28 THE MISMEASURE OF MAN
intelligence never alters very much in each sequential formulation.
Each surge to popularity works with the same fallacious logic and
flawed information.
The reasons for recurrence are sociopolitical, and not far to
seek: resurgences of biological determinism correlate with episodes
of political retrenchment, particularly with campaigns for reduced
government spending on social programs, or at times of fear among
ruling elites, when disadvantaged groups sow serious social unrest
or even threaten to usurp power. What argument against social
change could be more chillingly effective than the claim that estab-
lished orders, with some groups on top and others at the bottom,
exist as an accurate reflection of the innate and unchangeable intel-
lectual capacities of people so ranked?
Why struggle and spend to raise the unboostable IQ of races or
social classes at the bottom of the economic ladder; better simply to
accept nature's unfortunate dictates and save a passel of federal
funds; (we can then more easily sustain tax breaks for the wealthy!)?
Why bother yourself about underrepresentation of disadvantaged
groups in your honored and remunerative bailiwick if such absence
records the diminished ability or general immorality, biologically
imposed, of most members in the rejected group, and not the legacy
or current reality of social prejudice? (The groups so stigmatized
may be races, classes, sexes, behavioral propensities, religions, or
national origins. Biological determinism is a general theory, and
particular bearers of current disparagement act as surrogates for all
others subject to similar prejudice at different times and places. In
this sense, calls for solidarity among demeaned groups should not
be dismissed as mere political rhetoric, but rather applauded as
proper reactions to common reasons for mistreatment.)
Please note that I am discussing the cyclical surge to popularity of
innatist arguments for unitary, rankable intelligence, not the epi-
sodic formulation of such claims. The general argument is always
present, always available, always published, always exploitable. Epi-
sodes of intense public attention therefore record swings in the pen-
dulum of political preferences toward the right position for
exploiting this hoary old fallacy with a seriousness based on naive
hope or cynical recognition of evident utility. Resurgences of biolog-
ical determinism correlate with periods of political retrenchment
and destruction of social generosity.