Barrie Davis: Science and Universities

The ironic decision to cancel a meeting to discuss free speech at Te Herenga Waka University was because some students were ‘freaked out’ that there were some rightist speakers. That was not an isolated case but rather an example of mass hysteria on the Left and mass decadence on the Right that has taken hold in the West.

In recent times various people have been stopped from speaking in New Zealand because they hold rightist views: In 2018 Don Brash was banned from talking about Treaty issues at Massey University by Vice-Chancellor Jan Thomas after a complaint by some students. Also in 2018 commentators Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux were stopped from coming to New Zealand to speak by Auckland Mayor Phil Goff. In 2023 Kelly-Jay Keen-Minshull abandoned her tour of New Zealand without speaking after being booed, heckled and doused with tomato juice at Auckland.

Had they been able to speak, there was no compulsion to listen to them and if you did there was no compulsion to agree with them. Although the universities claim a policy of inclusion, we were not allowed to hear what they had to say. The authoritarian Left curtail our free speech, they censor our information and then they lie to us about it.

The usual excuse is that they are ‘protecting our most marginal minorities’, although it is not clear what they are protecting them from. On the other hand, in 2020, 2021 and twice in 2023 Te Herenga Waka University Press published a poem by Tusiata Avia about New Zealand consequent to the arrival of Captain Cook and his killing at Kealakekua Bay, which reads in part: “Hey James, it’s us. These days we’re driving round in SUVs looking for ya or white men like you … and I’ve got my father’s pig-hunting knife in my fist and we’re coming to get you … then we’re gonna FUCK. YOU. UP. FOR. GOOD. BITCH.” To be clear, that is a statement by a Polynesian woman of an intention to kill European men.

Whereas Keen-Minshull was the subject of an open letter from the Rainbow Greens to Immigration Minister Michael Wood calling for her to be banned from visiting Wellington in 2023, Avia’s The Savage Coloniser Book published by Te Herenga Waka University Press won the Mary and Peter Biggs Award for Poetry in 2021. That is quite a liberal outcome for such a trashy poem; yet as above, in 2024 the same university, Te Herenga Waka, cancelled a discussion on free speech which I doubt would have physically threatened anyone.

It is clear that the approach in the universities and from the Left generally is biased hypocrisy. How can we resolve that?

-----

Intersectionality, which we colloquially refer to as ‘woke’, “is a sociological analytical framework for understanding how groups' and individuals' social and political identities result in unique combinations of discrimination and privilege.” Intersectionality considers race, sex and class to determine how oppressed a group or person is and assumes that the cause of that straitened condition resides entirely within their Western environment.

In Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class, Charles Murray challenges that assumption. The title says it all: Murray claims human differences also have a genetic component, as instanced by race differences in intelligence. Thus, the status of a group or person in society is in part determined by their innate characteristics, such as average intelligence for a group or individual intelligence of a person.

In The Genetic Lottery: Why DNA Matters for Social Equality, 2021, self confessed leftist Kathryn Paige Harden says, “I find the conclusion that racial group differences are ‘genetic’ to be unpalatable.”

But, Harden further says,

“I also believe that intelligence tests measure an aspect of a person’s psychology that is relevant for their success in contemporary educational systems and labor markets, that twin studies tell us something meaningful about the genetic causes of individual differences between people, and that intelligence is heritable.”

We should not be surprised by that. Evolution – the process which put us on the planet both individually and as a species – comprises three components: replication, variation and selection. Variations occur in both memes and genes. Some variations are adaptive and are selected; others are not adaptive and are deselected. Intelligence is a candidate example of such variation.

A meta-analysis of the research on intelligence by Professor Richard Lynn in Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis (2015) gives average IQ by race relevant for New Zealand as: North East Asians 102, Europeans 99, Maoris 90, and Pacific Islanders 85.

These data are from the second edition (2015) of Lynn’s book which was revised and updated to include information from studies subsequent to the first edition (2006). The first edition is freely available on the internet here. A ‘Summary of race differences in intelligence’ is given in Table 13.1 of both editions and there is not a significant change to the general pattern of results.

The first edition has a chapter on Pacific Islanders (which is absent in the second edition) and includes a section on Maoris (p. 77). The chapter also has sections on ‘Brain Size of Pacific Islanders’ and ‘Environmental and Genetic Determinants of the Intelligence of Pacific Islanders’ (p. 80). Lynn says “The IQ of 90 of the Maoris is higher than the 85 of the other Pacific Islanders, suggesting a beneficial effect of living in an affluent European environment.”

