Africans, Westerners And Intelligence.
Colin Baker

 


Introduction:

On the front page of Britain's Independent newspaper of 17th October 2007, the headline read as follows;





'Africans are less intelligent than Westerners' says DNA pioneer





The highly controversial American geneticist, Dr. James D. Watson, was the man responsible for making this particular claim. A man well versed, in the stoking of theoretical fires, by suggesting in the past, among other things; a possible link between skin colour and sex drive, genes and homosexuality, and genes and stupidity. Essentially, Watson is a genetic reductionist when it comes to explanations of human characteristics and behaviour. No doubt, it is only a matter of time before he asserts that thumb twiddling, backside scratching and all the rest of it, are also genetically determined forms of human behaviour. His most recent genetic-based claim argues that Africans are genetically inferior to Westerners in the intelligence stakes. Indeed, he asserts that "genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade". Based on this kind of reasoning, Watson is, by his own admission, "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa".


The implications of such reasoning are obvious. For Watson's theory logically permits all Westerners (by which I take him to mean all those naturally born to an industrially developed capitalist world, most of whom are white, and of which he is one) to deduce that they are intellectually, and thus politically, economically and culturally superior, to the majority of humans on the African continent, most of whom are black. It was just such an imagined sense of superiority as we shall see later, that ideologically stood to justify the murderous activities of several European colonial powers over the past few hundred years across parts of Africa.


Discussing Watson's most recent genetic arguments, Charlotte Hunt-Grubbe writes in The Times (2007, online) that, "critics may see his (Watson's) acceptance of 'softer-science' studies - that attempt to link IQ with specific genes, but remove society and other factors from the equation - as a dangerously flippant approach to a complex issue". To a degree, it would appear that Hunt-Grubbe's concerns are well founded. For example, in the Independent's full story treatment of Watson's theoretical remarks (p. 2), we learn that the Equality and Human Rights Commission is pouring over its every word. Similarly, Steven Rose, professor of biological sciences at The Open University, accuses Watson of being "out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically". And anti-racism campaigners for their part, angrily argue that Watson's remarks relating to purported levels of 'inferior African intelligence' might well contravene, one or other aspect of racial hatred laws as such laws currently exist.


I too, see problems with Watson's genetic-based theory. In what follows, and not withstanding the fact that Watson has achieved great scientific heights in the biological sphere, not least regarding his 1960's Noble Prize-winning work relating to human DNA structure, I intend arguing two general points:






1. Watson's intelligence theory is deeply flawed, both logically and empirically. In this sense, Watson's desire to know has I fear, been supplanted by his metaphysical desire to think he knows.


2. Watson's African intelligence theory is essentially a natural and spontaneous intellectual product. An illusory strand of ideology which ultimately betrays his abject failure to theoretically transcend the practical limits of the existing capitalist structure.






Different Kinds Of Intelligence:


Watson of course, is no pioneer when it comes to issues of the intelligence quotient (IQ) and the seeking of such pure human intelligence. "Intelligence testing [has] its origins in the psychological laboratory of University College, London, where [around 100 years ago] Professor [Charles] Spearman broke new ground...when he added to his experiments on vision, hearing...and the rest, his attempt to isolate from other factors a measurable quotient for pure intelligence, which he called g" (Lewis, 1974, p. 149-50). The Independent article does not explicitly state the exact kinds of methods and concepts applied by Watson in his own quest to discover evidence of the illusive 'g'. Suffice to say that such methods and conceptions, along with Watson's various interpretations were almost certainly glazed, (or else dripping) with Western cultural bias as to what constitutes human intelligence. In this sense, "[IQ] intelligence is not intelligence. It is simply what the tester has decided to test" (Lewis, 1974, p. 155).


In other words, and this is the essential point, there are different kinds of intelligence. If, for the purposes of this work, we take intelligence to mean 'the capacity and application of the human brain for / to engage in the task of practical problem solving, and under definite material conditions' then the diversity of human intelligence both within and between cultures or races becomes obvious. "The agricultural worker has a vast knowledge and a shrewd judgment that would nevertheless give him a very low score in [Western IQ tests]. [Indeed] we are slow to recognise that professional footballers are a type of intellectual and that 'savages' are clever [in their own way]" (Lewis, 1974, p. 159). An African peasant in this regard, draws upon vastly different stores of knowledge with which to guide his or her intelligent, practical activities when compared with, say, the day-to-day intellectual activities of one or other Western car salesman. Similarly, a Western solicitor exercises a different kind of intelligence to that of a Western doctor, or a Western accountant, or a Western garage mechanic, or a Western engineer, or a Western graffiti artist, or a Western engine driver and so on.


