Gould was a marxist hack who cherry-picked 100-year-old science to push his political narrative.

>he lied about data
Got BTFO'd for misrepresenting Morton's skull measurements. Later researchers checked the numbers... Morton was basically right, Gould fudged the stats to make him look racist.

>strawmanning IQ
IQ science has progressed lightyears since the craniometry era. Modern g-factor theory is robust, predictive, and not based on skulls. Heritability is well-established.

>projecting
Gould's entire argument is science I don't like is just biased. He replaced data with muh social context because his feelings couldn't handle biological reality.

The scientific community considers it pseudoscience because IT IS.

>>18244646
>Jew lies
There, summed it up for you in two words.

>>18244646
Pretty much this. Especially the part about his own projection.

>>18244646
What's frustrating though is that if you talk to a sociologist, a cultural anthropologist, a criminologist, even a regular psychologist, basically everyone outside the niche field of psychometry, you'll find that Gould's basic beliefs are still dominant.

>>18244685
Maybe because hereditarian and racialist theories of crime are outdated?

>>18244685
Those fields are concerned with real life. People don't understand genetics at all, if you're physically and intellectually complete, life experiences will be far more determinative than your genes. The genes of every healthy person contain the potential for great success and total failure, intellectual achievement and ignorance, crime and moral excellence. If we were to take this layman's view literally >>18244646 it's impossible for a child to be smarter than both parents and impossible for stress, drugs, or anything else to lower IQ.

>The genes of every healthy person contain the potential for great success and total failure, intellectual achievement and ignorance, crime and moral excellence.
lol nah

>>18245617
then why are you mad lol