A History of Eugenics as It Pertains to Intelligence Testing - Essay Example

INTRODUCTION The ideology of eugenics is most commonly associated with the death camps, and forced sterilization regimens of Nazi Germany. And yet before the United States awakened to the potential consequences of this policy of systematic devaluation of human life, there was a substantial American contribution to eugenics theory and practice in the early 20th century, the zenith of the movement occurring in the 1920s and 30s. Originating with Francis Galton, the English intellectual and proto-geneticist, who coined the term eugenics itself over a career spanning hundreds of publications which included rudimentary intelligence tests and theories of heredity. (Galton, 1869, 1883) His work was built upon by others, notably Alfred Thomas Binet. He and And his collaborator Théodore Simon are credited as being instrumental in the development of the first, functional IQ test. (Foschi, et al. 2006) During the days in which the work of Galton was most widely accepted, schools tested children regularly, and those classified as feeble-minded were rewarded by a veritable incarceration in an institution similar to Massachusetts Fernald school for the feeble minded -- or to one of the more than 100 institutions like it. Fernald, and the recommendations inherent with eugenics are illustrative of the consequences of government and scientific policy which permit rights to be taken away from the less fortunate in the name of a certain public good – providing the incentive for yet further abuses above and beyond the reluctant acquiescence towards the hardhearted policy in the first place. Idiot, moron, and imbecile were evidently proper medical terms in the cold halls of Fernald, and elsewhere in the scientific community during the early 20th century. They defined various levels of retardation or mental disability. Moron specifically refers to those children who were almost normal," says the author of a 2005 book, Michael DAntonio. Who estimates that at least 50 percent of these undesirables would function in todays world normally. Originally, eugenics theory originated as a hard–handed attempt to improve the social condition of the country, mingling hierarchical class politics with theories of heredity. As all such regimes do, the promise was for a better world, with lower crime; greater wealth through a more productive economy, and the alleged elimination of all disease: we simply have to keep undesirables from breeding. But even this policy which encourages the abuse of humanity was itself abused, compounding the lasting consequences for its victims. The State boys rebellion at the Fernald the school for the feeble minded, being a case in point. The Massachusetts situated Academy was a school in name only, functioning essentially as a warehouse or the mentally retarded it also became utilized as a dumping ground simply for displaced children. A new book on the subject paints a picture of impoverished children, without time or opportunity to complete a standard education – deposited there simply to be abandoned for the sake of convenience: whether they were retarded or not. Survivor Fred Boyce was condemned by the state of Massachusetts to this institution for 11 years, starting at the age of eight. They ignored intelligence tests that placed him within the normal range. Even though prior to that he had received no formal education. The children essentially were compelled to work to support themselves, growing the food which they ate themselves; forced to work to sew up their own tattered shoes. While the logical outcomes of eugenics could easily be classified as an abuse in and of themselves, the story of Fernald casts light on an unscrupulous tendency to inflict further exploitation upon helpless populations. Violating the Nuremburg laws of informed consent prior to human experimentation, certain of the children at this Institute were surprised and heartened when they were offered a special treat; extra rations of milk and oatmeal. The milk and oatmeal of course, was laced with radiation. Being discarded by society, the opportunity for further exploitation in the name of biomedical research mustve proved to tempting for the administrators. Although recently, the survivors have received compensation in the form of $60,000, due to legal settlements. (DAntonio, 2005) in this case the rebellion itself came in the form of flight, the condemned boys mimicked the behavior of desperate slaves a century before the eugenics heyday. But for them there was no underground railroad to aid them. They were invariably recaptured, placed in quarters with barred windows more reminiscent of the prison in which they had been condemned, and left to rot in the words of survivor Fred Boyce. (DAntonio, 2005) Fernald supported a lazy assumption