IQ tests then, are at best limited given such considerations, and only relevant when applied to people of a similar culture and social environment, for it is impossible to formulate an intelligence quotient common to an imagined 'general intellect' of all humans. One definition for what constitutes adult literacy here in Britain has roughly been worded thus;





'the ability to cope with written material in the information age'





Now then, and given just a little thought, it is obvious that such a 'Western' definition as to what constitutes adult literacy would be all but meaningless were it applied to test, say, the intelligence of an adult sub-Saharan bushman or peasant. In this sense, if generally accepted Western conceptions of intelligence are uncritically applied as the primary means of inferring IQ levels of non-Western peoples (most humans living on the African continent for example), then should we truly be surprised when Westerners come out on top in such tests?


Yet what if positions were reversed? What if, for example, African bushmen or peasants were to apply one or other criteria of their own to test one or other dimension of the intelligence of a representative group of Western peoples? How well would the typical Westerner fair with such IQ tests then do you think? In practical terms then, what do you think might happen, if a completely ignorant Westerner (ignorant in terms of African cultural practices, topography, history etc..) were to be parachuted deep into the sub-Saharan bush, and then instructed to apply his / her (Western) intelligence with a view to surviving unaided in such a context? How effective would his / her intelligence be in such circumstances? Perhaps not useless in an absolute sense, but a lot less effective I'm sure, than the specific intelligence of someone who has lived in the African bush all of his / her life. The latter would almost certainly prove to be a far more 'intelligent' human being under such circumstances.


Different kinds of human intelligence then, depend not upon genetics per se, (how can a suggested genetic constant explain away so much intellectual variability?) but instead upon an interaction between the natural and the social. Humans are obviously biological beings, but the essential point to grasp is that people's biological potentialities, become their actualities, in inseparable relationship with the historically specific social and natural environment in which the people in question live out their lives. Dr. Leslie White (1969, p.149) in his book 'The Science Of Culture', appears to advance a similar kind of argument when he suggests that "human nature is merely culture, thrown against a screen of nerves, glands, sense organs, muscles etc". It is from within such diverse socio-cultural contexts, that the myriad forms of human intelligence, and the myriad criteria for defining and understanding such human intelligence arise and evolve throughout human history. Thus, Lewis argues that "[IQ] intelligence is not purely biological - it is tested by performance, and the result is not merely a reflection of the biological endowment, but measures that part of it which has been developed and the way in which it has been developed [in relation to historically specific, and culturally specific environmental and social factors]" (Lewis, 1962, p. 117-8). Marx and Engels (1940, p.27) neatly summed up the essence of intelligence when they argued in The German Ideology, that "the real intellectual wealth of the individual, depends entirely on the wealth of his real connections".


A more general point is worth making here I think. Even if one is minded for a moment to accept limited and controversial, comparative findings which may suggest that some Westerners are more intelligent along certain agreed measures than some Africans, does that then give Westerners (above all the giant capitalist multinationals) the right to go ahead and recklessly exploit Africa's natural resource wealth along with millions of its people? To deprive Africans en masse of their various political, economic and cultural rights whether as individuals or groups? To prevent a continent from enriching and developing the material and cultural needs of its people?






Intellectual Overlap:


Another general problem with IQ testing is this. Any attempt to conceptually juxtapose an imagined homogeneous, superior group of people alongside an imagined homogeneous, inferior group of people as Watson effectively does with regards 'Westerners and Africans' is to subjectively represent, what does not exist objectively. Neither Africa nor the West constitute homogeneous units but are made up of individuals. Thus, even if Watson's particular IQ tests demonstrate that a tiny tested group of Westerners came out with higher IQ scores than a tiny tested group of Africans, it does not follow from this, that such limited findings can then be generalised across both these groups. In other words, some individuals from the imagined inferior human group will nonetheless be more intelligent (and applying just about any culturally established IQ criterion one wishes to choose) than some individuals from the imagined superior group. Throughout African and Western civilisation alike, one is able to remark a broad range of human intellectual potential. The assertion of intellectual group superiority / inferiority therefore, is a meaningless one.


