The g Factor   General Intelligence and its Implications   Christopher BRAND
PreviousContentsPrefaceIntroductionChap. IChap. IIChap. IIIChap. IVEpilogueNext

 

 

Dedication
Prefacing Quotations
About the Author
Foreword by the Author to the Precedent Edition
Press Coverage in 1996

 

TO DOROTHY, MY MOTHER

 

Prefacing Quotations

    "....in regard to mental qualities, their transmission is manifest in our dogs, horses and other domestic animals. Besides special tastes and habits, general intelligence, courage, bad and good tempers, etc., are certainly transmitted."
    Charles DARWIN, 1871.

    "In course of time, there seems no reason why the intellective index (or system of indices) should not become so well understood, as to enable every child's education to be properly graded according to his or her capacity. Thus the present difficulties of picking out the abler children for more advanced education and the 'mentally defective' children for less advanced would vanish in the solution of the more general problem of adapting education to all."
    Bernard HART & Charles SPEARMAN, 1912.

    "....the injunction to 'face the facts' has for too long been advanced within the delusion that 'the facts' are there and have merely been 'discovered' by psychometry.... IQ psychology subsists on a thin gruel of theory produced (in a way typical of the pre-paradigmatic sciences) under great ideological constraints in turn-of-the-century Britain.... The revived fashion for the g factor perhaps indicates a belated recognition among psychometricians of the shortcomings of operationalism, and the need to ground IQ psychology in a theory of intelligence."
    Brian EVANS and Bernard WAITES, 1981.

    "The big unreported story about the study of intelligence in the last decade is the remarkable resilience and importance of g."
    Charles MURRAY, 1995.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

    The author is well known for his contributions to research and debate on intelligence and personality. He pioneered 'inspection time' testing in Britain and the USA. He lectures in psychology at the University of Edinburgh and is a Fellow of the Galton Institute.


FOREWORD BY THE AUTHOR TO THE PRECEDENT EDITION

  • On February 29th, 1996, this book, THE g FACTOR, was published in the UK. by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. of Chichester. Several weeks later, on April 14th, London newspaper reports of interviews with me began to appear saying I thought Black people had a lower average IQ than did Whites; and that, since I thought psychology and race had deep links, probably substantially genetic, I had agreed I could be called a 'scientific' - though not a common-or-garden - 'racist'.
     
  • On April 17th, with the book was on the verge of publication in the USA, Wiley Inc., of New York, denounced (unspecified) views of mine, both relayed by the media and appearing in the book, as "repellent." Thus they were withdrawing the book from publication. UK Wiley promptly followed suit.
     
  • On May 31st, Edinburgh University, having set up an Inquiry into me after students had demanded I be sacked, announced publicly that I was a fair examiner and that they would not be bringing any disciplinary charges against me for anything at all. However, they would be expecting {largely unspecified} improvements in my 'teaching style.' Apparently I would somehow need to cultivate better relations with students; and my Department would have to provide alternative coverage of the 'controversial' subjects on which I lecture. Privately, the University wrote to me to say I should go easy on sexual topics and provide the students with more spoonfeeding [handouts, visual aids]. I denounced the 'Inquiry' as a failed witch-hunt that had produced only a farce - while odiously reserving to itself the right to resume its unconstitutional inquisition at any moment of its own choosing.
     
  • On June 10th, I began 'going public' (in emailed Newsletters and on the Internet) with my various offers to Wiley as to how to settle the dispute and re-publish the book. At the time of writing, however, Wiley have agreed to none of my offers.

The above is, I trust, an objective brief summary of what can readily be imagined to have been two months of grave uncertainty as to the fate of my friendships, my finances, my career and my book. Essentially I have been hounded for my realism about race and IQ by my publisher, many elements of the Press, left-wing academics such as Professors Steve Jones (University College London) and Steven Rose (The Open University), my students, the Anti-Nazi League and my own university. I have made many new and wonderful friends in the course of all this. In particular, Calvin Langton, Ed Miller, John Pate, Bill Summers, Glayde Whitney, Rita Zürcher of the US National Association of Scholars (NAS) and John Furedy of the Canadian Society for Academic Freedom and Standards (SAFS) have provided invaluable support. However, the failure of politicians, lawyers, publishers and organized bodies to come to my support has been striking. In Britain, the only organized group to campaign conspicuously for my academic freedom of expression has been the Revolutionary Communist Party - though their efforts were ably complemented by those of the well-connected left-wing journalist Marek Kohn. Fortunately I have the 'old' form of academic tenure that is proof against my being made 'redundant'; but when a publisher can de-publish without consultation after a year of work and successful skipping through reviewers' hoops, it can be seen that the laws of contract and the arrangements for academic freedom of expression are both in a parlous state in the modern West. (Why did I not go to law? - For the usual reason. In Britain, only the very rich and the legally-aided poor can afford the gamble that breach-of-contract and defamation actions involve.)

Thus this edition comes about very much as an act of desperation - hoping to make my findings and views known despite truly vast efforts to frustrate me. In view of the many kind words that have been said about the book by eminent colleagues (notably Emeritus Professor Hans Eysenck, Institute of Psychiatry, University of London, Emeritus Professor Richard Lynn, University of Ulster, Dr Jim McKenzie, University of East London, and Professor Phil Rushton, University of Western Ontario), I have no doubt it is worth making this effort to reach out. I believe that only those who will scour the book for the alleged "repellent" passages will be thoroughly disappointed.