that an early childhood diagnosis of some form of mental retardation, idiocy moron etc. entirely defined the lives of these children. There was scarcely any employment demand for someone having graduated from an openly labeled school for the feebleminded. In this case the assumption of a deficient nature at the outset of the individuals life prevented the natural progression of social, and intellectual development that wouldve resulted in healthy, functioning adults. The definitive assumption of nature influenced nurture to the point that the lives of these patient/victims are forever marked by this experience. But such an operation requires the approval, at least tacitly of many people. Men such as Cyril Burt, alleged to have falsified the intelligence data for his twin studies, might well have understood the convenience of an operation like Fernald. (Blinkhorn, 1989) But in his case, and in the case of the school, there is no reason to believe that either entity started out with the deliberate intention of fraud. The pitfalls of corruption and convenience can be harmful to perpetrators as well as victims. These affairs are a few of many instances that cast a sobering light upon the reasonable endeavor of pioneering an understanding of the human brain. A curious example from the life of Pierre-Paul Broca is illustrative of the social forces that can become intertwined with the study of intelligence testing, and brain functioning. This French neurologist once founded a society of free thinkers, as well as an anthropological Society in Paris. The French minister of public instruction in association with the local police seemed vehemently opposed to Brocas studies of the nature of human beings and human cognition, even going so far as to insert a police spy into the meetings of the anthropological Society. (Sagan, 1979) Broca is credited with the discovery of the connection between the brains function, and brain regions. On fact he has a region named after himself – Brocas region, appropriately enough. (Sagan, 1979) while the police motives are uncertain, it is possible to speculate that among the authorities of Paris there was a concern that mapping out brain function could prove divisive. If certain structures and processes of the human body and human skull could be associated with idiocy or mental retardation, that might lead to disruptive discrimination within a culture that certain authorities might wish to avert whenever possible. But the authorities failed to stymie the advance of anthropometric knowledge. Brocas findings are critical to the development of cranioscopy; pioneered by Franz Joseph Gall – whose findings were re-categorized into the once-science of phrenology. While the imaginary brain organs have not been found to exist, it was an important milestone in the recognition of the rudiments of brain anatomy; as a way to elucidate the specifics of brain function. (Fodor, 1983) The fundamental tenets are listed below: That moral and intellectual faculties are innate, That their exercise or manifestation depends on organization, That the brain is the organ of all the propensities, sentiments and faculties, That the brain is composed of as many particular organs as there are propensities, sentiments and faculties which differ essentially from each other. That the form of the head or cranium represents the form of the brain, and thus reflects the relative development of the brain organs. (Gall, 1833) Phrenology and craniometry can be thought of as stepping stones away from a purely religious ideology as the deterministic factor behind human behavior. The brain became the seat of intellectual function rather than invisible, magical spirits from heaven. Phrenology in a conceptual sense opened the doors for new avenues in psychology and neurology unburdened by the untestable notion of the soul. Galton, the aforementioned founder of eugenics also contributed to theories of intellect and intellectual testing through the creation of analytical tools that described intellectual proclivities as they disseminated throughout the generations of men which he considered noteworthy. Galton, concluded that the likelihood of high intellect or talent drops from the second degree of generational separation from an individual designated as a genius. (Galton, 1869) The modern science of intelligence testing owes much to the birth of two girls; Madeleine and Alice. This event turned the interest of their father, Alfred Binet away from the realms of hypnotism and personality polarization towards the direction of childhood psychological development. Over the two decades that followed Binet is credited with hundreds of publications and may have been an early influence in the work of Jean Piaget. (Bergin & Cizek, 2001) In 1904, there was a demand made by the French government for the professional