There are both literate, and illiterate Westerners then, just as there are both literate, and illiterate Africans along with a range of intellectual abilities existing within these two polar extremes. Africa generally, is undoubtedly backward in terms of industrial and scientific development as it currently exists. Partly no doubt as a direct consequence of this, one source notes that around 30% of males and 40-50% of females are currently classed (from a Western IQ perspective) as illiterate across the continent south of the Sahara (Wikipedia, Literacy, 2007, online). Yet despite this, there are countless intelligent Africans, even if we apply Western criteria as a measure of IQ such as the ability to read, write, process and communicate difficult ideas and so on. To begin with, and from an individual perspective, Nelson Mandela is surely an obvious example of an intelligent African (not to mention world leader), so too Doris Lessing (writer), Dikembe Motombo (sportsman), Dr. Chris Ouma (National AIDS Program Co-ordintor) along with thousands upon thousands of other such Africans. Such 'intelligent people' are indeed to be found throughout Africa if only we are minded to look. Perhaps less well known, is the fact that there has been an Association of African Universities in existence since 1967, championing the cause of higher education generally, and in 45 countries across the continent (AAU, 2007, online). For example in Eastern Africa, universities can be found in Burundi, Comoros, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Across Middle Africa, in Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and S�o Tom� and Pr�ncipe. Across Western Africa, in Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, C�te D'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leoneand Togo. In Northern Africa, in Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Sudan and Tunisia. Finally, within Southern Africa, there are universities in Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa and Swaziland (Wikipedia, Universities and Colleges by Country - Africa, 2007, online).


The existence of such institutions undoubtedly reflects the fact, not only that many native Africans succeed in higher education, but also the principle that changed circumstances and opportunities, make for changed people. For example, two years ago, the multi-millionaire businessman Sir Richard Branson, announced that his personally funded 'school of entrepreneurship' "ha[d] been opened at a unique South African university, which provides virtually free education for poor students" (BBC News, 2005, online). If there were any truth in the fact that Africans were genetically inferior concerning their various intellectual capabilities, then I am sure that Mr. Branson would not have risked investing his millions under such circumstances. For his ultimate motivation was to guide young Africans onto a "golden highway to economic freedom". In other words, Branson's aim was and is, to educate would-be future capitalists. The very fact however, that Branson did invest his money, implies not only that he expects a positive outcome in a general business sense, but more importantly in my view, that he naturally embraces the principle that if material circumstances are changed, (in this case, the provision of better educational opportunities for poor, young South Africans) then people's intellectual capacities, and no matter what their skin colour, can also be positively developed. Africa then, is by no means the intellectual basket case that Watson would have us believe. That said of course, it is undeniable that illiteracy levels across the continent as a whole, are a very real problem.


Such illiteracy however, is by no means an absolute, African phenomenon. For example, ..."in the UK, the 1999 Moser study reported that some seven million adults assessed by the International Adult Literacy Survey were seriously deficient in literacy (National Literacy Trust, 2004, online). Similarly, a 2000 United Nations report into UK illiteracy rates (illiteracy defined as: 'relative inability to read and write at a level adequate for communication, or at a level that lets one understand and communicate ideas in a literate society, so as to take full part in that society) found that "[a]t least seven million adults in the UK are functionally illiterate" (BBC News, 2000, online). No doubt partly as a reflection of such reality, key skills courses aimed at teaching very basic English and maths skills (i.e. aimed at forming the basis for increases in intelligence) are now reasonably ubiquitous across the UK. And in 2005, the then UK Education Secretary Ruth Kelly asserted, "It is totally unacceptable that at least 70,000 16-year-olds a year are weak in the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic" (BBC News, 2005, online). Still in a UK context, information has recently been published showing that some first year undergraduates arriving at one or other British university, including the much-lorded top two - Oxford and Cambridge - are found wanting in the most basic of (Western) intellectual skills. Research published by the Nuffield Review into Higher Education for example, found among other things that; " Physics admissions tutors complained: 'They can't even write in sentences. Their spelling is appalling. They can't be understood ... they graduate with a 2:1 but they still can't spell or write English'. And from biology admissions tutors: "Elementary maths is missing. They can't put decent sentences together' and 'Students hate numbers, they're scared stiff of numbers' " (Nuffield Review, 2006, online).


