Jon Entine poses the question, "So why do we so readily accept the idea evolution has turned out Jews with a genetic predisposition to Tay-Sachs disease and that blacks are more susceptible to sickle cell anemia yet find it racist to suggest that West Africans may have evolved into the world's best sprinters?"...Well, it isn't.
In the lexicon of multiculturalism, 'race' doesn't exist, therefore racism is a non-term. Maybe, the suggestion is 'ethnically insensitive.' Possibly, Mr. Entine's question is merely rhetorical since his tome makes it quite clear he knows the suggestion is benign, but the ramifications resulting from periodically implemented subjective agendas offered by those who promulgate populace group superiority based on bio-diversity hold the real peril. Maybe it is the lugubrious episodes of self-flagellation African descendants must endure as the result of any concession to idea genetic differentiation, phenotypically or genotypically, is a plausibility. Ideally, a racial/cultural/ethnic/population (this could become tedious) group's diversity should be construed as little more an area of distinctiveness with no implication to the group's access or opportunities in larger society. Needless to say, that is not the the reality of the world and often the tangible effects of theory have been devastating. It's why many post-modernists prefer tacit acceptance of victimization to maintain an aura of contrition amongst those culpable for past oppressive actions. "Race" is a social construct until prevailing wisdom requires group partitioning to buttress some advocated social issue, and defining the lines of demarcation are within the latitude of the aggrieved, only. One thing is certain, the only areas where diversity is not a respected value for the modernists are in dissemination of nonconforming views and any suggestion of any manifestation of racial bio-diversity.
As a journalist rather than an anthropologist, physiologist, psychologist, sociologist or any other 'ologist', Mr. Entine is not destined to have the last world on genetic predisposition - not that he should. The reality, however, is any information emanating from the scientific community will not be dispassionately adjudged either. Prevailing wisdom promulgates 'undefinable race', with any evident variants exclusively attributable to environmental influences. The debate is not new, it has been waged in different forms for centuries but reaction to the horrific atrocities of the 20th century elevated the egalitarians to the ideological summit. Unfortunately, via tacit revisionism, the acknowledged definition of egalitarian morphed from "equal in worth" to "identical at birth," a premise unsubstantiated by extant empirics.
Withstanding the review of every reasonable objection, I reluctantly find myself consonant in principle with Mr. Entine's generalized postulations, which serves to transport me to a place of significant discomfort since I know logically, I cannot categorically dismiss the postulations of Rushton, Jensen or Herrnstein and Murray. If I accept the the rationale of phenotypical adaptations such as a broader nose to accomodate equatorical climatic conditions or enhanced musculature to facilitate leaping ability are valid, than I must also concede the probability of genotypic variables that have direct impact on intelligence is not beyond feasibility. The resultant question becomes whether the existent data are necessarily pejorative to Africans and African descendants or are prevalent reactions ill-founded paranoia. Here again, the prevailing view obfuscates the answer. I find it to be a curious capitulation the the determinists' reasoning. That seems to be another area where agreement is viable, that it is a question of juxaposition, 'brawn or brain.' Could it be that the real answer is 'brawn and brain?" Environmental "thought police" proscribe existentalism as their province alone, without objective consideration of the underlying basis. Preemptive circumvention is the order of the day, particulaly where any mechanism to measure intelligence is proffered. The first objection is invariably the onus of cultural bias immediately supplemented by protestations regarding the nebulous quality of intelligence. It has been proposed by some environmentalists, intelligence is a completely immeasurable value, that there may in fact be 100 or more "intelligences." In both instances, the alternative positions seem predicated on social objectives rather than science.
It should be noted Mr. Entine takes no position on the matter of "g", or innate intelligence in general. He presents a balanced overview of extant research to delineate the encumbrances to full and open research of bio-diversity. He discussion - understandably - is focused on physiological differentiation.
As noted, I find Mr. Entine's ruminations regarding the predominance of the descendants of West Africans in sports where speed, quickness, agility and verticality are paramount to be reasonable. Aside, it was not entirely clear what criteria other than physicial appearance was used to ascertain the lineage of African American athletes. In the case of East Africans, the prima facie evidence tends to support his premise without equivocation in regard to endurance events in track and road racing. However, his views are less pursuasive when one scrutinizes a wider range of sports. The miniscule genetic advantages he alludes to to not appear as pertinent in many other endeavors. He places a great deal of credence in the effects of environmental influences he believes constrain the Africans' access to equalized opportunity in sports where dominance is not as clearly evident or succintly, a non-issue at present. Unless he anticipates a significant influx of East Africans at Daytona, I believe the premise would have benefited from narrower parameters. I have similar misgivings with regard to women in as much as whatever genetic advantage West African descent female sprinters may have realized, West African descended female basketball players seem to blow out ACL's as frequently as their "nordic" peers.
In the final analysis, TABOO: WHY BLACK ATHLETES DOMINATE SPORTS AND WHY WE'RE AFRAID TO TALK ABOUT IT is fundamentally a polemic to foster discussion of the second part of that provocative title. It admirably meets the challenge. The basic questions are unchanged; nature or nuture, brawn or brain. TABOO does not contain the answers but it unquestionablely instigates healthy discussion.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet or computer – no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera, scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Customers who bought this item also bought
Page 1 of 1 Start againPage 1 of 1
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Top reviews from other countries
AleD
Le differenti prestazioni sportive delle varie razze hanno spiegazione genetica?
Reviewed in Italy on January 20, 2022Verified Purchase
Raymond Gayle
A very interesting book and very enlightening on why the ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on February 1, 2016Verified Purchase
Eric Gartman
Pandora's Box
Reviewed in the United States on June 19, 2001Verified Purchase
Mrs B
Interesting read!!
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on July 2, 2018Verified Purchase
Wheelchair Assassin
Brave and important writing
Reviewed in the United States on August 7, 2004Verified Purchase
