ant's review
4.0
I don’t think you have to agree with or be persuaded by all of the content of a book to learn from it, or even to understand a new perspective on a topic.
I found the information in this book to be well structured. The author presented his case, evidenced it and then referenced additional material for the reader to learn more. This is quite a dense book and I think it is deserving of the additional reading and research. The author freely states that in many cases the book conveys the current state of the research not settled facts.
Overall, I found the book to lay out the author’s case in very clear terms and that it dealt with the evidence in a very thoughtful manner.
I found the information in this book to be well structured. The author presented his case, evidenced it and then referenced additional material for the reader to learn more. This is quite a dense book and I think it is deserving of the additional reading and research. The author freely states that in many cases the book conveys the current state of the research not settled facts.
Overall, I found the book to lay out the author’s case in very clear terms and that it dealt with the evidence in a very thoughtful manner.
panashe's review
5.0
4.5 stars. Charles Murray, the controversial author behind *The Bell Curve* dips his toes into more controversial territory with *Human Diversity*. The central thesis of this book is that there exist notable psychological differences between groups of human beings, and these differences are due in large part to genetic factors.
Examples of groups differentiated in these ways include males/females, races (or the more academic 'ancestral populations') and social classes. He argues that these differences are biological in origin (not merely socially constructed) and have proven robust to any social policy interventions we could throw at them. We cannot hope to erase these differences though social policy. Instead, policy makers should acquaint themselves with the nature of these differences, and understand what is or isn't amenable to change.
Considering that Murray is a policy analyst and not a psychologist/anthropologist/geneticist/neuroscientist/some other -ist, his arguments are surprisingly good. It is clear that he has engaged the research, and explores the implications of very recent developments in all of these fields (as of early 2020) to the topic of human diversity. This book is rigorous enough that it can be hard to follow, even for a philomath like myself. Even then, I think he does well to illustrate his basic point, while making sure to expound on the relevant data and references for the interested reader. He never seems to overstate his point, coming to modest conclusions from the evidence.
The weakest chapter is probably the final one, where he leaves the data behind and begins to expound on his personal conservative views, calling for people to rally around family, community, faith, and vocation.
Examples of groups differentiated in these ways include males/females, races (or the more academic 'ancestral populations') and social classes. He argues that these differences are biological in origin (not merely socially constructed) and have proven robust to any social policy interventions we could throw at them. We cannot hope to erase these differences though social policy. Instead, policy makers should acquaint themselves with the nature of these differences, and understand what is or isn't amenable to change.
Considering that Murray is a policy analyst and not a psychologist/anthropologist/geneticist/neuroscientist/some other -ist, his arguments are surprisingly good. It is clear that he has engaged the research, and explores the implications of very recent developments in all of these fields (as of early 2020) to the topic of human diversity. This book is rigorous enough that it can be hard to follow, even for a philomath like myself. Even then, I think he does well to illustrate his basic point, while making sure to expound on the relevant data and references for the interested reader. He never seems to overstate his point, coming to modest conclusions from the evidence.
The weakest chapter is probably the final one, where he leaves the data behind and begins to expound on his personal conservative views, calling for people to rally around family, community, faith, and vocation.
stephang18's review
4.0
Very difficult reading. Filled with math, statistics and biology. Makes many points that should become starting points of further discussion and exploration. Murray says again and again that sociology will now become an actual science. Not sure about that, but he's a very smart guy and usually right.
More...