Meanwhile, in the United States, currently the globe's most powerful economy, functional illiteracy (defined as 'the inability of an individual to use reading, writing and computational skills efficiently in everyday life situations') is significant. For example, the number of functionally illiterate Americans on a national scale was recently estimated at 21% (that's around 60 million people given the US population is currently around 300 million). Similarly, in the US capital city Washington DC, functional illiteracy rates are significantly higher than the national average, at an estimated 36% of the adult population. Moreover, a study "done by the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development in 2003 compared literacy and numeracy rates in Bermuda, Canada, Italy, Norway, Switzerland, and the United States. Among this group, the United States came in fifth out of six. Only Italy had a worse rate of literacy/numeracy" (Associated Content, 2007, online). No doubt these figures conceal as much as they reveal, not least because America has a large migrant population sourced from all regions of the world with all this implies in the (il)literacy stakes with regards language barriers and the like. Nonetheless, it is still a little perplexing to read such figures while at one and the same time, an American scientist (James Watson) is asserting the superior intelligence of Westerners generally over that of Africans (The Times, 2007, online). If Watson ever turns out to be correct in his assertion that 'stupidity is a disease'. then I for one, know of at least two industrially advanced Western countries, currently in urgent need of treatment.






Biological Similarity:


Interestingly, just like the existence of intellectual diversity and intellectual overlap serves to undermine Watson's general assertion of an intellectually homogeneous and genetically superior Western culture, so too paradoxically, does the existence of similarity. For it is important to remember, that humans, unlike others in the animal kingdom have not splintered into biologically distinct groups, with fundamentally different genetic constitutions. According to Professor Steve Jones, "Modern genetics does show that there are no separate groups within humanity" (1993, p. 185). He adds; "[w]hen gene geography is used to look at overall patterns of variation, it seems that people from different parts of the world do not differ much on the average. Colour does not say much about what lies under the skin" (Jones, 1993, p. 192). Similarly, Lewis (1962, p.107) argues that "[t]he genetic constitution [in man] is basic, universal and has hardly altered in the bare 200 generations of recorded history. It shows no evidence of fundamental change since the Stone Age". Of course, there are many varieties of humans, with regards hair form, skin colour, eye colour, height, weight and so forth. Such variety itself, is easily accounted for however, when we remind ourselves that "In the case of man (whose reproductive cells have 23 chromosomes) this gives some 16 million possible kinds of individual for each conception" (Lewis, 1962, p. 15). Variety in this sense, truly is the spice of life.


This being so, and bearing in mind that the evolutionary process of natural selection is the opposite of chance, (ie. it involves the selection of what is detected by the living organism as being advantageous genetic mutations in relation to its existence in a given environment) an obvious question arises if we are minded to take Watson's 'genetic intelligence' theory at face value. Why is it, that from an obvious foundation of common, genetic constitution, African people have somehow evolved an obviously negative, genetic pre-disposition all of their own and which manifests no obvious survival value whatsoever? There are as we have seen obvious differences in terms of peoples various intellectual capacities, but can we truly develop a scientific understanding of such differences by confining ourselves almost exclusively to genetic study alone? Given we are but one species who share a common genetic constitution, are we not logically obliged to seek for social factors also, to account for such general differences in capacity including when it comes to differences of human intellect? Such factors as vastly differing cultural, political, economic and social experiences and opportunities? We have returned it would seem, to the undeniable fact that our biological potentialities become our actualities in the context of our day-to-day life experiences and social activity.






Overgeneralising:


Another specific argument we must direct at Watson's assertion of superior Western intelligence is that which questions the representative nature of Watson's evidence. In this regard, I would question his obvious tendency to overgeneralise from wholly limited data. There are many, many millions of people currently living on the African continent. Similarly, there are many millions of people living in the region we loosely term the West. In a practical sense then, Watson can only have possibly engaged with an insignificant fraction of these people in his research into so-called genetic intelligence. Yet for some reason, he feels confident enough to assert that he is "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" en masse, Africa of course being a very large continent. We might well ask therefore how it is, that Watson logically permits himself to project his limited and highly questionable findings relating to human intelligence, onto the population of the entire African continent? Edward Said it was, who coined the term 'othering', as a way of describing a process whereby a dominant culture (the West generally) defines itself in comparison with another believed-to-be inferior race or culture, with the former, ideologically describing itself, in terms of what it is not. In other words, the suggested inferior race or culture is seen not in its own terms, not objectively, but in subjective terms suited to the dominant race or culture. It is my view, that Watson has taken it upon himself to unjustly and illogically 'other' an entire continent's people, by overgeneralising his highly limited and questionable data relating to aspects of human intelligence.