organization for child psychology, La Société Libre pour lEtude Psychologique de lEnfant, to create a commission to advise on the education of retarded children. The commission was tasked with the creation of a mechanism for identifying students for whom alternative education is the best option due to their inherent limitations. Alfred Binet would gain the support he needed for the development of his mental intelligence scale. Binet and his colleague Simon, in creating what historically is known as the Binet-Simon Scale, devise a range of tasks to assess childrens abilities at various ages during development. This took the form of a task-selection process devised from the investigators long careers of observing children in natural settings. Their measurement was tested on a sample of fifty children, ten children per five select age groups. The children chosen for the study were identified by their school teachers as being representative samples for average achievement at their age. This scale of normal functioning would be used as a comparative tool to charge a childs capacities relative to their natural peers. (Siegler, 1992). The 30 tasks comprising the scale were of increasing difficulty. The lower level tasks could be done by everyone. Among the easiest test items were questions assessing whether or not a child could follow a beam of light or verbally respond to the examiner. Somewhat more difficult tasks required children to point to various named body parts, repeat on-demand two digit numbers and, repeat simple sentences, and give simple definitions for common, familiar words. The 30 tasks comprising the scale were of increasing difficulty. The lower level tasks could be done by everyone. Among the easiest test items were questions assessing whether or not a child could follow a beam of light or verbally respond to the examiner. Somewhat more difficult tasks required children to point to various named body parts, repeat on-demand two digit numbers and, repeat simple sentences, and give simple definitions for common, familiar words. Among the more challenging test items required children to reproduce drawings from memory or to create meaningful sentences from triplicate verbal items. The most challenging would require the children to repeat a selection of seven random digits or to find Ryans for various obscure, complex words – or sphinx-like riddles. Binet was open about the limitations of this scale, and was honest about the diversity of intelligence and the variation by which intelligence can progress within the individual child, adding a new layer of complexity to Galtons nature versus nurture debate. He made a point to stress developmental influences as they affected inherent genetic potential. While such a nuanced conclusion might sound obvious to modern thinkers, these findings do represent an important departure from Galtons prior assertions that seemed to trumpet the preeminence of genetic factors. But this complex conclusion is also distinguished from prior notions attributing intellect and personality to an intangible soul with no biological component. Surely genetics are factor, but not the entire story. (Siegler, 1992). Binets testing formula was refined by Lewis Terman; whose goal was not specifically to provide aid to children with special needs but rather to classify individuals in accordance with the job track most likely to yield career optimization. (Shurkin, 1992) Adding to this body of knowledge is the Wechsler intelligence scale for children, which – rather than providing a single numerical value, measures separate categories quantifying verbal, perceptual organization, freedom from distraction index, as well as overall I.Q. (Kaplan et al. 209) But the 20th century has seen a blossoming of psychologists tackling these issues, producing a diversity of theories and system. In S used to measure cognitive performance, and human intelligence. Such as Luis Leon Thurstone who devised the statistical model of the standard deviation more commonly in use today than Binets test. (Gulliksen, 1968.) The aforementioned promises of eugenics have led to speculation that – in addition to a healthier population overall, it would someday be possible to limit crime by eliminating a genetic component of criminal behavior. To this end it was inevitable that researchers would explore the linkages between intelligence and crime. Henry Goddard was a eugenics pioneer that linked theories of heredity and intelligence with behavioral consequences, and was the first to testify that defendants with intellectual limitations should not be held criminally liable in accordance with the same standards as the general population. While he agreed that sterilization of the feeble-minded would most likely eliminate mental retardation, for political reasons he did not support any proposals of