Heredity, IQ, and Social Issues
- Episode aired Oct 17, 1973
YOUR RATING
Photos
Storyline
Featured review
Historically relevant, but the pro-nurture side academic is totally clueless
Episode S0112, Recorded on October 16, 1973
Guests: Thomas G. Bever, Richard J. Herrnstein, Andrea Glass, Harvey Grill, Elisabeth Clark
Kinda boring to be fair. It's the basic IQ stuff with nature vs. Nurture debate. Obviously Richard Herrnstein is a great guest who can explain the very basics to the audience. But William F. Buckley Jr. Did what Fox News so often is accused of doing. They always try to have a progressive left-wing voice in their studio, but it will often be a nerd or just a confused screeching woman with no self-control or great intellect. Being a less than great representation of their political side. In this case the nurture side academic is all over the place. He doesn't seem to understand even the basic studies Herrnstein brings up and instead he attacks any claim, word, definition, or idea Herrnstein has with quite a mean and lazy attitude. In such a confused and rambling matter that Herrstein constantly has to correct him. And both Buckley and the audience are equally confused and irritated about his vague claims and such an extremely focus on nurture that he refuses to accept even very basic facts in psychology about IQ and heritability. Always claiming that the science in this area is "debated" and "not proven". The debate is thereby quite a waste of time. Is it impossible to find a smart and knowledgeable pro-nurture academic? Could be. But it's just a shame that Herrnstein gets away from this debate without being put on the line and having to question some difficult questions. It's too easy for him.
I give it an extra star for being historically curious. But academically it's rather a waste of time. Shame as the potential is great, but when one side ignores studies and results that have been replicated 100 times over there is no debate to be had. It's just a decimation.
Guests: Thomas G. Bever, Richard J. Herrnstein, Andrea Glass, Harvey Grill, Elisabeth Clark
Kinda boring to be fair. It's the basic IQ stuff with nature vs. Nurture debate. Obviously Richard Herrnstein is a great guest who can explain the very basics to the audience. But William F. Buckley Jr. Did what Fox News so often is accused of doing. They always try to have a progressive left-wing voice in their studio, but it will often be a nerd or just a confused screeching woman with no self-control or great intellect. Being a less than great representation of their political side. In this case the nurture side academic is all over the place. He doesn't seem to understand even the basic studies Herrnstein brings up and instead he attacks any claim, word, definition, or idea Herrnstein has with quite a mean and lazy attitude. In such a confused and rambling matter that Herrstein constantly has to correct him. And both Buckley and the audience are equally confused and irritated about his vague claims and such an extremely focus on nurture that he refuses to accept even very basic facts in psychology about IQ and heritability. Always claiming that the science in this area is "debated" and "not proven". The debate is thereby quite a waste of time. Is it impossible to find a smart and knowledgeable pro-nurture academic? Could be. But it's just a shame that Herrnstein gets away from this debate without being put on the line and having to question some difficult questions. It's too easy for him.
I give it an extra star for being historically curious. But academically it's rather a waste of time. Shame as the potential is great, but when one side ignores studies and results that have been replicated 100 times over there is no debate to be had. It's just a decimation.
- JurijFedorov
- Sep 9, 2022
- Permalink
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content