This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Bell Curve article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 200 days |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Global Bell Curve was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 22 February 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into The Bell Curve. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
The contents of the Cognitive elite page were merged into The Bell Curve on 4 December 2021. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contents of the The Bell Curve Wars: Race, Intelligence, and the Future of America page were merged into The Bell Curve. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
Arbitration Ruling on Race and Intelligence The article The Bell Curve, along with other articles relating to the area of conflict (namely, the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, broadly construed), is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, described in a 2010 Arbitration Committee case where the articulated principles included:
If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the above guidelines. You may also wish to review the full arbitration case page. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. |
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
What seems to be missing from the discussion is how well did The Bell Curve sell? A discussion of how many copies were sold, how many reprints were made, and critics’ assessment of the reason’s behind the book’s commercial success or lack of it are certainly worthwhile. Luokehao, 13 December 2020, 08:09 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.221.166.49 ( talk)
Of course the synopsis of a book always relies on one source. Why warn readers about that ? It is silly. 142.189.246.116 ( talk) 17:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
According to Gould, the book authors assume that intelligence must be:
But author Charles Murray said he made no such assumptions
Should we leave it at that? Or can we quote the passages which Gould claims indicate such assumptions?
And on the other hand, are there any passages in the book which refute Gould's claim? -- Uncle Ed ( talk) 14:48, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
The first citation is a guardian opinion article, it's argumentative and raises valid points, however I do not think it can be considered "mainstream science" as the article is not science, it puts forward a point of view that may have some scientific basis by one person.
The second citation is a vox article which is again an opinion article in a similar style to the first, it's a criticism of a podcast between Sam Harris and Charles Murray, it cannot be considered "mainstream science".
The third citation is an actual published article in a journal, however, it cannot be considered a scientific refutation of the view. It's an observation of how white supremacists use similar articles to the ones that Charles Murray has made to justify their bigotry. It is also a low impact article from a low impact journal, the article itself only has 43 citations, it cannot be considered "mainstream science".
I do not believe that the claim is sufficiently cited. 106.68.123.65 ( talk) 13:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Or does this source article [1] not even mention The Bell Curve? Goodtablemanners ( talk) 01:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Bell Curve article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 200 days |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Global Bell Curve was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 22 February 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into The Bell Curve. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
The contents of the Cognitive elite page were merged into The Bell Curve on 4 December 2021. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contents of the The Bell Curve Wars: Race, Intelligence, and the Future of America page were merged into The Bell Curve. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
Arbitration Ruling on Race and Intelligence The article The Bell Curve, along with other articles relating to the area of conflict (namely, the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, broadly construed), is currently subject to active arbitration remedies, described in a 2010 Arbitration Committee case where the articulated principles included:
If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the above guidelines. You may also wish to review the full arbitration case page. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. |
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
What seems to be missing from the discussion is how well did The Bell Curve sell? A discussion of how many copies were sold, how many reprints were made, and critics’ assessment of the reason’s behind the book’s commercial success or lack of it are certainly worthwhile. Luokehao, 13 December 2020, 08:09 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.221.166.49 ( talk)
Of course the synopsis of a book always relies on one source. Why warn readers about that ? It is silly. 142.189.246.116 ( talk) 17:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
According to Gould, the book authors assume that intelligence must be:
But author Charles Murray said he made no such assumptions
Should we leave it at that? Or can we quote the passages which Gould claims indicate such assumptions?
And on the other hand, are there any passages in the book which refute Gould's claim? -- Uncle Ed ( talk) 14:48, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
The first citation is a guardian opinion article, it's argumentative and raises valid points, however I do not think it can be considered "mainstream science" as the article is not science, it puts forward a point of view that may have some scientific basis by one person.
The second citation is a vox article which is again an opinion article in a similar style to the first, it's a criticism of a podcast between Sam Harris and Charles Murray, it cannot be considered "mainstream science".
The third citation is an actual published article in a journal, however, it cannot be considered a scientific refutation of the view. It's an observation of how white supremacists use similar articles to the ones that Charles Murray has made to justify their bigotry. It is also a low impact article from a low impact journal, the article itself only has 43 citations, it cannot be considered "mainstream science".
I do not believe that the claim is sufficiently cited. 106.68.123.65 ( talk) 13:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Or does this source article [1] not even mention The Bell Curve? Goodtablemanners ( talk) 01:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)