Arthur Jensen citations

Arthur Robert Jensen, né le 24 août 1923, et mort le 22 octobre 2012, est un psychologue américain. Il a notamment publié des travaux sur l'hérédité de l'intelligence et sur les différences de QI moyen entre blancs et noirs. C'est aussi un des signataires de la publication Mainstream Science on Intelligence affirmant le rôle du QI dans la vie humaine et les différences de QI moyen entre les races comme n'étant pas exclusivement dues à l'environnement.

Bien qu'ayant été classé parmi les 50 plus éminents psychologues du XXe siècle par une étude, Jensen reste une personnalité controversée, principalement pour ses conclusions basées sur ses recherches concernant les causes raciales des différences d'intelligence.

Il est l'inventeur de la boîte de Jensen, un outil de mesure des temps de réaction et de choix. Wikipedia  

✵ 24. août 1923 – 22. octobre 2012
Arthur Jensen photo
Arthur Jensen: 11   citations 0   J'aime

Arthur Jensen: Citations en anglais

“I will be ashamed the day I feel I should knuckle under to social-political pressures about issues and research I think are important for the advance of scientific knowledge.”

Profiles in Research Author(s): Arthur Jensen, Daniel H. Robinson and Howard Wainer, Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Vol. 31, No. 3 (Autumn, 2006), pp. 327-352
Contexte: [Interview: Responding to a question about whether it was smart to publish his 1969 article at the time he did] In retrospect, however, I would hope that I would not have changed a thing in that article, even if I had been able to imagine the supposed "storm" it caused. I will be ashamed the day I feel I should knuckle under to social-political pressures about issues and research I think are important for the advance of scientific knowledge.

“I felt even somewhat resentful of my prior education, that I could have gone as far as I had—already a fairly well-recognized professor of educational psychology—and yet could have remained so unaware of the crucial importance of genetic factors for the study of individual differences.”

Source: Differential Psychology: Towards Consensus (1987), p. 424
Contexte: I had begun by trying, for the sake of scholarly thoroughness, merely to write a short chapter for my book on the ‘culturally disadvantaged’ that I expected would succinctly review the so-called nature-nurture issue only to easily dismiss it as being of little or no importance for the subsequent study of the causes of scholastic failure and success. I delved into practically all the available literature on the genetics of intelligence, beginning with the works of the most prominent investigator in this field, Sir Cyril Burt, whom I had previously heard give a brilliant lecture entitled The Inheritance of Mental Ability’ at University College, London in 1957. The more I read in this field, the less convinced I became of the prevailing belief in the all-importance of environment and learning as the mechanisms of individual and group differences in general ability and scholastic aptitude. I felt even somewhat resentful of my prior education, that I could have gone as far as I had—already a fairly well-recognized professor of educational psychology—and yet could have remained so unaware of the crucial importance of genetic factors for the study of individual differences.

“In my philosophy, science is an unrelenting battle against ad hoc explanation. No other field in psychology with which I have been acquainted has been so infested by ad hoc theories as the attempts to explain social class, racial, and ethnic group differences on various tests of mental ability.”

Source: Differential Psychology: Towards Consensus (1987), pp. 430-1
Contexte: The key theme in Gordon’s chapter, that lends it theoretical coherence, is his clear perception that the guiding force in my own work in mental measurement arises principally from my constant search for construct validity that can embrace the widest range of phenomena in differential psychology. In my philosophy, science is an unrelenting battle against ad hoc explanation. No other field in psychology with which I have been acquainted has been so infested by ad hoc theories as the attempts to explain social class, racial, and ethnic group differences on various tests of mental ability. My pursuit of what I have called the Spearman hypothesis (Jensen, 1985a), which is nicely explicated by Gordon, represents an effort to displace various ad hoc views of the black-white differences on psychometric tests by pointing out the relationship of the differences to the g loadings of tests, thereby bringing the black-white difference into the whole nomothetic network of the g construct. It is within this framework, I believe, that the black-white difference in psychometric tests and all their correlates, will ultimately have to be understood. Understanding the black-white difference is part and parcel of understanding the nature of g itself. My thoughts about researching the nature of g have been expounded in a recent book chapter (Jensen, 1986b). Enough said. Gordon’s chapter speaks for itself, and, with his three commentaries on the chapters by Osterlind, Shepard, and Scheuneman, leaves little else for me to add to this topic.

“The study of race differences in intelligence is an acid test case for psychology. Can behavioral scientists research this subject with the same freedom, objectivity, thoroughness, and scientific integrity with which they go about investigating other psychological phenomena? In short, can psychology be scientific when it confronts an issue that is steeped in social ideologies? In my attempts at self- analysis this question seems to me to be one of the most basic motivating elements in my involvement with research on the nature of the observed psychological differences among racial groups. In a recent article (Jensen, 1985b) I stated:I make no apology for my choice of research topics. I think that my own nominal fields of expertise (educational and differential psychology) would be remiss if they shunned efforts to describe and understand more accurately one of the most perplexing and critical of current problems. Of all the myriad subjects being investigated in the behavioral and social sciences, it seems to me that one of the most easily justified is the black- white statistical disparity in cognitive abilities, with its far reaching educational, economic, and social consequences. Should we not apply the tools of our science to such socially important issues as best we can? The success of such efforts will demonstrate that psychology can actually behave as a science in dealing with socially sensitive issues, rather than merely rationalize popular prejudice and social ideology.”

p. 258
Source: Differential Psychology: Towards Consensus (1987), pp. 438-9

Auteurs similaires

Richard Bach photo
Richard Bach 8
écrivain américain
Kurt Vonnegut photo
Kurt Vonnegut 29
écrivain américain
Jack London photo
Jack London 12
écrivain américain
John Steinbeck photo
John Steinbeck 18
écrivain américain
Maya Angelou photo
Maya Angelou 4
poétesse, actrice et militante américaine
Richard Feynman photo
Richard Feynman 5
physicien américain
Jack Kerouac photo
Jack Kerouac 11
écrivain et poète américain
Ray Bradbury photo
Ray Bradbury 20
écrivain américain
Francis Scott Fitzgerald photo
Francis Scott Fitzgerald 18
écrivain américain
George Carlin photo
George Carlin 35
humoriste américain