I have made minor corrections for this edition and am particularly grateful to John Loehlin and Glayde Whitney for improvements they drew to my attention. However I have done nothing to modify or remove any of the passages that might, on casual reading or quotation out-of-context, send the high priests of 'political correctness' into hysterics. Because I am here working from my disks of February 1995, not from Wiley's of February 1996, there will be many minor discrepancies between the two texts. However, anyone wishing to check whether passages appearing here also appeared as such in the Wiley edition is welcome to check with me. (Please send in the article or chapter you have drafted, highlighting the quotations from 'THE 'g ' FACTOR' that you wish to make and attribute to the Wiley edition, and I will check correspondence for you.)

Please note that I maintain copyright on this edition. Extracts may be published only with permission. Reproduction, which must be of the full text, may only be made for personal study purposes and on no account for sale. Please note that, as and when a publisher comes forward, and I reassign copyright, it is likely that no further large-scale copying would be permitted. For the latest news of the copy permissions, please consult my Internet sites (given below).

There is much more to 'the Brand affair' than I dare risk boring some readers with in this Foreword to the book itself. So I will just indicate press coverage that interested readers may like to follow; and then give the Internet sites at which the day-by-day history of the affair is recounted. Professional coverage of the case is being maintained by Dr Martin Cloonan, Case Study Programme, Department of Politics, University of York, York Y01 5DD. In the USA, NAS offers an email service of my Newsletters and their own coverage of the affair: .

 

Press coverage

  • All Scottish newspapers from April 15 for c. 10 days
  • Guardian (London), 25 iv 1996 (E.Clouston, p.4)
  • New Scientist (London) leading article 26 iv 1996
  • Times Higher (London), 26 iv 1996, pp. 19, 48
  • Sunday Times (London), 28 iv 1996, c.p5 also letter from Professor Hans Eysenck
  • US National Association of Scholars Science News List (NASSNL), 29 iv 1996
  • BBC TV 2, 'Newsnight', Tues 30 iv 1996, c.2305hrs
  • Guardian, 1 v 1996 (Gary Younge, 'The gene genies')
  • Nature (London) 2 v 1996, p.33
  • Science (Washington), 3 v 1996, p.644, news report & photo
  • New Scientist (London) leading article 3 v 1996
  • The Observer (London), 5 v 1996, 'Arsenic and old race'
  • California Valley Times 8 v 1996 (by Linda Seebach)
  • Nature, 9 v 1996, news report & photo
  • National Association of Scholars, Science News List (NASSNL), 9 v 1996
  • The Spectator, 11 v 1996 (K.Malik,'Race towards censorship' pp. 19-21)
  • Chronicle of Higher Education (Washington), 16 v 1996 (Liz McMillen) http://www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk/racegallery/ (Website run by Marek Kohn, author of 'The Race Gallery')
  • Independent on Sunday [Supplement], 19 v 1996 (M.Kohn) NASSNL, 22 v 1996
  • http://www.nas.org/pressreleases/wiley.htm (Statement re Wiley DePublisher from US National Association of Scholars and the Canadian Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship.)
  • BBC TV Scotland, 31 v 1996
  • Evening News (Edinburgh), 31 v 1996 : 'Uni warns race row author to steady on.But lecturer hits back at report.'
    BRAND:"It's entirely unsatisfactory that the University should produce this vague statement which I can't possibly reply to."
  • Chronicle of Higher Education, 31 v 1996, p.A6
  • The Herald (Glasgow), 1 vi 1996 (Lynne Robertson) : PICTURE CAPTION: 'Chris Brand: unrepentant after university inquiry.' "Mr Brand branded the university investigation as "no different from a witch hunt." He added: "It's obviously a relief when a witch hunt into anything and everything about one is called off for a while.""
  • The Scotsman (Edinburgh), 1 vi 1996 (Graeme Wilson, p.5)
  • The Morning Star (London), 1 vi 1996 (Our Scottish Correspondent) 'Lecturer told to 'modify' style.'
    "[According to Dean MacCormick] the psychology department is to "redistribute the teaching workload in relation to such controversial topics as intelligence as intelligence and personality"."
  • Guardian (London), 1 vi 1996 (Gary Younge, p.6, Home News)
  • The Scotsman, 5 vi 1996 ('Academic freedom undermined', letter from Hugh Peto & Fiona McEwan)
  • Times Higher, 7 vi 1996 ('Call for improved Brand', p.2, by Aisling Irwin & Olga Wojtas)
  • The Guardian, 7 vi 1996 (Prof. Steve Jones [University College London], p. 19)
  • Radio Leeds (UK), 10 vi 1996, c.11.10hrsGMT (Producer Hilary Robinson)
  • NASSNL, 12 vi 1996, Item 5.
  • Science 272, 14 vi 1996, 'University review leaves iconoclast intact' (p. 1593).
  • American Renaissance, vii 1996 (News and book review by Jared Taylor and Thomas Jackson)

My Newsletters about the affair, their back-copy Archives, and Summaries of the THE g FACTOR's four chapters can be found on the Internet at the following sites. http://www.ed.ac.uk/~crb/book/ and http://www.webcom.com/zurcher/thegfactor/index.htm

CHRIS BRAND
EDINBURGH, JULY 1996

 

 

PreviousContentsPrefaceIntroductionChap. IChap. IIChap. IIIChap. IVEpilogueNext
The g Factor   Christopher BRAND - www.douance.org/qi/brandtgf.htm - REDISTRIBUTION FORBIDDEN
free web hosting | free hosting | Business WebSite Hosting | Free Website Submission | shopping cart | php hosting