• DOI:10.1353/PBM.1961.0028
• Corpus ID: 5304813

The Equalitarian Dogma

@article{Garrett1961TheED,
  title={The Equalitarian Dogma},
  author={Henry Edward Garrett},
  journal={Perspectives in Biology and Medicine},
  year={1961},
  volume={4},
  pages={480 - 484}
}

• H. E. Garrett
• Published 7 January 2015
• Sociology
• Perspectives in Biology and Medicine

Up to World War I, it is probable that American scientists who gave the matter any thought at all believed the Negro race to be natively less gifted than the white. Thus, the Negro was generally considered to be less intelligent and more indolent than the white, and to be somewhat lacking in the fundamental traits of honesty and reliability. This judgment was concurred in by most white Americans. Social scientists today do not often accept these onetime common-sense judgments. Instead, they hold that racial differences are skin deep: that whereas the black African differs from the white European in the breadth and depth of his civilization, there are no genetic or native factors to account for these differences; that all races are potentially equal in ability and differ only in their opportunity to achieve. Usually the social scientist will include motivation as a cause of racial differences, together with discrimination and prejudice. This view that, except for environmental differences, all races are potentially equal has been called the equalitarian dogma.1 It has spread through many of our colleges and universities and is widely accepted by sincere humanitarians, social reformers, crusaders, sentimentalists, and (ostensibly) politicians. Many ministers of religion, convinced that the concept of the "equality ofman" is in keeping with the ideals of Christian brotherhood and democracy, have joined the social scientists. Last, but by no means least, the Communists vigorously defend the equalitarian dogma. Only the man in the street, uninstructed in social anthropology, remains puzzled and reluctant.