Yeah, this is all tragic. I wrote elsewhere that this is clearly a case of both racism and dishonesty.

Could you please let me know what the free online text comparison tool you used was? You didn’t mention what it was in your piece.

Going out on a limb on this one, but I don’t think he’d make it through the selection process if he did apply.

For those of you not on LinkedIn, this information is also available on the SU website. Click on the option at the bottom of the linked page with the thumbnail labelled “Available postdoc positions”. This position is presently listed there: www.su.ac.za/en/research/...

If the dark ages were real, I bet that this is how they started.

Yeah, I don’t know how and why because I posted it in order 😅

It’s a pleasure

I meant to say that this chapter is for *The Routledge Handbook of the History of the Philosophy of Science after Kant.

Yes, you can find it here: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

:)

We end the chapter by saying that this return of race science, given the history of race science, provides reason for disquiet.

You can find the page proofs for this chapter here: www.researchgate.net/publication/...

13/13 The rise of consumer ancestry tests is also a major concern. By reporting results in terms of supposed racial origins, they present complex biocultural histories as categorical ancestry components. This misleadingly naturalises classifications of race & ethnicity in the manner of race science.

12/13 This relates to our warning against the rise of liberal eugenics. Despite its framing as individual parental choice, the use of race as a proxy in this domain makes doubtful its distancing from racism especially in how its eugenics will likely reinforce already preexisting racial hierarchies.

11/13 Another pillar of this revival is the failure of personalised genomics. This failure has led to precision medicine. This field uses race as a proxy for ancestry, reintroducing the methodological and typological errors of race science into current medical and behavioural science practices.

10/13 Since 2000, race science has returned with a vengeance. One basis emerges from the argument that since we can cluster genetic data into groups, those clusters are biologically real race groups. But statistical clustering in this case doesn’t map onto meaningful biological categories.

9/13 We close the chapter by examining the contemporary resurgence of biological realism about race triggered by various interpretations of the Human Genome Project and commercial ancestry testing. Beliefs in biological race have returned in a ‘new’ statistical, high-tech, genomic guise.

8/13 Nevertheless, we highlight that scientific refutation alone does not stop the social harm caused by racist ideas. For instance: despite being discredited, works like The Bell Curve continue to influence arguments against policies for social justice and welfare (through think tanks, etc.).

7/13 We argue that hereditarians’ reliance on heritability estimates is confused and dependent on false claims about genetics. Moreover, from Lewontin’s empirical interventions to contemporary genomics, the races they assume are real have been shown to lack robust biological reality.

6/13 We review parts of the case debunking this central argument. Its flawed logic claims that because IQ is heritable, performance gaps must be genetic. We reiterate that heritability is a population-specific measure that doesn't tell you about the aetiology or cause of a trait.

5/13 In 1969, race science was revived by hereditarian psychologist Arthur Jensen. He argued that IQ differences between races are genetic, fixed, and immune to social intervention. Jensen’s framework became the central argument for contemporary versions of scientific racism.