Politics

You may have heard about the (some think) racist email from a third year Harvard Law student. You can read the (nearly) full email here. But this quote gives the gist of the student’s argument:

I absolutely do not rule out the possibility that African Americans are, on average, genetically predisposed to be less intelligent. I could also obviously be convinced that by controlling for the right variables, we would see that they are, in fact, as intelligent as white people under the same circumstances. The fact is, some things are genetic. African Americans tend to have darker skin. Irish people are more likely to have red hair. (Now on to the more controversial:) Women tend to perform less well in math due at least in part to prenatal levels of testosterone, which also account for variations in mathematics performance within genders. This suggests to me that some part of intelligence is genetic, just like identical twins raised apart tend to have very similar IQs and just like I think my babies will be geniuses and beautiful individuals whether I raise them or give them to an orphanage in Nigeria. I don’t think it is that controversial of an opinion to say I think it is at least possible that African Americans are less intelligent on a genetic level, and I didn’t mean to shy away from that opinion at dinner.

Why doesn’t she say she thinks it is possible that African Americans are MORE intelligent on a genetic level? By her argument, we don’t know the facts so this could be just as true. (Is she revealing a racist bias?) I also found it amusing that she thinks her babies will be “geniuses and beautiful individuals” whether raised by her or in a Nigerian orphanage. Typical Harvard student, thinks she’s a genius — and that her kids will be too! We know her kids would be very different individuals under those scenarios regardless of their genetics. Personally, I think I would like the Nigerian version of her children more. I also call bullshit on the idea that “prenatal levels of testosterone” have anything to do with gender and math scores, whatever “scientific” study she is talking about there.

She sums up:

In conclusion, I think it is bad science to disagree with a conclusion in your heart, and then try (unsuccessfully, so far at least) to find data that will confirm what you want to be true. Everyone wants someone to take 100 white infants and 100 African American ones and raise them in Disney utopia and prove once and for all that we are all equal on every dimension, or at least the really important ones like intelligence. I am merely not 100% convinced that this is the case.

I agree with her first sentence. But look at how she frames it. Isn’t it just as bad science to pursue the opposite conclusion in the absence of evidence, that innate intelligences are unequal? Recall how she cited the prenatal study. Is she reaching for data that will confirm what she wants to be true?

Since we cannot do the 100/100 experiment, we will likely never know the answer to this debate. But we can go with common sense. And common sense tells me there are 100 different kinds of intelligent in this world. One kind gets you into Harvard Law school. Another kind knows the futility of engaging in this argument unless you are a racist.

In her defense, she just considered it an intellectual discussion between her and two other friends. It’s not like this was an op-ed piece she wrote. And I’m sure everyone has a few emails they wish they could take back. The Harvard Law student who sent the email said this in her apology to the Black Student Law Association: “I emphatically do not believe that African Americans are genetically inferior in any way. I understand why my words expressing even a doubt in that regard were and are offensive.”

Since my college days as an International Relations major, I’ve had an interest in the development of Third World countries. But my post-college trajectory was more domestic in nature so most of my knowledge of the field is twenty years old. I think the phrase “Third World” is frowned upon these days, for instance.

Nevertheless, I do try to read an article about development now and then. I read one recently in which a guy talked about creating a “virtuous circle of reinforcing changes.” Reinforcing changes rather than a focus on one category of change. Virtuous circle (or cycle) rather than vicious circle (or cycle). Vicious cycle sounds more familiar and more interesting to me so I prefer, in turn, virtuous cycle. The virtuous cycle of reinforcing changes appeals to me for two reasons. First, it sounds like a positive feedback loop, which have fascinated me since I first learned about them in a freshman year science seminar. Second, because whenever I think about development, I think with exasperation, “Where does one start?”

The population of the world today is just shy of 7 billion people. Some demographers think the world population will plateau at around 9 billion in 2050. Others believe no foreseeable plateau exists.

So what can we do? I feel like education is the key. Whatever else we do, we need to educate the young people in these countries. Then, eventually, they will be able to solve their own problems. And one thing I’ve come to believe in life is that problems are best solved by the people who have the problems. I apply this to individuals, peoples and nations.

I do want to help, though, and I think we can help, and not just in obvious situations such as the recent earthquake in Haiti. But there is so much to do. We need to lower fertility rates and help build critical life-sustaining infrastructure. I want to educate people but how do we educate them if they spend all their time looking for food and water? And how do they get food and water, let alone sit in classrooms, if the political atmosphere is stifling, stagnant or downright volatile?

My sources in development tell me there has been more of an emphasis on partnerships in development recently. This is a great way to help while making sure people help themselves. And in helping themselves, they become a homegrown problem-solving elite for the future.

So I love the phrase, “virtuous cycle of reinforcing changes.” It’s new to me but probably old hat to development professionals. Basically, it means we have to do everything at once, which is what we have been trying to do (in sometimes disorganized fashion) for many, many years. With some success and some failure. What can we do but keep trying?

The virtuous cycle of reinforcing changes. It is not a bad way to look at any attempt to affect positive change on a complex system. The phrase is just a phrase, and maybe it is only saying what many people already know. But what a great way to say it.