Theory And Logic:


Common sense also stands to problematise Watson's line of theoretical reasoning. Watson certainly tries very hard to persuade people by means of reason, to accept his theoretical argument that our genes determine our intelligence, and once and for all. He has published books, written in scientific journals and so on with regards this very subject matter. Yet, if his theory of genetically determined intelligence is true, it then logically becomes a self-defeating theory. For as Dr. Lewis points out, "Any system of explanation which seeks to impugn the method of persuasion by reason, by representing it either as neurologically [or genetically] determined, or pure rationalisation, or the expression of a fixed behavioural pattern, is obviously a self-defeating theory. If it is true, there are no grounds for believing it" (1974, p. 178). In this sense, each time Watson argues a reasoned case for the existence of genetically determined human intelligence (or any other human character for that matter), in effect, he spectacularly contradicts himself. All determinist theories are, at root, pointless, for logic dictates nothing can come of them. No determinist theory by definition, can offer us a guide to possible future action. Conversely, all scientific theories (whether related to the natural or the social sciences and no matter how erroneous such theories may subsequently turn out to be) are tentatively formulated, as a guide to further human practical activity.






Geography And Environment:


At this point, I think it appropriate to offer a more plausible explanation, intended to account for the natural origins of many of Africa's contemporary ills. It is undeniable, that much of Africa is still at a stage of tribal or peasant existence when it comes to the kinds of socio-economic relations evident across much of the continent. There are of course, obvious exceptions. For example the modest and patchy industrial capacity visible in parts of South Africa, areas of Egypt in the north and so on. However, most people with a lively interest in African affairs would probably agree that Africa is the least industrialised continent on the planet, as the world currently exists.


Judging by appearances then, it might well be tempting to conclude, as Watson no doubt does, that Africans, along with Eskimos and other such peoples are indeed, of inferior intellectual stock when compared to Westerners, for these former peoples are so far behind our own technological achievements. How is it, that we in the West could have attained such advances in our cultural and material productive techniques, scientific knowledge and such like, while Africans in particular, are still largely living in a sub-industrial, tribal and peasant world? A genetic pre-disposition to greater intelligence on the part of Westerners? Not at all. For this kind of metaphysical explanation also overlooks critical geographical and environmental factors playing a part in Africa's past history, not least the phenomenon we have come to know as the 'Fertile Crescent', a concept first coined by the archaeologist, James Henry Breasted. "The Fertile Crescent is a historical crescent-shape region in the Middle East incorporating the Levant, Ancient Mesopotamia, and Ancient Egypt...Watered by the Nile, Jordan, Euphrates and Tigris rivers and covering some 400-500,000 square kilometres, the region extends from the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea around the north of the Syrian Desert and through the Jazirah and Mesopotamia to the Persian Gulf". (Wikipedia, Fertile Crescent, 2007, online).


According to Lewis (1962, p.106), "[cultural] backwardness [across much of the African continent]...is entirely explicable in terms of differences in opportunity and environment. Natural conditions gave peoples in the Fertile Crescent (where alone in the world wheat and barley were originally found)...a great start. Compare their conditions with...the inhabitants of Africa south of the Sahara, people who, because of historical or geographical accident, were outside the main stream of cultural development and were unable to advance, no matter what their racial background may have been". It is arguably this historical and geographical accident then, that is the primary, objective cause for why Africa en masse, is a backward region of the world along just about any measure one wishes to apply when compared to the industrially developed West. This is critical to realise, for as I have implied throughout this essay, human evolution (and with it, human intelligence) is now a thoroughly social matter. "The appearance of man lifts animal life on to a level which does far more than show physical improvements in the biological mechanism. The human type brings into operation totally new laws of organic existence in relation to the environment and, above all, in relation to further steps in evolution which...are no longer modifications in bodily structure but in technology and [social] organisation. As a consequence, the whole mechanism of physical variation, selection, survival and transmission is superseded and the laws and methods of [biological] animal evolution are over and done with" (Lewis, 1962, p.26). And social evolution has meant among other things, not only the historical development of increasingly higher forms of human association as a direct consequence of improvements in people's production techniques, advances in scientific knowledge and so on. It has also brought in its wake, antagonistic classes, exploitation and in more recent times, reckless competition. Thus we remark in history social processes and social relationships such as the slave trade, colonial rule, corrupt national leaders and so on, all of which have further served to compound Africa's natural plight.






Capitalism:


This whole idea of social evolution raises an interesting question. Watson's general argument about genetically determined intelligence is clearly an illusion. But what is the objective source, the social origins of this ideological illusion? Let us begin to answer this by placing Watson's claim about African people's intelligence into its proper context, for no one lives in a bubble. And the historical context in which Watson made his comments about Africans, is one of industrial capitalism.