Professor Helmuth Nyborg of the University of Aarhus says “This is the definitive study … by the man who did more than anybody else to collect the extensive data.” In his 2016 review of the book, Edward Dutton wrote, “Clearly, this new book will now be the definitive resource for anyone interested in understanding race differences in intelligence. … This is an important work, documenting all of the available data, and prosecuting the most parsimonious case to explain it.”

I previously covered this topic in “I Lift My Pen” (here) which attracted the following anonymous comment: “Richard Lynn (his professor emeritus status was withdrawn by Ulster University in 2018) and Helmuth Nyborg are both very controversial in the scientific study of intelligence. Lynn’s work in particular has been widely condemned as racist pseudoscience and white supremacist.”

So I read some relevant articles by the BBC (here and here).

The Beeb reports in the first article, 14 February 2018:

“Ulster University's (UU) students' union has called for the university to end its association with a psychology professor.

“The union has passed a motion calling for UU to revoke Richard Lynn's role as emeritus professor.

“The motion alleges Prof Lynn advocates views that are "racist and sexist in nature".”

And in the second article, 15 April 2018:

“Ulster University has withdrawn the emeritus title from psychology professor Richard Lynn.

“Prof Lynn taught at UU and some of his work has proved controversial.

“He has argued that people from east Asia have a higher average IQ than Europeans and that men have a higher average IQ than women.

“The university said it had made its decision "following due process and considering all relevant information".”

A few further points: 1) Like the cancellation of the free speech meeting at Te Herenga Waka, Lynn was cancelled after a complaint from a posse of students. 2) Lynn had also recognized that IQ declines with age, but that doesn’t seem to bother anyone. 3) It is sometimes objected that there are different sorts of intelligence; but for the purposes of this discussion ‘intelligence’ is whatever it is that IQ tests measure, usually called ‘general intelligence’ (g). 4) I have previously found it helpful that East Asians have a higher average IQ than Europeans, nevertheless the UU and its students still think that is racist.

Think about it. Lynn’s studies include hundreds of thousands of IQ tests. All you have to do is put three questions at the beginning: What is your sex, race and age and you can start making arguments regarding any correlation that is found with these variables and IQ. In particular, Lynn considered the effects of environment and the role of genetics.

Calling Lynn names, such as ‘racist and sexist’ is not only puerile, but it is also irrelevant to science. Science deals in facts. Nevertheless, science holds that all theories are falsifiable; that is, the book is never closed. So, if you think Lynn is mistaken, you write an article stating your rationale and publish it. That is how science works. Is there anyone that does not know that? Note that Lynn’s book went to a second revised edition, which gave 9 years for others to give feedback and for him to consider it.

But that is not what happened to Lynn. The University made an investigation that was initiated by students complaining and then they cancelled him in 2018 just five years before he died 17 July 2023 aged 93, thereby illegitimately negating his life’s’ work. Whether Lynn was right or wrong is not the issue; he was cancelled because some students complained his research is racist and sexist. Lynn was subsequently vilified because he transgressed a current collective precept; it was mob rule over science.

So also in New Zealand when Khylee Quince said of Gary Judd KC, “I suppose it was inevitable that one of the old racist dinosaurs would make a pathetic squeal in an attempt to preserve the status quo... Mr Judd and 'matauranga Maori is not science' friends can go die quietly in the corner.” That is puerile name calling by a senior Maori academic that will only serve to further lower the status of New Zealand academia and so diminish the idea of universities as statutory ‘critics and conscience’ of New Zealand society.

It is ridiculous to claim that Maori knowledge is science, as science comprises the documented, accumulated knowledge that was developed over thousands of years from Socrates, Plato and Aristotle to Newton, Darwin and Einstein. That covered developments including the Magna Carta, the Renaissance, the Scientific Revolution, the Enlightenment, and the Industrial Revolution. The Maoris didn’t even have writing. European science is categorically different to Maori knowledge which is drawn in part from mythology. Modern science aims to be objective and universal, which invalidates claims which are from a particular perspective. Maori knowledge is from a Maori world-view, so it is exclusive which disqualifies it as inclusive science. Interestingly, Maori knowledge therefore also does not meet the DEI criteria of Inclusion.

What is said of Quince can also be said of Siouxsie Wiles and Shaun Hendy. These academics forego the tenets of science to fulfil their ideology and should don a dunce’s cap and ‘go stand quietly in the corner’ until they fathom the error of their ways.

When I did engineering at Auckland there were about 80 people in the class; the first two rows were Asians, there were three women and no Polynesians. I doubt that Asians would now spend a fortune to send their children to a New Zealand university for a quality European education when they read in the media that the waspish Maori head of the Maori indoctrinated law school wishes death to people who do not agree that science in New Zealand includes primitive Maori knowledge.

