Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Whatever became of Nicholas Wade, and the Troublesome Inheritance?

Denyse O'Leary
June 23, 2015
Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, News
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
arroba Email

Further to PBS’s “shocking” revelation about long-ago humans (“we met and mated with other types of human” and “40 kya human bones contain Neanderthal and current genes,” one couldn’t help wondering about last year’s apparent attempt to revive Darwinian racism, in the form of science writer Nicholas Wade’s Troublesome Inheritance.

In the increasingly Soviet system that governs the evolution elite today, science writer Ash Jogalekar was supposed to know that he should privately agree with the premise of the “Dark Enlightenment” in which non-racists are “creationists” but—publicly—mildly disparage the book. He made the mistake of actually saying he liked it:

That mainly shows us the power that Darwin’s name exercises over a large swatch of the U grad public. Just invoking his sacred name sanitizes what they would all otherwise be screaming about as “racism!” A few of them get it.

The people who disagree with this direction for research are sometime forced to act in bad faith, as Scientific American did with Jogalekar (who really did get fired). They ostensibly fired him, Soviet-style, over a lack of sufficient repudiation of physicist Feynman for being a jerk around women. All poor Jog had said was, maybe it was more acceptable in mid-century than now (and let’s face it, Jog probably doesn’t know; no way is he old enough). It was utterly nothing unless the mag was trying to get rid of him anyway over Troublesome, but didn’t want to have to discuss that. Book was well named, anyway.

All which said, the book appears to have sunk out of sight, in a well-managed PR operation:

The moral of which is, PR will cover if one floats what sounds like racism as an implication of Darwinism, as long as one disparages what one is promoting. Or what?

Compare Steve Meyer Darwin’s Doubt:

Lower overall but higher in areas of actual science interest.

But can anyone imagine the same deadtree/hairhead media hosting a serious discussion of the implications of the Cambrian explosion, despite the many thoughtful people who obviously care?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

See also: Scientific American may be owned by Nature, but it is run by Twitter

Comments
Jerry at 2, I'm not so much interested in the book as the response to it. Darwinian racism, sociobiology, etc. appear to inhabit a delicately protected class of such things. Darwin's sacred name protects what would otherwise be beaten to death. Jogalekar apparently didn't know he was supposed to disapprove. Was he supposed to secretly agree but publicly disapprove? Was that the step he missed? No, I don't know either, but something weird flew past, that's for sure. If Wade's publisher sent me a review copy, I suppose I would have to read it and I would. But I am not *paying* for Darwin's kabuki theatre. No way. I'm more interested in who's writing the script and why. News
Jerry. UD did many, excellent, interesting, and important threads on Wade's book. It is a book about stupidly defining human smarts by race. No excuses . are you ashamed of the conclusions? A little difference is enough to write a book and attack peoples abilities and exalt others. I don't agree racism is a real thing but why isn't the world crying racism more? Hmmmm. its all a attack on the belief in mankinds being made in Gods image and no such thing as smarts being affected by genes. Its a worn out idea in these times. it figures it comes from evolutionism. Do you believe your smarter then others because of your race? Please list winners and losers!!! Robert Byers
Denyse, Have you read the book? I have and fond nothing to object to. Most of it is speculation and he tries to show that environmental both natural and human shape who has offspring. I think there is something to that but there are no wild differences due to it. There are definitely different races but how much of a difference it makes is debatable. I found the book interesting and the reactions to it even more interesting. jerry
I agree Wades book is wrong, stupid, non common sense BUT its not racism. Its fair and square to say races/sex are superior/inferior to each other even if wrong. Racism is a left wing word invented to control opinion. Racism always means MALICE. And always means RACE is not even a option in defining human abilities etc. Racism never existed. Just wrong ideas. I live in Toronto surrounded by a majority of foreign identities. most would agree race/identity/sex matters in abilities and innately Its only Canadians and a few others who believe all men are created equal in smarts. I believe this from observation and the bible. Thats a minority biew however even amongst those who lose. They are not racists. They are not bad and NOT WRONG JUST BECAUSE RACE IS SETTLED AS NOT RELEVANT. Racism, anti-semitism, sexism, homophobia are the myths of the bad guys even if there are immoral ideas in these matters. Wade is a jerk from the past but lots of them are there. He doesn't think he won't be invited to scholarly circles parties. WE can oppose ideas keenly without using the bad guys concepts. Robert Byers

Leave a Reply