Hilbert College

- Home -

- Students -

- Tutorials -

- Student Papers -

A bell curve is a graph that depicts how the majority of society falls near the mean, and a smaller amount falls in higher or lower than the mean. There have been several explanations given for this curve, some controversial.

In November 1989, Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray collaborated on The Bell Curve; a book that discussed the two ends of the distribution of Intelligence. There have been numerous criticisms since The Bell Curve was released in October 1994 (http://www.cycad.com).

Herrnstein and Murray choose to look at the two ends, or extremes if you will, of the Bell Curve and not the middle, or average. On one end, you have what they call the gifted, or persons with high cognitive ability, and on the other you have the intellectually challenged, or persons with a low cognitive ability. Herrnstein and Murray claim that the "gifted" people are better suited for the world. While on the other hand, they are not that tolerant with the persons with a low cognitive ability (Kaye 81).

Throughout their book, Herrnstein and Murray show different aspects on how oneÕs intellect determines how they will associate with society. Some examples are dealing with occupations, social activity and morals.

Herrnstein and Murray begin their book by describing the emergence of a "cognitive elite." They later operationally define this cognitive elite as the top 95th percentile of intelligence. This emergence is accompanied by the emergence of its counter-part: a cognitive lower class, defined as the bottom 5th percentile (Herrnstein 25-27).

They then discuss the partitioning of society. Different jobs and careers start to attract different people with differing trends of intelligence. Professionals such as lawyers, scientists, educators and doctors obtained the intellectually elite jobs, while the other jobs were left for the intellectually lower class. This led to a partitioning of cognitive ability through occupation (Herrnstein 51-54).

According to Herrnstein and Murray, those with higher IQ scores are more likely to be selected to more lucrative and technical occupations. They go on to state that IQ score is the best predictor of job performance. The also state that people with lower IQÕs are more likely to become disabled on the job, becoming temporarily or permanently out of the work force.

As for people on the low side of the curve, Herrnstein and Murray claim that they are more likely to be below the poverty level (Rogers 253). It is also likely that he or she would be a high school dropout. The report also says that persons with a low cognitive ability will be more likely to have illegitimate children or children before they are married (Rogers 253).

All this, they say, can be cited by trends in American history. After establishing this societal separation, Herrnstein and Murray move on to discuss how the intelligence of a person reflects, and effects, his or her station in life and society.

There are numerous subjects in The Bell Curve that are debatable, several of which will be discussed here.

Herrnstein and Murray state in The Bell Curve that IQ is substantially heritable. Because economic success in life depends in part on the talents measured by IQ tests, and because social standing depends in part on economic success, it follows that social standing is bound to be based, to some extent, on inherited differences (Herrnstein 105-106). In the journal Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Jacobs states that Herrnstein and Murray believe that instead of trying to help the less fortunate and disadvantaged, Americans should simply live with it and accept inequality as a natural occurrence that happens in life. It is not something that can be helped, and trying to eliminate it will only lead to disaster. To Herrnstein and Murray, low intelligence is a stronger precursor of poverty than low socioeconomic background. They believe it is better for a person to be born "smart" than "rich" (Herrnstein 127).

Laura and Charles Kaplan criticize this statement in Democracy, Meritocracy, and The Cognitive Elite: The Real Thesis of the Bell Curve. They claim that to Herrnstein and Murray, education cannot change meritocracy. It can only prepare people for their place in it. As the only educational outcome they discuss at length is the possible raising of IQ scores, they are silent about the possibility of moral and political education in public schools. They claim that Herrnstein and Murray have no interest in changing the lifestyle, or slowing the growth, of the new cognitive elite. Herrnstein and Murray find the idea of an aristocracy of talent appropriate, and perhaps enjoy some of its benefits themselves (Kaplan 430-431).

Along with the idea that nature prefers some people to others, Herrnstein and Murray state that race tracks intelligence. Herrnstein and MurrayÕs theory behind this is that different races have different genes and these different genes are the reason why people of certain races are smarter than people of other races. Fischer, in Inequality by Design, disputes this thesis by saying that groups score unequally on tests because they are unequal in society. A racial or ethnic groupÕs position in society determines its measured intelligence (Fischer 173). This could be incorporated to mean that people that live in poverty are not as intelligent as others because they do not, or have not had, the opportunity to attend good schools like people with money have, and these people in poverty can be any race.

