REAR-GUARD ACTION MELVILLE J. HERSKOVITS* perspectives in biology and medicine has as its purpose "to communicate new ideas and to stimulate original thought in the biological and medical sciences." It also presents "original essays" which advance "new hypotheses representing informed thinking," and "interpretative essays . . . which take stock ofrecent and current research and develop heuristic ideas not yet fully tested." It is in this journal that we find an essay by Henry E. Garrett, Emeritus Professor ofPsychology at Columbia University and now at the University of Virginia, entitled "The Equalitarian Dogma." This article is an attack on those who hold that the assumption ofthe existence of inherent racial inequalities has not been established by scientificresearch. It assails thosewho maintain that this factlays the burden ofproofon students who maintain that race is a significant factor in determining human behavior and differences in the cultures ofdifferent peoples. The appearance ofthis paper, by a psychometrist who is professor in a school ofeducation, published in ajournai devoted to biological and medical research, is at best curious. That an editor ofthisjournal, a physiologist, felt it necessary to write an editorial explaining why he "invited and accepted" Professor Garrett's paper is significant. His uneasiness is reflected in two statements. "There are reasons for thinking that racial differences . . . may be real," he writes, countering this by another sentence which reads, "Similarly, there are compelling reasons to claim that all evidence on racial differences is unsatisfactory." The editor continues: "There are promising approaches to the problem which have not yet been used." What these methods may be are not indicated , but the assertion, again, leads to what would seem to be a prime instance ofconfusion resulting in a non sequitur: "Is science to continue as * Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University. This article was written for and is reprinted by permission from Negro Digest, October, 1961. 122 MelvilleJ. Herskovits · Rear-Guard Action Perspectives in Biology and Medicine · Autumn 1961 the free pursuit ofknowledge or is it to become subordinate to social and political theories?" One gathers, both from this editorial statementand from Professor Garrett 's article, that there exists a conspiracy of silence, aimed at replacing the scientific study of race with scientism in racial psychology, so that anyone who investigates the problem of racial differences presumably comes under some kind ofattack that imperils his freedom ofscientific research . Except for one work cited by Professor Garrett, which certain university presses refused to publish because its findings showed that American Negroes stood lower than American Whites in intelligence test scores, we are given no evidence that such a conspiracy exists. It is tedious to read the repetitions in this article ofshop-worn arguments about "racial" differences in "intelligence," by which is meant differences in test scores between "Negroes"—a mixed African-European-American Indianpopulation—and those ofEuropean descent. Perhaps what attracted the attention of the editor of perspectives to Professor Garrett's article was the new interpretations it gives of the forces making for acceptance ofthe equalitarian point ofview—intruth, about the only "new" hypothesis found in it. One reason given lies in the failure ofthe Nazi war effort; another the rise of African nationalism; still another the Supreme Court decision of 1954 ordering desegregation ofpublic schools. But apparently the crowning reason why, in recent years, ideas ofracial equality have spread is the fact that "the Communists (and their supporters ) have aided in the spread and acceptance of the equalitarian dogma, although the extent and method oftheir aid is difficult to assess." Their moves are presumably as subtle in this field as in others. "Direct action as well as subversion are both in the Communist creed. Communists have used equalitarian dogma as a device to gain converts among underpriviledged people and also to foment trouble when possible. Many non-Communists hold the position that the free world must outdo the Communists in acceptance of this belief and must reject any further inquiry into its validity." It is apparent that as a logician Professor Garrett is no more effective than the editor who gave his reasons for publishing this paper. The syllogism employed here is clear. "Communists and their sympathizers are against racism. Equalitarians are against racism. Hence equalitarians are...