Engineering is science based and as a registered engineer I would not put my name to any design that had a hint of Maori knowledge in it. Doing so would be unreasonable, unprofessional and irresponsible; it would possibly also be dangerous and career limiting; it would be wrong. The law department may get away with it as the application and development of law is by partisan rhetoric predicated on discretional rules and selected facts, as instanced by the findings of the Waitangi Tribunal. You can say anything is law. But you can’t create quality infrastructure and technology in the physical world with knowledge gleaned from Maori ancestors.

What will transpire after the inevitable happens and someone is injured or killed when using mains powered equipment or when relying on electronic devices? With the inclusion of tikanga (Maori lore) in our legal system, the event could perhaps be designated an aitua, which denotes a misfortune or disaster of a serious or fatal nature. The aitua is usually assumed to be the result of a violation of tapu (restriction), makutu (sorcery) or some other disturbance of the natural order. In Maori lore, the compensation for aitua is the opposite of the present European law. So instead of the injured individual obtaining compensation from the supply company, the company would obtain compensation from the individual. On several occasions in the nineteenth century Maoris alleged makutu, but the courts refused to act because no legislation then existed for dealing with this crime. (Te Matapunenga, s.v., “Aitua”, “Makutu”)

No one knows where this is headed, because Maori lore is not law and has not yet been tested in the courts. That is Gary Judd’s point, for which he has been called “an old racist dinosaur” by Khylee Quince (here). I understand Judd to be saying that Maori lore (tikanga) cannot meet the standards required by European law and that we should not be regressing to primitive customs.

New Zealand is presenting itself as a primitive country on the world stage. If it is thought particular Maori knowledge has relevance as science, to be inclusive it should be written up and published in a scholarly science journal, or reference such an article. Otherwise Maori knowledge belongs in humanities as an object of study. The fundamental issue is that Maoris want to distinguish themselves; in other words, they want to be exclusivist. That is in contradistinction to the rest of the world: science is one of the few things that bring us together on a level playing field. But if Maoris participate in that, their contribution to knowledge will not be Maori knowledge; it will just be knowledge. Scientists do not claim to have French knowledge or Chinese knowledge, although they do have knowledge about France and China. The idea of knowledge that is peculiar to French people or Chinese people or Maori people is an anathema to science and useless to me.

It is a tenet of intersectionality that the weaker party is always right, but that is mistaken. The party that is right is the one that presents the more compelling argument based on the more likely facts. There is no other reason to believe that Maori knowledge is right. We need to return to merit as the measure, not race. To be inclusive, Maori knowledge should be tested for veracity the same as other knowledge. If we accept knowledge simply because it is Maori, we will fail, as a person, as an organization and as a country. That is a clear and obvious fact.

The Maoris and their woke patronizing supporters are trashing our universities and our country. They are doing so in thrall of an ideology that seeks equity; that is, to make all people the same. Nature, however, favours future variation – to make people different so that evolution may proceed. Sexual reproduction emerged only because it provides greater variation by uniquely combining genetic material from two different organisms. Dying is adaptive because it removes past variations from the gene pool. There is life because of variation; the purpose of life is life and true diversity is variation of life.

We need to come to terms with nature by accepting that the world is not as we think it ideally should be. In particular, to respect diversity – of intelligence, for example – we need to accept the possibility that there is both memetic and genetic difference in race, sex and class.

Then we can have a conversation.

Once we properly subscribe to diversity and inclusion, we exclude equity as a natural outcome. However that does not entail that we should not assist people who are disadvantaged due to natural variation. But we need to start the debate again as to what assistance is appropriate, this time with all the known facts on the table. We need to include that innate disadvantage of one group is just another way of saying that advantage of another group is due to a natural evolutionary process of adaptation. Moreover, the evolutionary advantage of that more adapted group of Europeans is what brought about the benefits that have increased all other human populations worldwide. These populations now have some responsibility to catch up with the Europeans: the Chinese achieved that quite quickly so why have the Polynesians not done the same? The reason is probably that there is a genetic difference in addition to a cultural difference, so the problem is innate to the Polynesians and the most likely indicator is the variation of intelligence. So in what way and to what degree are Europeans responsible for that?

Only racist dinosaurs and well trained academics have refused to frame the problem this way.

Dr Barrie Davis is a retired telecommunications engineer, holds a PhD in the psychology of Christian beliefs, and can often be found gnashing his teeth reading The Post outside Floyd’s cafe at Island Bay.