Argumentum Ad Hominem in the Science of Race

REFERENCES

• Barkan, E. (1992). The retreat of scientific racism: Changing concepts of race in Britain and the United States between the world wars. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Batt, S. (2003). Keeping company in controversy: Education reform, spheres of argument, and ethical criticism. Argumentation and Advocacy , 40, 85–104.
   Google Scholar
• Biesecker, B. (1989). Recalculating the relation of the public and technical spheres. In B. E. Gronbeck (Ed.), Spheres of argument: Proceedings of the sixth SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 66–70). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, J. (2002). Public and technical interdependence: Regulatory controversy, out-law discourse, and the messy case of Olestra. Argumentation and Advocacy , 39, 91–110.
   Google Scholar
• Bravero, A. F. (2000). “13 angry men”: Dale Bumper's ad hominem impeachment trial of President Clinton. Argumentation and Advocacy , 36, 218–227.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J. (1992). The definition of a profession: The authority of metaphor in the history of intelligence testing , 1890–1930. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ceccarelli, L. (2001). Rhetorical criticism and the rhetoric of science. Western Journal of Communication , 65, 314–330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceccarelli, L. (2005). “Let us (not) theorize the spaces of contention.” Argumentation and Advocacy , 42, 30–33.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1976). The fallacy of Richard Hermstein's IQ. In N.J. Block & G. Dworkin (Eds.), The IQ controversy (pp. 285–298). New York: Pantheon.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, L. E. (2000). Liars and ghosts in the House of Congress: Frank's ad hominem arguments in the case against DOMA. Argumentation and Advocacy , 36, 196–210.
   Google Scholar
• Cravens, H. (1985). History of the social sciences. Osiris , 1, 183–207.
   Google Scholar
• Crenshaw, C. , & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (1999). Rhetoric, racist ideology, and intellectual leadership. Rhetoric & Public Affairs , 2, 275–302.
   Google Scholar
• Cronshaw, S. F. , Hamilton, L. K. , Onyura, B. R. , & Winston, A. S. (2006). Case for non-biased intelligence testing against black Africans has not been made: A comment on Rushton, Skuy, and Bons (2004). International Journal of Selection and Assessment , 14, 278–287.
   Google Scholar
• Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dikötter, F. (1998). Race culture: Recent perspectives on the history of eugenics. American Historical Review , 103, 467–478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eemeren, F. H. van , Grootendorst, R. , & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Fabj, V. , & Sobnosky, M.J. (1995). AIDS activism and the rejuvenation of the public sphere. Argumentation and Advocacy , 31, 163–184.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, C. S. (1996). Inequality by design: Cracking the Bell Curve myth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fish, J. M. (Ed.). (2002). Race and intelligence: Separating science from myth. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Galison, P. L. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Geiser, M. P. (2000). John Randolph of Roanoke and the argumentum ad hominem. Argumentation and Advocacy , 36, 210–217.
   Google Scholar
• Goodnight, G. T. (1982). Public, private, and technical spheres of argument: A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation. Journal of the American Forensic Association , 18, 214–227.
   Google Scholar
• Goodnight, G. T. (1991). Controversy. In D. W. Parson (Ed.), Argument in controversy: Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 1–13). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Goodnight, G. T. (2005). Science and technology controversy: A rationale for inquiry. Argumentation and Advocacy , 42, 26–29.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, A. G. (2005). Scientific and technical controversy: Three frameworks for analysis. Argumentation and Advocacy , 42, 43–47.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, A. G. , Harmon, J. E. , & Reidy, M. (2002). Communicating science: The scientific article from the 17th century to the present. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action ( T. McCarthy , Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1981)
   Google Scholar
• Hacking, I. (1995). The looping effects of human kinds. In D. Sperber , D. Premack , & A.J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate (pp. 351–394). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hacking, I. (1996). The disunities of the sciences. In P. L. Galison & D. J. Stump (Eds.), The disunity of science: Boundaries, contexts, and power (pp. 37–74). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hannaford, I. (1996). Race: The history of an idea in the West. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herrnstein, R. J. , & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hogan, M.J. (1991). Between the public and technical spheres of argument: The “televisual” rhetoric of the nuclear freeze campaign. In D. W. Parson (Ed.), Argument in controversy: Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 100–106). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, J. P., Jr. (2004). The scientific defense of racial segregation, 1954–1964. American Psychologist , 59, 530–537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, J. P., Jr. (2005). Science for segregation: Race, law, and the case against Brown v. Board of Education. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, J. P., Jr. , & Weidman, N. M. (2004). Race, racism, and science: Social impact and interaction. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, A. R. (1972). Genetics and education. New York: Harper and Row.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Johnstone, H. W., Jr. (1952). Philosophy and argumentum ad hominem. Journal of Philosophy , 49, 489–498.
