Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus at the University of Ulster, graduated in psychology and took his Ph.D. at the University of Cambridge and has worked as lecturer in psychology at the University of Exeter, professor of psychology at the Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, and at the University of Ulster. His research in intelligence, sex differences, race differences, and eugenics is highly regarded within the academic field, and his books and studies have been mentioned in numerous scientific journals and news publications.

1. Herrnstein and Murray’s “The Bell Curve” (p. 368) makes a statistical analysis showing that raising the average IQ by 3 points would result in radical changes in social behaviour, lowering poverty, health problems, welfare users, imprisonment rates, and children born out of wedlock. What barriers do you think prevent society from reaping the benefits of those attainable changes?

The eugenicists debated this question in the first half of the 20th century but were unable to produce any practical plans. The formidable problems are discussed in my book Eugenics.

2. Your recent book, ”The Global Bell Curve: Race, IQ and Inequality Worldwide,” investigates whether the same racial hierarchies in IQ and socioeconomic status found in the Bell Curve, persist outside of America. Your findings suggest that they do. What impact do you think these findings can have on the way we look at social and economic equality between racial groups?

It would totally transform them because western societies base public policies on the myth that all people are equal.

Does the hereditary determinism pose a threat to the Western egalitarian ideals?

Yes.

3. New studies suggest that racial groups have evolved away from each other over the past 10,000 years, leading to more pronounced genetic differences. With greater movement and gene flow between the continents today, is it likely that we’ll see a stop to or even a reverse of this trend?

Probably not because there is not much inter-mating between racial groups.

4. Your study together with Paul Irwing claims that men are on average five points ahead over women on IQ tests, and that this gap increases within the higher intelligence scores. What evolutionary strategy may have evolved these sex differences?

Men have had a greater need for high IQs because they compete more against other men.

Are the genes for intelligence manifesting themselves differently in a woman who has an equivalent genetic potential for high IQ as a man?

No, but there are sex differences in different kinds of intelligence, eg men have higher spatial abilities & (as adults) reasoning abilities.

5. In your book “Eugenics: A Reassessment” you begin with the propositions that intelligence, health, and moral character are valuable and constitute the foundation of civilization. Given the long intellectual history in favour of this idea, beginning with Plato's Republic, why do you think civilization has been permitted to enter a dysgenic state where each generation has progressively diminished these positive traits?

This evolved because with the invention of reliable contraception in the 1870s it was inevitable that this would be used more efficiently by the more intelligent, & hence that fertility would become dysgenic.

What can be done to reverse this?

Only draconian measures such as ratioing the numbers of children people are permitted according to their IQs.

6. With a continued development within the field of genetic engineering, humanity might be able to simulate natural selection in the future via technology, such as embryo selection. Do you see this development as an inevitable product of the development in genetic science, or is it likely to be a conscious choice (on the part of the general public or the government) as a way to reverse the current dysgenic trend?

I argue in my book Eugenics that this will evolve spontaneously in free societies through embryo selection for desirable qualities. It might also be mandated by authoritarian states.

7. What dangers are involved with using technology to simulate natural selection?

None of any significance.

Do you believe ethical concerns are likely to interfere with the development and possible use of genetic engineering, or is the force of science and technology stronger?

Yes but they will not prevent it.

8. Evolutionary psychologist Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa was called irresponsible for saying that scientists were only responsible to the truth and bore no responsibility for the consequences of the knowledge they create. As a scientist, what do you think of the ethical issues involved in reporting truths that might offend some people’s beliefs?

I agree with Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa.

9. In what way would people’s everyday lives change for the better, if society would start to implement an eugenic policy to increase the average IQ within the population?

The quality of life would improve in many ways.

10. How does your ideal society look like, in terms of general intelligence, health, lifestyle, and moral character of its population?

Let’s say the whole population would be like physicians – competent and honest.

Interview was conducted by Alex Birch the 22th of July 2008.

Corrupt would like to thank Richard Lynn for kindly participating in the interview and sharing his views on general intelligence and genetic science.

Visit Richard Lynn's website

Lynn's books can be purchased from Washington Summit Publishers