Capitalism, is the most advanced form of exploitative human association known to mankind, and follows in the historical wake of two previous social systems also based on particular social property relations of exploitation, namely feudalism and slavery. Capitalism involves the contradictory existence of two broad classes of people; Firstly there is the capitalist class itself; those people who, for historical reasons, own means of production (all the necessary means at the disposal of human beings to undertake and complete the general process of production, such as land, raw materials, buildings, instruments of production, modes of transport etc..). Second, there are those people who do not own, or else have no significant ownership rights over the existing means of production. These property-less people for their part, are compelled to sell their labour-power (intellectual, physical, or else a mixture of both) to one or other owner of means of production as their primary means of securing their respective share of socially produced wealth.


During the production process, working people collectively produce much more than they require to survive as human beings. This has been the case since times of slavery and is obviously the case today, under conditions of global social production. Such surplus forms the basis for human exploitation, for the owners of the means of production are able to subsequently appropriate all surplus value in the form of profits. Under conditions of capitalism this means all value above and beyond the initial cost of production. The production of surplus value through the sale of commodities is the entire raison d'�tre of the capitalist system. Human beings are necessarily subordinate to productive instruments instead of vice versa. Similarly, inanimate objects are the end good we are all compelled to seek, while exploited human beings are the means to these ends.


The unavoidable, antagonistic material interests of on the one hand, the class of working people and on the other, the class of property-owners which arise from such objective circumstances, are necessarily conditioned and regulated through the legal establishment and ongoing political defence of socially binding property relations. Such production relations make clear who is entitled to what, who owns what, how social wealth is to be divided up and so on. They legally function in capitalist society to subordinate the various fruits of social production to the process of private appropriation.


Finally here, and as one might expect given all the above, capitalism is an inherently unequal and uneven social system with regards both its productive geography, and its (in)ability to distribute the resulting social product to meet the needs of all of humankind. Its purpose is not to meet the growing material and cultural needs of all humanity, but to produce ever-greater amounts of surplus value in the form of profits for the minority, property owners of means of production.







Ideology And Illusion:


All theories, and no matter how fantastic their claims, have their basis in reality. "Unless we are to believe that ideas are formed spontaneously in the mind, or that we are already equipped with 'innate ideas', then we must suppose that a source in objective reality outside the mind can be found for all our ideas, including the most abstract and illusory - a source from which they are derived and of which they are the reflection...." (Cornforth, 1956, pp. 94-5). Watson's theory then, is rooted in the socio-economic reality that is, global industrial capitalism. It is an ideological reflection of such reality. However, reality is reflected in our ideas about things in different ways, depending on the manner in which we form and develop our ideas. If, on the one hand, our ideas and theories about things arise from, and are based on our concrete, critical investigation of those things and the practical verification of the conclusions we draw about the properties and relations of those things, then such ideas will reflect reality more or less faithfully. On the other hand, if we form our ideas and theories about things, independent of critical, practical activity, preconceptions of some kind or other will dominate our reasoning. Watson I believe, adopts the latter illusory approach in his theoretical reasoning about African people's human intelligence. This is what I meant earlier, when I suggested that his desire to know, has been supplanted by his desire to think he knows. His theory is without doubt a reflection (albeit roundabout) of objective social relations existing in space and time; a reflection of an international division of labour, objectively conditioned by exploitative social relations. For centuries now, albeit unequally and unevenly, Western capitalism in one or other of its forms, has ruthlessly exploited both the people and the natural resource wealth of Africa, as the imperative of competition drives forward the global pursuit for ever greater profits. However, although the source of Watson's theory lies in the complex of objectively existing social relations, he does not consciously abstract his theory from such experiences and relationships. Nor is his reasoning advanced as a basis for the conscious analysis of such reality. His theory, on the contrary, is a natural, unconscious, unintended reflection of the afore-mentioned objectively existing exploitative economic structure. Watson's only conscious aim in all this, is to convince everyone that Westerners were in the past, are now, and forever will be, intellectually superior to Africans.