   Google Scholar
• Kenny, M. G. (2002). Toward a racial abyss: Eugenics, Wickliffe Draper, and the origins of the Pioneer Fund. Journal of History of the Behavioral Sciences , 38, 259–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keränen, L. (2005). Mapping misconduct: Demarcating legitimate science from “fraud” in the B-06 lumpectomy controversy. Argumentation and Advocacy , 42, 94–113.
   Google Scholar
• Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and its problems: Toward a theory of scientific growth. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lombardo, P. A. (2002). “The American Breed”: Nazi eugenics and the origins of the Pioneer Fund. Albany Law Review , 65, 743–830.
   Google Scholar
• Lombardo, P. A. (2003). Pioneer's big lie. Albany Law Review , 66, 1125–1144.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn, R. (2001a). Eugenics: A reassessment. Westport, CT: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Lynn, R. (2001b). The science of human diversity: A history of the Pioneer Fund. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
   Google Scholar
• Metealf, R. (2005). Rethinking the ad hominem: A case study of Chomsky. Argumentation , 19, 29–52.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, G. R. (2003). Did Habermas cede nature to the positivists? Philosophy and Rhetoric , 36, 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Neisser, U. , Boodoo, G. , Bouchard, T. J., Jr. , Boykin, W. A. , Brody, N. , Ceci, S. , (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist , 51, 77–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olson, K. M. , & Goodnight, G. T. (1994). Entanglements of consumption, cruelty, privacy, and fashion: The social controversy over fur. Quarterly Journal of Speech , 80, 249–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul, D. B. (1995). Controlling human heredity: 1865 to the present. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities University Press International.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, R. (1996). Heredity and humanity: Race, eugenics and modem science. Washington, DC: Scott-Townsend.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, T. N. (1991). What happened at Baltimore: Technical argument and public values concerning human sexuality at the 1991 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA). In D. W. Parson (Ed.), Argument in controversy: Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 270–276). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Richards, G. (1997). “Race,” racism, and psychology. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Richards, G. (2004). “It's an American thing”: The “race” and intelligence controversy from a British perspective. In A. S. Winston (Ed.), Defining difference: Race and racism in the history of psychology (pp. 137–169). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, S.J. (1995). The Pioneer Fund: Financier of fascist research. American Behavioral Scientist , 39, 44–62.
   Google Scholar
• Rowland, R. C. 1986). The relationship between the public and the technical spheres of argument: A case study of the Challenger Seven disaster. Central States Speech Journal , 37, 136–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rushton, J. P. (2002). The Pioneer Fund and the scientific study of human differences. Albany Law Review , 66, 207–262.
   Google Scholar
• Schiappa, E. (2003). Defining reality. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sedgwick, J. (1995). Inside the Pioneer Fund. In R. Jacoby & N. Glauber (Eds.), The Bell Curve debate: History, documents, opinions (pp. 144–161). New York: Times Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shuey, A. M. The testing of Negro intelligence. Lynchburg, VA: J. P. Bell.
   Google Scholar
• Smedley, A. (1998). Race in North America: Origin and evolution of a worldview (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Steele, C. M. (2004). Kenneth B. Clark's context and mine: Toward a context-based theory of social identity threat. In G. Philogené (Ed.), Racial identity in context: The legacy of Kenneth B. Clark (pp. 61–76). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Stefancic, J. , & Delgado, K (1996). No mercy: How conservative think tanks and foundations changed America's social agenda. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, W. H. (1999). Correcting the corrections. Psychological Reports , 84, 457–458.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, W. H. (2002). The funding of scientific racism: Wickliffe Draper and the Pioneer Fund. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tucker, W. H. (2003). A closer look at the Pioneer Fund: Response to Rushton. Albany Law Review , 66, 1145–1160.
   Google Scholar
• Wallinger, M. J. (1989). Regulatory rhetoric: Argument in the nexus of public and technical spheres. In B. E. Gronbeck (Ed.), Spheres of argument: Proceedings of the sixth SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 71–80). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (1995). A pragmatic theory of fallacy. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (1998). Ad hominem arguments. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (2000a). Case study of the use of a circumstantial ad hominem in political argumentation. Philosophy and Rhetoric , 33, 101–115.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (2000b). Use of “ad hominem“argument in political discourse: The Battalino case from the impeachment trial of President Clinton. Argumentation and Advocacy , 36, 179–186.
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. , & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1995). Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. Albany: State University of New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weyher, H. F. (1998). Contributions to the history of psychology: Intelligence, behavior genetics, and the Pioneer Fund. Psychological Reports , 82, 1347–1374.
   Google Scholar
• Weyher, H. F. (1999). The Pioneer Fund, the behavioral sciences, and the media's false stories. Intelligence , 26, 319–336.
   Google Scholar
• Winston, A. S. (1998). Science in the service of the far right: Henry E. Garrett, the IAAEE, and the Liberty Lobby. Journal of Social Issues , 54, 179–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zulick, M. D. , & Laffoon, E. A. (1991). Enclaved publics as inventional resources: An essay in generative rhetoric. In D. W. Parson (Ed.), Argument in controversy: Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA conference on argumentation (pp. 249–255). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
   Google Scholar