forced sterilization. Believing that society as a whole would find it unacceptable, and the degree of resistance that it would likely provoke would prove insurmountable. The most viable solution in his estimation, would be a policy of segregation of those he deemed mentally deficient on to isolated colonies where they would be prevented from mingling, and breeding with the general population. Thereby confining the deficient traits where they would have no influence on the mainstream. (Goddard, 1917) Along this line of reasoning, the first world war provided an excellent opportunity for the study of large, concentrated populations from a psychological standpoint, as well as the most fertile proving ground for group intelligence testing. The Army intelligence tests orchestrated by Robert Mearns Yerkes, was a pivotal moment for the popularization and acceptance of psychology by the general population; never before had psychologists had access to data from so large a group as occurred during the alpha and beta Army tests. But the actual tests themselves fall more into the neighborhood of pseudoscience. Where ones score depends almost precisely on the degree of acculturation to the United States, the number of years that a potential recruit had lived in America was the most crucial determining factor. Many of the test items themselves made direct references to characters used in advertising, and popular culture. (Paul, 1995) The fact that Yerkes ardently defended these questions as measures of nature intelligence is indicative of an almost paralytic cultural arrogance. But attempts such as this provided an impetus for growth in the field of psychology. And as the body of knowledge grew more complex, anomalies began to emerge – in which certain individuals may score favorably on one test, and rank in the lower rungs on another. The G factor is a meta-analysis that seeks to fill in the gaps between performance ratings between the different tests. Charles Spearman hypothesized that there exists an underlying, general intelligence that the tests of Binet, and the musings of Galton touch upon. The theory has provoked controversy, from such notables as paleontologist Stephen J. Gould, and Peter Schönemann, who doubt the existence of G-intelligence. But Spearmans work is an important milestone towards the development of a unifying theory of intelligence; a goal whose importance cannot be understated. (Spearman, 1904), ( Schönemann, 2005) Unifying intelligence theories that can link together different rating systems also have the potential to bring a more inclusive perspective to cognitive models that reach beyond the racial/class eugenics axis of early 20th and 19th century theorists; such as Terman who attributed differences in educational opportunity as inherent racial limitations biologically manifested in Hispanic, and Negro populations. (Terman, 1916) Views accepting various, or multiple intelligences have the potential to grant a more comprehensive framework. Such as the imminent Howard Gardner, who posited eight separate forms of intelligence, distinct from earlier labels that would define these abilities as mere talents or gifts. Spatial Linguistic Logical-mathematical Bodily-kinesthetic Musical Interpersonal Intrapersonal Naturalistic Gardeners ideas have received support from certain thinkers who wish to believe that everyone has some special proclivity at which they excel, everyone can be a genius at something. Though the concept has been attacked by some investigators as lacking in empirical support. (Visser et al. 2006) Others, such as Thurstone contributed to a multiplicity theory concerning human intellectual performance, with his seven primary mental abilities: verbal comprehension, word fluency, number facility, spatial visualization, associative memory, perceptual speed and reasoning. (Gulliksen, 1968) More condensed concepts emerged from theorists like Sternberg, and his triarchic theory of intelligence. Delineating cognitive function into analytical, creative/synthetic, and practical knowledge. (Sternberg, 1977) An idea to simplify this theoretical jumble came from Raymond Cattell and John Horn, and their theory of contrasting bilateral forms of intelligence. Fluid and crystalline, which refers to problem-solving aptitude and factual knowledge respectively. (Horn & Cattell, 1967) SUMMARY In the final analysis, looking back on the early 20th century eugenics movement; the high hopes that it brought us are obscured by the shadow that lies beneath our best intentions. It was simply a convenient way to dispose of undesirables, dumping them like so much human driftwood into the halls of Fernald. It seemed axiomatic to dismiss any differences in educational opportunity amongst racial minorities, and chalk them up as being genetically inferior and thus worthy of sterilization. The