THE HEREDITARIAN THEORY OF IQ i8 3
The dismantling of Binet's intentions in America
In summary, Binet insisted upon three cardinal principles for
using his tests. All his caveats were later disregarded, and his inten-
tions overturned, by the American hereditarians who translated his
scale into written form as a routine device for testing all children.
- The scores are a practical device; they do not buttress any
theory of intellect. They do not define anything innate or perma-
nent. We may not designate what they measure as "intelligence" or
any other reified entity. - The scale is a rough, empirical guide for identifying mildly
retarded and learning-disabled children who need special help. It
is not a device for ranking normal children. - Whatever the cause of difficulty in children identified for
help, emphasis shall be placed upon improvement through special
training. Low scores shall not be used to mark children as innately
incapable.
If Binet's principles had been followed, and his tests consis-
tently used as he intended, we would have been spared a major
misuse of science in our century. Ironically, many American school
boards have come full cycle, and now use IQ tests only as Binet
originally recommended: as instruments for assessing children
with specific learning problems. Speaking personally, I feel that
tests of the IQ type were helpful in the proper diagnosis of my own
learning-disabled son. His average score, the IQ itself, meant noth-
ing, for it was only an amalgam of some very high and very low
scores; but the pattern of low values indicated his areas of deficit.
The misuse of mental tests is not inherent in the idea of testing
itself. It arises primarily from two fallacies, eagerly (so it seems)
embraced by those who wish to use tests for the maintenance of
social ranks and distinctions: reification and hereditarianism. The
next chapter shall treat reification—the assumption that test scores
represent a single, scalable thing in the head called general intelli-
gence.
The hereditarian fallacy is not the simple claim that IQ is to
some degree "heritable." I have no doubt that it is, though the
egree has clearly been exaggerated by the most avid hereditari-
ans- It is hard to find any broad aspect of human performance or
anatomy that has no heritable component at all. The hereditarian
acy resides in two false implications drawn from this basic fact: