Eugenics in race and state.

  • International Congress of Eugenics
Date:
1923
Catalogue details

Licence: Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Credit: Eugenics in race and state. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    372/534 (page 356)
    356 MAXIMILIAN P. E, GROSZMANN When their delusive results are linked up with theories of heredity, a new element of concern enters. They have been applied in measuring hu¬ man values in terms of social strata. The element of good stock is introduced in a questionable manner. Donald G. Paterson, in School and Society, states that the tests involved in a mental survey of the school popu¬ lation of a small Kansas town, using Pintner's scale, were measures of native endowment, relatively imaffected by social and economic forces. He con¬ tends, therefore, that the inferior mental ability of children found in poor social surroundings, is not due to the social factors involved, but to the mental inferiority of the parent stocks. Roswell Hill Johnson, in a study published in the July, 1921, issue of Social Hygiene, comes to similar conclusions. Views like these would seem to undervalue the tremendous influence of geographical, political, economic, and educational factors, the factors of opportunity. The force of social inheritance, of history, habits, customs, etc., would be greatly minimized. If we accept these views as true, we might wonder why there should be any great excitement or worry about economic and social reforms. Every attempt of the underdog to rise would be futile. Everything is as it is because of genetic development, dividing the race into social classes, and the burden of heredity would be heavy on the shoulders of the mass. That there are different levels of civilization and culture, and differences in efficiency types, is not denied. But that concession does not imply a native and perinanent inferiority of certain groups, outside of a restricted number of extreme cases. We must not confuse weakness with degeneracy, or differences in economic types with social inadequacy. If it were true that the lower social strata represent generally inferior stock, the outlook for making the world safe for democracy would be gloomy. At least one half of the American people would probably rank with the in¬ ferior. They are quite prolific, and we may debate the question whether this fecundity is an inferior or a superior trait. May be President Harding was wrong in congratulating the parents of a brood of sixteen children. Sterility may be termed a lethal factor. May not the disinclination of the higher classes to breed and propagate indicate an acquired social or racial inadequacy? Must we depend upon the gradual weeding' out of the tremendously numerous alleged inferior stock, by breeding higher types? Must we meanwhile be satisfied with training the burdened individuals within the limits of their capacity, without enabling them to transmit their acquired potencies to their children and children's children? Can we transmit only opportunities? Must we begin all over again with each new-born individual,