history of eugenics is a stark reminder that in the attempt to control human evolution with the objective of shaping the mind towards a utopian ideal, the criminal degeneracy allegedly attached to the lower classes can more readily be seen in the behaviors of those whose good-intentioned road to Hell treads the path of forced sterilization and incarceration upon the innocent. While it is both necessary and inevitable that psychological investigators will seek to study and define cognition and intelligence, perhaps those French constables were right to worry about the social consequences of Brocas anthropological studies of brain function and intellect. A more recent investigator has added a new element to the debate by downplaying the importance of intelligence itself; Keith Stanovich plays the maverick by denying the supremacy of IQ as the determining factor of success. He makes the distinction between intelligence and rationality, rationality being the most reasonable pursuit of honest life goals in the most efficient way possible in accordance with practical realities. (Stanovich, 2009) A seemingly self evident axiom, but one which the eccentric genius may not always adhere to. Perhaps it is that principle of rationality that should be the guiding ideal behind future intelligence research, which can be largely separate from sheer brainpower. REFERENCES Bergin, D. A., & Cizek, G. J. (2001). Alfred Binet. In J. A. Palmer (Ed.), Fifty major thinkers on education: From Confucius to Dewey (pp. 160-164). London: Routledge. Blinkhorn, Steve 1989. "Was Burt Stitched Up?", Nature, 340:439, 1989 Kaplan, Robert M.; Saccuzzo, Dennis P. (2009). Psychological Testing: Principles, Applications, and Issues (Seventh ed.). Belmont (CA): Wadsworth. p. 262 (citing Wechsler (1958) The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult Intelligence) DAntonio, Michael. 2005. "The State Boys Rebellion" Simon and Schuster, 2005. Fodor, JA. 1983 The Modularity of Mind. MIT Press. Foschi, Renato; Cicciola, Elisabetta (2006), "Politics and naturalism in the 20th century psychology of Alfred Binet.", History of psychology 9 (4): 267–89, 2006 Nov, doi:10.1037/1093- 4510.9.4.267, PMID 17333631 Gall, J.F. 1833. "The Anatomy and Physiology of the Nervous System in General, and of the Brain in Particular, with Observations upon the possibility of ascertaining the several Intellectual and Moral Dispositions of Man and Animal, by the configuration of their Heads." The American Journal of the Medical Sciences" Southern Society for Clinical Investigation Galton, F. 1869. Hereditary Genius. London: Macmillan Galton, Francis 1883. "Inquiries into Human Faculty and its Development". First Edition, Macmillan, 1883 Goddard, H. H. 1917. Mental tests and the immigrant. Journal of Delinquency. Gulliksen, H 1968. "Louis Leon Thurstone, experimental and mathematical psychologist". The American psychologist 23 (11): 786– 802. doi:10.1037/h0026696. PMID 4881041. Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1967). Age differences in fluid and crystallized intelligence. Acta Psychologica, 26, 107-129. Paul, Diane B. 1995. Controlling Human Heredity: 1865 to the Present, 1995; pages 65–67, 109 Sagan, Carl. 1979. Brocas Brain. Random House: New York. Schonemann, Peter H. 2005 "Psychometrics of Intelligence" in Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, K. Kemp-Leonard (ed.), 3, 193-201: Spearman, C. 1904. “General intelligence” objectively determined and measured. "American Journal of Psychology", 15, 201–293. Sternberg, R. J. 1977. "Intelligence, information processing,and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities." Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Terman, L. M. 1916. "The measurement of intelligence" Boston, MA, US: Houghton, Mifflin and Company. (1916). xiii, 374 pp. doi: 10.1037/10014-000 Siegler, R. S. 1992. The other Alfred Binet. Developmental Psychology, 28, 179-190. Reprinted in G. Kugiumutzakis (Ed.) (1995). Developmental psychology: past, present and future. Crete: Crete University Press Shurkin, Joel. 1992. Termans Kids: The Groundbreaking Study of How the Gifted Grow Up. Boston (MA): Little, Brown. ISBN 978- 0316788908 Stanovich, Keith E. 2009. "Rationality versus Intelligence" SCIENCE AND SOCIETY. Project syndicate, a world of ideas. http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stanovich1/English. Accessed 11/10/2011. Visser, Beth A.; Ashton, Michael C.; Vernon, Philip A. 2006. "g and the measurement of Multiple Intelligences: A response to Gardner". Intelligence 34 (5): 507–510. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.04.006. Yerkes, R. M. (1930). Autobiography of Robert Mearns Yerkes. In C. Murchison (Ed.), History of psychology in autobiography (Vol. 2, pp. 381-407). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press. Read More