The explanation for Watson's illusory 'fixed and frozen' reasoning, and, ipso facto, the natural, unconscious and unintended reflection of reality so evident in his spurious intelligence theory, is located in his failure to consciously recognise the natural and spontaneous historical evolution of social relations themselves. He utterly fails to recognise that capitalism, like primitive communism, slavery and feudalism before it, is an historically transient system. Let me develop this point further. In order to produce and exchange anything, people since the dawn of time have necessarily entered into social relations with one another. These social relationships into which people enter are both indispensable, and independent of their will. They are indispensable, since otherwise, production and exchange of the means of life would be impossible. And they are independent of their will, in the sense that there is no conscious and deliberate decision taken by society as a whole beforehand, as to the kind of dominant social pattern to establish. On the contrary, private ownership of the material means of production and with it, class conflict which first arose in times of slavery in the ancient world, rules out the possibility of people being able to consciously, rationally and collectively direct the development of society as a whole. Thus, it has always been the case that people have come to naturally and spontaneously regulate their social relationships in accordance with the historically conditioned, evolving character of their productive techniques. Thus, because people do not deliberately institute their social relations of production but at the same time cannot survive without them, "...they are not conscious of them as transitory social relations which have been instituted at a definite time, in definite circumstances, to answer definite but only temporary historical needs of society. Rather do they appear as part of the necessary order of things. [Consequently], the characteristic features of...[people's]...social relations and relationships with nature, which are in fact the historically determined result of a definite mode of production, are reflected in abstract ideas in the form of preconceptions and illusions about the...ultimate nature of reality (eg. differences in human intelligence) and so on" (Cornforth, 1956, pp.97-8). For those who reason in such an uncritical, ahistorical manner, illusive theories tend to take the place of concrete, scientific analysis when it comes to explaining social phenomena. Moreover, as the above implies, it is not a simple matter of drawing people's attention to their illusory forms of reasoning. The objective, material social basis which currently precludes collective social planning on a rational basis - private ownership of the material means of production - must itself be politically transformed into that of common ownership, if a conscious concensus as to the desired direction of social evolution is ever to be realised in practice.







Ideology And Class:


Watson's theory, expressing as it does a false consciousness of existing social relations, naturally functions to disguise the underlying reality of class exploitation, to deceive the wider population and in so doing, to justify and forestall any theoretical and practical challenge to the respective global, capitalistic social order. In this sense, his is a reactionary theory which logically and naturally provides "the [ongoing] justification for condemning coloured races to economic exploitation, to the denial of their political and legal equality, and to their treatment as sub-human" (Lewis, 1962, pp. 100-1). As things currently stand, material circumstances are not compelling Watson personally, to seek out a more profound and scientifically conscious understanding of human relationships. On the contrary, for Watson to even begin to think about criticising capitalism in a scientific manner, would logically be tantamount to biting the hand that feeds him. For example, he derives a handsome income from a stream of commercial book publications, including 'Avoid Boring People: Lessons From A Life In Science' (2007), 'DNA: The Secret Of Life' (2003), and 'The Double Helix: A Personal Account Of The Discovery Of The Structure Of DNA' (2001). He has also enjoyed an uninterrupted, distinguished and well-paid academic career in his capacity as a molecular biologist at one or other learning institution, most notably, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL) on Long Island, New York. An institution which is itself, deeply entwined with capitalist business interests. The majority of individual trustees listed on CSHL's own website for instance, are all owners / managers / associated with one or other profit-seeking organisation. A selection of such organisations includes Donald E. Axxin Companies, Lloyd Neck Real Estate, venture capital investment company East Hill Management, investment firm iEurope Capital, Sterling Grace Capital Management, Lindsay Goldberg Investors, finance giant Lehman Brothers, equity giant The Carlyle Group and many others besides (CSHL, 2007, online). These favourable objective circumstances, above all his privileged and influential place in the social division of labour mean that Watson is currently content with his social lot, and thus naturally motivated to formulate all kinds of illusory social theories that correspond with, and ultimately justify the capitalist economic structure. That Watson is not conscious of the ideological role that he fulfils in this regard, does not contradict the fact that this is the function he performs.


