Dearth of Evidence: Response to “Eugenicism, Bigotry, and Stirring the Embers of a Troubling Episode” (A Review of The Cattell Controversy: Race, Science, and Ideology)

Comments on Frank Dumont's review (see record 2009-07436-001) of William H. Tucker's book, The Cattell Controversy: Race, Science, and Ideology (see record 2009-02568-000). Although Dumont's review of the book notes that “there are several varieties” (Conclusion section, para. 1) of eugenics, he provides not a single word about Cattell’s version—the book’s central issue. Dumont states that over time Cattell “reworked his personal conceptualization...[of eugenics] into a less politically and ethically repugnant system” (Conclusion section, para. 1) and suggests that it is “bias” (Beyondism section, para. 2) on my part to conclude that his later writings were simply euphemistic versions of his earlier ideas. However, having provided neither information about Cattell’s belief system nor any example of my putative bias, he thus leaves readers mystified about the substance of Cattell’s thoughts, either early or late in his career. Having written books on controversial topics, I expect opposition. But serious charges—of bias, ad personam attacks, and calumny—completely devoid of supporting evidence constitute a pronouncement, not an academic argument, and do not seem to me to advance the discussion of these serious issues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)