Karen B. Rogers, in The Roeper Review, argues that IQ is not the same thing as "intelligence," merely a form of it. An IQ test does not tell us all we need to know about a personÕs intelligence. There are many different types of intelligence. For example, according to the Herrnstein and Murray sample, there is a group designated "highly intelligent" (an IQ of 120-130) and a group identified as "highly gifted" (an IQ of 145-160+). The Bell Curve does not recognize these differences (Rogers 253-254).

The Bell Curve suggests that the less intelligent are more likely to commit crimes because they cannot fully comprehend the complex criminal codes held by American society. Because they cannot understand all the laws, they are less likely to realize that they might be doing something wrong or illegal. If criminal laws were simplified (say, to apply only to obvious crimes such as assault, theft, rape, destruction of property, murder, etc.) they would be readily understood by all. Subsequently, the true criminals would only commit crimes, instead of unwittingly by the ignorant.

The Bell Curve also suggests simplifying the punishment of crimes. Crimes that go along without being punished, or punishments that do not adequately fit the crimes lend to the misconception of true crime (Herrnstein 543-544).

The Bell Curve also associates intelligence with disability. They suggest that a smarter person is less likely to be or become disabled where as a person of less intelligence has increased chances of becoming disabled. Their logic is that a smarter person is more likely to avoid certain situations that may result in disability. This logic relies heavily on the assumption that disabilities are largely caused by avoidable accidents. Further more, this asserts that a more intelligent person, by virtue of his or her intelligence is less accident-prone. These assumptions make this argument suspicious (Jacobs 124).

Jacobs asserts that The Bell Curve is, despite the denial of Herrnstein and Murray, a treatise on race. Jacobs asserts that Herrnstein and Murray work under too many assumptions in their research. First of which, Jacobs argues, IQ is not a completely effective standard of measurement for actual intelligence. Also, the racial divisions and differences accounted by Herrnstein and Murray are faulty in their definitions. Racial divisions are largely nominal, not factual, in American society, anyway. Also, the actual genetic differences between races only account for .01% of DNA differences (Jacobs 135).

Herrnstein and Murray generally assert that there are two extreme, or polar, ends of society. The higher end is characterized by the affluent, wealthy, successful and smart. Poverty, illness, disability and lack of intelligence characterize the lower end. Furthermore, the determining factors behind the construction of the two groups are not demographics, family history or social structure. Instead, intelligence determines whether a person is a member of one group or the other.

Note, however, Herrnstein and Murray hold that these groups are, in fact, extremes, and do not include or represent the majority of the society. The groups, though, do pull and strain the society greatly toward the needs of each. That is, the higher and smarter group influences society, as a whole, to provide more for its own group. The lower, less intelligent group pulls society to its own group needs (Herrnstein xxi-xxiii).

Debate over the reasoning, procedures and conclusions of Herrnstein and Murray is ongoing and heated. The roles that IQ and intelligence play in society is discussed by the two, but their work has created more debate than agreement or conclusion.

Fischer, Hout, et al. Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.

Herrnstein, Richard J., Charles Murray. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free Press Paperbacks, 1994.

Jacobs. Philosophy of Social Sciences 29.1 (1999) "The Bell Curve and Its Critics." Sage Publications Inc.

Kaplan, Charles, Laura Duhan Kaplan. "Democracy, Meritocracy, and the Cognitive Elite: The Real Thesis of the Bell Curve." Educational Theory 4.3 (1997).

Kaye, Howard L. The American Sociologist. Reviewing the Reviewers: The Bell Curve. 27 (1996). Transactions Publishers UK Ltd.

Murray, Charles. " ÔThe Bell CurveÕ and Its Critics." Commentary 99.5 (1995): 23 http://www.cycad.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/../people/Murray/bc-crit.html P/

Rogers, Karen B. The Roeper Review: A Journal on Gifted Education. 18.4 (1996). The Roeper School