Indeed, for as long as there have been antagonistic dominant / subordinate classes (perhaps 5,000 years or more), various intellectuals have developed all sorts of illusory theories which, while undoubtedly sourced from and reflecting social reality in all sorts of roundabout ways, have ultimately functioned to disguise reality in accordance with given, ruling class interests. The ancient Greek philosopher Plato for example, passionately believed that the slave relations of ancient Greece, were the pinnacle of human achievement. For him, slavery was as good as it got. (Plato in this sense I suppose, was the Francis Fukuyama of antiquity). Plato argued that human beings belonged to one or other fixed kind. There were those laced with iron and brass, (the slaves) who were hopelessly condemned to a life of toil. Then there were those laced with silver (who might now be termed the middle-class) who were, Plato argued, born to be administrators. Finally, there were those laced with gold. This latter group was superior, and put on earth to rule all others. Needless to say, Plato was conveniently laced with gold, or at least he believed as much. His Noble Lie was undoubtedly the ideal reflection of a definite pattern of slave relations, objectively existing in space and time, as well as that of the places people occupied in the social division of labour. Yet Plato, like Watson today, did not consciously derive his theory from such reality, nor was it intended as an analysis of such reality. His conscious aim was, on the contrary, to intellectually convince people as to the absolute fixed essence of all human nature and with it, the prevailing, exploitative pattern of social existence. It is true of course that Plato consciously and deliberately, as opposed to naturally and spontaneously, formulated his Noble Lie. But in that case, he was not only engaging in deliberate deception, but also that of self-deception. For such a consciously formulated Noble Lie was based on Plato's unfailing (erroneous) belief as to an everlasting society based on slave relations. Similarly, in the Middle Ages, all leading intellectuals of the Catholic Church disseminated the conception of a permanent, heavenly hierarchy with the Church at its apex, the peasant at its base and the Lord of the Manor sandwiched between the two. Again with this particular ideology, it was not consciously abstracted from reality, nor was it intended to explain the basis of feudal socio-economic power. The conscious motive here, was merely to give a metaphysical, fixed account of the whole world. Thus, it quite naturally played a part in disguising objectively existing, exploitative feudal relations of production, in which the peasant was subordinate to the lord, who in turn, was subordinate to the Catholic Church which in turn as an institution, was subordinate to God! And today, Watson is himself, arguing that intelligence is a genetically fixed phenomenon with all this practically implies, despite all the evidence and logic that stands to flatly contradict his thinking. Nonetheless, and just like Plato thousands of years before him, Watson passionately believes in his illusion and to such an extent, that he is minded to predict as mentioned above, that 'genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.'






Conclusion:


Three days have now passed, since James D. Watson uttered his remarks about purportedly intellectually inferior Africans. For whatever reason, he has thought it proper to publicly apologise. My own view as to why he has done so, is that he seeks to prevent millions of people from logically reasoning, and subsequently concluding, that he is one of Joseph Gobineau's siblings. That said, I would hope that the reader is now sufficiently convinced that Watson's initial comments about Africans, which certainly were repugnant to the core, cannot be comprehensively understood from issues of race alone. His theory is not only deeply flawed in terms of both fact and logic. It is also important to see it as a necessary intellectual consequence of someone who is unable, or else unwilling to conceptualise capitalism as an historically transient social phenomenon. Watson is but another in a long historical line of intellectuals, who, while not necessarily belonging to the ruling class in question, is nonetheless drawn for various objective reasons, to naturally and spontaneously form illusory ideas about the purported fixed nature of human existence. Ideas which in the last analysis, ultimately support and justify minority class rule of one or other kind.












References





Associated Content (2007) More Than One-third of Washington D.C. Residents Are Functionally Illiterate [Accessed online, October 2007] Available at: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/183792/more_than_onethird_of_washington_dc.html



Association of African Universities (1997-2007) [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://www.aau.org/about/index.htm



BBC News (2005) Branson Backs African Students, [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4417378.stm



BBC News (2005) Teenagers Must Pass 3R's Test, [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4292203.stm



BBC News (2000) One in Five UK Adults Illiterate, [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/811832.stm



Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (2007) Board of Trustees [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://www.cshl.edu/about/trustees/index.html



Cornforth, M. (1956) Dialectical Materialism: An Introduction, Volume Three, The Theory of Knowledge, London, Lawrence and Wishart.



Independent Newspaper, 17 October, 2007.



Jones, S. (1993) The Language of the Genes, Biology, History and the Evolutionary Future, London, HarperCollins.



Lewis, J. (1962) Man and Evolution, London, Lawrence and Wishart.



Lewis, J. (1974) The Uniqueness of Man. London, Lawrence and Wishart.



Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1940) The German Ideology, Parts I & III, The Marxist-Leninist Library, London, Lawrence and Wishart.



National Literacy Trust (2004) Adult Literacy in Testing [Accessed online, October, 2007]Available at: http://www.nationalliteracytrust.org.uk/Pubs/sticht2.html



Nuffield Review (2006) Higher Education Focus Groups Preliminary Report [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2006/02/09/illiteratepdf.pdf



The Times (2007) The elementary DNA of Dr. Watson, [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article2630748.ece



White, L. A. (1969) The Science Of Culture, A Study of Man and Civilisation, Toronto, Doubleday Ltd.



Wikipedia, Fertile Crescent, [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertile_Crescent



Wikipedia, Literacy, [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read



Wikipedia, Universities and Colleges by Country [Accessed online, October, 2007] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_and_colleges_by_country#Africa







Colin Baker BSc (Hons) October, 2007

 

 

Copyright © 2007 Colin Baker
Published on the World Wide Web by "www.storymania.com"