to describe these groups broadly conceived, but these terms have since been replaced in the scientific literature - the MeSH terminology as of 2004 is Asian Continental Ancestry Group, African Continental Ancestry Group and European Continental Ancestry Group.)^[4] Rushton uses averages of hundreds of studies, modern and historical, to assert the existence of this pattern.

The book argues that Mongoloids, on average, are at one end of a continuum, that Negroids, on average, are at the opposite end of that continuum, and that Caucasoids rank in between Mongoloids and Negroids, but closer to Mongoloids. His continuum includes both external physical characteristics and personality traits.

Citing genetic research by Cavalli-Sforza, the African Eve hypothesis, and the out of Africa theory, Rushton concludes that Negroids branched off first (200,000 years ago, Caucasoids second 110,000 years ago, and Mongoloids last 41,000 years ago), arguing that throughout all of evolution, more ancient forms of life (i.e. plants, bacteria, reptiles) are less evolved than more recent forms of life (i.e. mammals, primates, humans) and that the much smaller variation in the races is consistent with this trend. "One theoretical possibility," said Rushton "is that evolution is progressive and that some populations are more advanced than others". Rushton argues that this first, second, and third chronological sequence perfectly correlates with, and is responsible for, a consistent global multi-dimensional racial pattern on everything from worldwide crime statistics, the global distribution of AIDS, to personality.

Rushton says that his collection of 60 different variables can be unified by a single evolutionary dimension known as the r and K scale. His theory attempts to apply the inter-species r/K selection theory to the much smaller inter-racial differences within the human species. While all humans display extremely K-selected behavior, Rushton believes the races vary in the degree to which they exhibit that behavior. He asserts that Negroids use a strategy more toward an r-selected strategy (produce more offspring, but provide less care for them) while Mongoloids use the K strategy most (produce fewer offspring but provide more care for them), with Caucasoids exhibiting intermediate tendencies in this area. He further asserts that Caucasoids evolved more toward a K-selected breeding strategy than Negroids because of the harsher and colder weather encountered in Europe, while the same held true to a greater extent for Mongoloids. Rushton argues that the survival challenges of making warm clothes, building durable shelter, preserving food, and strategically hunting large animals all selected genes for greater intelligence and social organization among the populations that migrated to cold climates.

Rushton invokes genetics to explain his data arguing that purely environmental theories fail to elegantly explain what he sees as such a consistent pattern of both behavioral and physiological differences, but instead just provide a long list of ad hoc explanations. Rushton argues that science strives to organize and simplify data, and seeks the simplest explanation possible, and claims that r/K selection theory explains all his data quite parsimoniously.

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (July 2008)

Critical response

Rushton’s research has been both praised and criticized due to its controversial subject matter of race and intelligence.

In Race, Evolution and Behavior, Rushton relies on a method called “aggregation of evidence”, (described here), in which he draws inferences from a wide number of studies, both historical and modern. Some researchers have been critical of this approach because of concerns that it overlooks flaws in measurements which may have occurred in specific studies.^[5] Other researchers have asserted that the predictions made by Rushton’s theories have not been borne out by reality,^[6] and have raised doubts as to the validity of “race” as a biological concept.^[7] (See Race and genetics.)

Professional opinions

Favorable

Arthur Jensen, an eminent psychologist^[8] and Professor Emeritus of educational psychology at the University of California, Berkeley,^[9] has said:

This brilliant book is the most impressive theory-based study...of the psychological and behavioral differences between the major racial groups that I have encountered in the world literature on this subject.^[10][11]

Hans Eysenck of the University of London has said:

Professor Rushton is widely known and respected for the unusual combination of rigour and originality in his work....Few concerned with understanding the problems associated with race can afford to disregard this storehouse of well-integrated information which gives rise to a remarkable synthesis.[4]

Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson (one of the two cofounders of r/K selection theory) states:

I think Phil is an honest and capable researcher ... The basic reasoning by Rushton is solid evolutionary reasoning; that is it's logically sound. If he had seen some apparent geographic variation for a non-human species--a species of sparrow or sparrow hawk, for example--no one would have batted an eye.^[12]

Some critics have asserted that the viewpoints of some of these researchers may have been biased, due to their having been grantees of the Pioneer Fund, the same organization which has funded much of Rushton’s research.^[13] However, this claim would not apply to E. O. Wilson, as he has never been a Pioneer Fund grantee.

Unfavorable

Psychologist and Peace Studies Researcher David P. Barash wrote in a scholarly review of Race, Evolution and Behavior^[1]:

I suspect that r- and K-selection does in fact have some relevance to variations in human behaviour, notably the so-called demographic transition, whereby economic development characteristically leads to reduced family size, and, moreover, a greater reliance on a variety of `K-type' traits. But this is a pan-human phenomenon, a flexible, adaptive response to changed environmental conditions of lowered mortality and greater pay-off attendant upon concentrating parental investment in a smaller number of offspring [...] Rushton wields r- and K-selection as a Procrustean bed, doing what he can to make the available data fit[...]. Bad science and virulent racial prejudice drip like pus from nearly every page of this despicable book."^[14]

Leonard Lieberman, professor of Anthropology at Central Michigan University wrote regarding Rushton's book:

"Rushton seldom carries out direct measurements and does not adequately explain his selective use of the research and writing of others."^[15]

Mailing Controversy

The 1st special abridged edition published under the Transaction Press name in 1999 caused considerable controversy when 40,000 copies were "mailed, unsolicited, to psychologists, anthropologists, and sociologists, many of whom were angered when they discovered that their identities and addresses had been obtained from their respective professional associations' mailing lists."^[16] The director of Transaction Press, Irving Louis Horowitz "condemned the abridged edition as a 'pamphlet' that he had never seen or approved prior to its publication."^[16] A subsequent 2nd special abridged edition was published in 2000 with a rejoinder to Horowitz's criticisms under a new entity called The Charles Darwin Research Institute.^[16]

Reviews

Favorable

• What is Intelligence and Who has it?, The New York Times’ review of Race, Evolution, and Behavior, The Decline of Intelligence in America, and The Bell Curve.
• The Return of Racial Science, by Glayde Whitney, published in Contemporary Psychology, December 1996, pp. 1189-1191.
• Review of Race, Evolution and Behavior, by Henry Harpending, published in Evolutionary Anthropology, 1995.

Unfavorable

• The Race-Research Funder, discussing the links of the Pioneer Fund to the distribution and positive reviews for Race, Evolution and Behavior.
• Review of Race, Evolution and Behavior, by Irving Louis Horowitz in Society, Jan-Feb 1995 v32 n2.

See also

• Race and intelligence

References

External links

• Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective; 2nd Special Abridged Edition